08-04-23 1

NEZT

Het VCS verhaal

Peter Kopeczek

08-04-23 2

Doelstellingen

• Creeren van een virtuele platform = neZt…

• …waar onderwijs, creatieve en bedrijven elkaar kunnen vinden…

• …voor het met elkaar werken aan sociale of andere levensvatbare innovaties.

08-04-23 3

Doelstellingenspecifiek Hangar36

• Samenwerking verhogen tussen diverse initiatieven van Hangar36 en creatieve HBO opleidingen

• Pilot-demo van een virtueel platform als tool om vast te stellen wat er nodig is om via virtualiteit de creatieve en innovatieve business te stimuleren

08-04-23 4

Activiteiten

• Een inventarisatie van behoeftes en ervaringen van Hangarparticipanten.

• Een inventarisatie van behoeftes en ervaringen van studenten van creatieve opleidingen in Den Haag.

• Maken van een Pilot-demo: eerst inventariseren en het verwerken van de inventarisatie. Wat is er al op virtueel gebied. Daarnaast ook de kenmerken inventariseren.

• Het presenteren van de bevindingen van 1 en 2 aan de opleiders en stagebegeleiders en andere potentieel belanghebbenden, zoals bv de gemeente. Dit doen we door een (creatief en onderscheidend) Seminar te organiseren (er is een mooie ruimte in de Hangar).Dit seminar heeft tot doel: concrete kenmerken te inventariseren waaraan een eerste demo moet voldoen.

• Aanbevelingen en conclusie.

08-04-23neZt Peter Kopeczek 5

NeZt as Innovation Intermediary

08-04-23 6

Introducing

08-04-23 7

VEA combines latest research with technology development

● Spin out and joint venture of – CeTIM, a leading research institute in innovation management,

networked organisations and project management– Amrein Engineering, a Swiss software company developing since >15

years collaboration solutions

● Developing next generation solutions for project management, collaboration and portals

● International, located in Netherlands, Switzerland and Germany

● Key people:– Dr. Hermann Löh, CEO, extensive consulting and research experience in

management of innovation– Dr. Jürg Amrein, CTO, one of the Swiss pioneers in collaboration

software– Prof. Bernhard Katzy, advisor to VEA, chair for technology and

innovation management at University Munich and Leiden

VEA PROFILE

7

More information on www.ve-a.com More information on www.ve-a.com

08-04-23 8

But while productivity in operations is “well understood”, for knowledge work, it is not

AVERAGE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LOW AND HIGH PERFORMING COMPANIES

08-04-23 9

Management of innovation requires a paradigm shift

Management for Innovation

● Focus on results

● Collaboration

● What is my contribution?

● Solution Quality

● Innovation

● Knowledge as opportunity for value

● Attractiveness as employer

Traditional management approaches

● Management and supervision

● Task breakdown

● Management of resources

● Quantity and Speed

● Repetition

● Knowledge as cost factor

● Dependency as employee

08-04-23 10

Conditions for success

1 + 1 >> 2

New management and collaboration

approaches

Creating the right environment for experimenting and crafting

Enabling ICT Platform+

08-04-23 11

VCS is a comprehensive project environment – with productive business approaches built in

Join virtual meeting with

one click

Effective meetings:● Optimal preparation with

agenda and presentations● One click web and telephone

conferencing● Follow-up on results

Productive, result-oriented collaboration:● Process support from planning to

actually doing work – in one view● Strict result orientation● Effective support for team coordination

and collaboration● Taking motivational factors into account

08-04-23 12

VCS is a comprehensive project environment – with productive business approaches built in

Project transparency:● Quality oriented measurement

with intermediate milestones● Quick project overview with

colour coding ● Drill down to understand

issues and bottlenecks

Productive information management:● Documents and other elements can be

linked into and fully worked on within the process

● At the same time they are part of the knowledge repository for structuring and easy retrieval

● Efficient version management● Dramatic productivity improvement

Docu-ments

Informa-tion items

Decisions

Result-oriented collaboration

Effective meetings

08-04-23 13

VCS develops innovative approaches both to community collaboration and project management

Processes supported

Innovativeness ofconcepts

(Productivity, Web 2.0,etc.)

