Twitter and the Search Barrier

26 05 2009

I am currently reading Collaboration: How Leaders Avoid the Traps, Create Unity, and Reap Big Benefits, a book by Morten T. Hansen of Harvard Business School. It is an interesting read so far: he has laid out some of the key benefits and risks to collaboration, a number of which are quite interesting and potentially useful. However, what I have found most interesting thus far is his take on the four most significant barriers to collaboration. His list:

  1. The Not Invented Here Barrier: People not willing to seek input from others outside their unit;
  2. The Hoarding Barrier: People not willing to provide information for others outside their unit;
  3. The Search Barrier: People are not able to find people, expertise, or information easily, and;
  4. The Transfer Barrier: People are not able to transfer complicated knowledge from one unit to another.

All of these points have some validity, and are definitely important and significant barriers to collaboration in the workplace; however, I want to spend some time with the third barrier, the search barrier.

As a side note, I have as yet not read how Hansen proposes to overcome said barriers; I’m only halfway through the book.

What is the Search Barrier?

According to Hansen, the search barrier is the inability of a company or organization to “know what it knows”. This can be due to a number of factors: company size, physical distance, information overload, and poverty of networks are the ones that Hansen cites. The search barrier is one of the most significant hurdles facing large organizations: think about all the expertise and experience that exist in most organizations, and how hard it really is to tap that knowledge (specifically the tacit knowledge). Basically, it’s too hard or too much work to search through your organization to find the support/input that you need; consequently, organizations are inefficient because they are continuously solving the same problems.

So what does this have to do with Twitter?

Its about finding the RIGHT person, not just people.

It's about finding the RIGHT person, not just people.

In the spirit of continuing to treat Twitter as a solution searching for a problem, I think that this is a very real business problem that can be greatly helped by microblogging. After all, this is one of the most appealing, at least for me, uses of Twitter on the open internet.

Twitter actually addresses many of the key problems cited by Hansen as components of the search barrier.

  • Company size could be less of an issue, if only because the network of followers (a.k.a. the target audience) serves as the filter of information. So you aren’t searching all the units of an organization for an answer; you are asking people to serve as a filter and pass on information and/or people that they already know.
  • It’s clear that microblogging helps with bridging distances. However, it’s also important to note that microblogging enables “weak ties“, allowing for people to maintain relationships that may become more important in the future.
  • Though relatively counter-intuitive, microblogging can help with information overload, because your network serves as a collaborative filter. For the same reason, microblogging can help solve the problem of poverty of networks by making it easier to keep in touch with colleagues.

But microblogging is just a technology

In much contrast to the rest of this entry, I do want to emphasize that simply having the technical capability for microblogging does not ensure success: effective deployment also entails organizational and process challenges in order to achieve the desired results. Social media success is only sometimes about tools; most times it’s more about changing behaviors and inculcating more collaborative mindsets.


Actions

Information

4 responses

26 05 2009
Dirk Röhrborn

Great post. We liked the idea of twitter and came up with http://www.communote.com. Initially it was meant to serve as a tool for our _internal_ project communication as most of our work is software development organized in projects. Now that this enterprise microblogging tool is widely used within our organisation (almost every project, team or topic has its own microblog) we realized that through #tags and filters the communote system visualizes many of our competencies. When filtering for a topic, such as “wiki” we get a list of authors and a cloud of related tags as a result. This helps us to find the right contact person for a topic and to span the search barrier to some extent. I agree, that microblogging also bridges distances between different units and also moves the mobile and home office workers a little closer to the rest of us. However, it needs an open minded company culture to get the most out of these social media tools.

28 05 2009
Yannick Pouliot

Nice summarization of these important issues, Justin. The search barrier is an area in which I’ve been active for some time (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expertise_finding). In fact, a small number of companies (including mine, ResearchScorecard) believe there is something of a market for selling data mining services that enable efficient search of human expertise. As with others of its ilk, ResearchScorecard focuses on providing the results of extensive data mining applied to the resulting products of human expertise. This data mining is essential in evaluating authoritativeness. In our case, we evaluate authoritativeness using Life Sciences research products whose value the field sees as indisputable, which are collected using web spiders. The goal is to facilitate collaboration between scientists, especially across disciplinary boundaries. Why focus on authoritativeness? Simply because generating a list of experts on topic X that omits quantitative metrics of authoritativeness just isn’t very helpful if the list is longer than e.g. 10 individuals…

While companies such as LinkedIn address a broader market of human expertise (and do so pretty well), the data they provide is supplied by its users, thereby suffering from various deficiencies that diminish the effectiveness of data mining that hinder estimations of authoritativeness. On the flip side, LinkedIn is of course much broader and more generic than ResearchScorecard.

One might think that our data approach is suitable to unique institutions such as publicly-funded research. In fact, I believe meaningful metrics of value can be found or generated for many organizations, though not necessarily easily, as you point out. A great book that makes this case is “How To Measure Anything” (http://www.amazon.com/How-Measure-Anything-Intangibles-Business/dp/0470110120/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1243488212&sr=8-1).

As concerns microblogging, I have a hard time conceiving that it can address many of Hansen’s problems. This is because of itsinability to assess the authoritativeness of tweets. I certainly do think it can help integrate distributed teams effectively, though.

3 06 2009
How does Microblogging affect Project Communication | communication, project communications, project management, teamwork, usecase | Communote Blog

[...] unique form of communication. There are a number of discussions on the effects of this technique. Justin Franks refers to Harvard professor Hansen and argues that the “search barrier” in…, while Stefan Hauptmann explains the phenomenon with the sociological concept of “unlikely [...]

19 10 2009
communote - Enterprise Microblogging

[...] Die Auswirkungen von Microblogging sind deshalb immer häufiger Gegenstand intensiver Diskussionen. Justin Franks vermutet in Anspielung auf Harvard-Professor Hansen, dass Microblogging die “Suc…, während Stefan Hauptmann das Phänomen mit dem soziologischen Konzept der [...]

Leave a comment