Get HR on the Intranet team and then what?

Ran into two interesting posts on Intranet. One is about the seemingly essential role of HR in the Intranet team. Jane McConnell of 'Globally local... Locally Global' just wrote about two companies that have HR in their team and gives insight in their Intranet approach. It looks like Intranets that are "the way of working" have HR on board.
So, now we have HR on board, what are we going to do? James Robertson of Column Two has an interesting post on how the Intranet team should spend their time.

The rule of thumb for intranet resources is:

  • 30% effort for day-to-day maintenance
  • 40% effort for projects and new initiatives
  • 30% effort managing relationships with staff and stakeholders

Comments

  1. UnknownJuly 23, 2008 at 3:03 PM

    After HR is on the team, they should be able to contribute to issues such as profiling, tagging developing into folksonomies, sharing expertise among employees, analysing search logs to see what people are looking for and what expertise might be "missing" in the organisation.
    These are just first 2 minute thoughts! HR should want to be involved in all issues concerning skills, profiles, expertise - what the organisation has today and what it will need tomorrow.
    Jane

    ReplyDelete
  2. UnknownJuly 23, 2008 at 3:39 PM

    Oops, my post title is a little ambiguous. I didn't mean: what should HR do, but what should the Intranet team spend its time on (the second part of my post).
    But I agree with your discription of the role of HR on the Intranet team. They make sure the Intranet has a 'people focus'.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Please leave a comment! Just log in using one of the formats and if you want me to get back to you. Otherwise comment anonymously.

Popular posts

Keep the Intranet Small

Image
This tweet by Jonathan Phillips ( @digitaljonathan ) triggered to finalize this post, that's been burning in my draft box. I've always been intrigued by how unsuccessful many intranets are. And there are all kinds of good reasons for intranet failure. One of the things that is hardly ever mentioned is: Shouldn't the intranet be smaller? Usually intranets are huge. Lots and lots of pages with lots and lots of content. With complex navigation. The intranet  evaluation surveys almost always show employees only use the news page and people finder. But still we build and maintain nice big intranets. Not only stats point to smaller intranets. There are others reasons as well. I came up with a few. If you have more, just leave a comment. Here's my list: -            user requirements: users don't require large intranet -            search/navigation: searching and navigating a small intranet is easier than in a large intranet -            mobile: the content of the
Read more

Enterprise 2.0 Research

Image
There's not too much fundamental research on Enterprise 2.0. Deloitte recently published interesting research done on enterprise 2.0 implementations and their return-on-investment. In the EU research has also done as well. Study is being done for the European Commission and it was carried out by Tech4i2, IDC and Headshift. What was the goal of the study? Goals of the study To provide a clear definition of Enterprise 2.0 is, describe the market and the positioning of EU industry, also in comparison with US and Asia; To analyze the take-up of Enterprise 2.0, the organizational requirements, and the role on the transition to a knowledge based low-carbon economy; To collect evidence on its macro-economic impact, as a market opportunity for the European Software industry and as a productivity tool for European business; To identify and analyse both the direct and contextual challenges, including the need for Next Generation Access and the legal barriers; To analyse an
Read more

Innovation in Turbulent Times

Image
I love reading articles about innovation. And every now and then you read one that is very interesting. "Innovation in Turbulent Times" by Rigby, Gruver, Allen (in HBR, June 2009) is one of them. This article takes fashion companies as an example for continuous, year-by-year innovation. And how successful fashion companies are usually led by two people: a left-brainer and a right-brainer. "If you don't have highly creative people in positions of real authority, you won't get innovation. Most companies in other industries ignore this lesson." They extend this to show that successful non-fashion companies have the same kind of leadership. And this kind of leadership is usually also characterized by a long-term relationship. I think this concept can also be extended to teams and projects as well. More often than not, people are good at one or the other: thinking up great concepts or ideas, or, making them. In teams and projects we can learn from this as
Read more