Collaboration/ community

Project Management

Traditional

Innovative

VCSCollectiveX

(Community)

Daptive

Projectplace

R-Plan

SharePoint,Lotus

Open Source

(Alfresco, Plone)

HuddleBasecamp

08-04-23 14

Especiallyfor Hangar 36

08-04-23 15

There is a dynamic co-evolution between ways of working, ICT and organisation …

Work practices (individual/team)● Work task fulfilment● Project management● Self-coordination● Sense making

Organization● Organizational Structure● Leadership structure● Business processes

Technologies● System architectures● Tools and

functionality● User interface● User adoption

Social linking•Shared understanding/ objectives

•Informal relationships

Co-evolution

Outcomes•Effectiveness•Work efficiency•Creativity level•Responsiveness•Satisfaction•Learning

08-04-23 16

There are dynamic forces at work that influence outcome

● Vision and goals

● Perceived benefits in using

● System fit with processes / way of working

● Fit with business structure & culture

● Fun and ease of use/obstacles

● Ownership by users

● Social environment and cultural norms

● Network effects of use

Support,Positive drivers

Barriers,Negative drivers

Influence in project

08-04-23 17

We have collected some important lessons learnt

● Professional and social communities are quite different

● For professional communities, content quality is key Sources: Blog, workshops, linked content, papers

● Facilitator is essential, has to have focus and dedication– Make people feel at home– Listen & trigger contributions– Provide structure and filtering for users

● Have events – and promote them– Face-to-face meetings / conferences– Virtual workshops around topics– Topic weeks

● Do not over expect engagement of members

LESSONS LEARNT

Engagedcontributor

Sometimesinvolved

Consumers

08-04-23 18

Before starting there should be some questions answered to achieve success

● What is the value proposition for the participants?

● What is the value proposition for the facilitator(s)?

● Where does the content come from?

● What are ways of engaging and contributing more content?

● Who facilitates – are there enough resources, skill and dedication for this?

● What is the business model – who pays for what – and why?

KEY QUESTIONS FOR CREATING A PROFESSIONAL COMMUNITY

08-04-23 19

The productivity differences are largely due to different coordination models

DIFFERENTIATION IN COORDINATION MODELS

Formal project management Ad-hoc coordination Heedful interrelating

Scope definition

Management sets exact scope before project approval; Changes only with formal approval process

Nobody defines scope clearly, can change quickly on request

Team defines and negotiates scope jointly. Changes on member request with joint approval

Team selection

Management/PM on long-term resource planning

Short-term resource availability

Competence and commitment of people

Task planning & assignment

Formal WBS and detailed task planning by PM, scheduling ac-cording to resource availability

Short-term task identification and assignment according to availability – usually by PM

Identification of required results and negotiation/sign-up of people to deliver

Progress tracking

Reporting task progress or completion

Typically PM keeps track of central Todo-List

Updating maturity status of results

Problem solving

Risk management and detailed planning tries to identify problems early, solving through hierarchical decision making

Problem solving discussions as they arise

Visibility and concern by everybody identifies problems, which are solved by those affected

Result/ knowledge integration

Through planning clear task break down and specifications with minimal interfaces

Largely through project manager

Shared responsibility and collaboration for results, e.g. iterating drafts between team

[Source: Lühring, 2006; Löh and Katzy, 2008; Sari et al., 2007]

Backup

08-04-23 20

Formal project management Ad-hoc coordination Heedful interrelating

Scope definition

Management sets exact scope before project approval; Changes only with formal approval process

Nobody defines scope clearly, can change quickly on request

Team defines and negotiates scope jointly. Changes on member request with joint approval

Team selection

Management/PM on long-term resource planning

Short-term resource availability

Competence and commitment of people

Task planning & assignment

Formal WBS and detailed task planning by PM, scheduling ac-cording to resource availability

Short-term task identification and assignment according to availability – usually by PM

Identification of required results and negotiation/sign-up of people to deliver

Progress tracking

Reporting task progress or completion

Typically PM keeps track of central Todo-List

Updating maturity status of results

Problem solving

Risk management and detailed planning tries to identify problems early, solving through hierarchical decision making

Problem solving discussions as they arise

Visibility and concern by everybody identifies problems, which are solved by those affected

Result/ knowledge integration

Through planning clear task break down and specifications with minimal interfaces

Largely through project manager

Shared responsibility and collaboration for results, e.g. iterating drafts between team

The productivity differences are largely due to different coordination models

DIFFERENTIATION IN COORDINATION MODELS

Guiding principles:•Reducing uncertainty by detailed planning and control•Formal project manager, supported by plans and procedures•Team members are resources to be used efficiently•Break-down of responsi-bility to individuals, however little integration

Guiding principles:•Flexible reaction to external/internal changes•Little planning, short-term assignment of tasks•Little formal documen-tation (outdating quickly)•Project manager keeps track and communicates•Team members have limited visibility and thus little chance to support integration

Guiding principles:•Enabling team members to make contributions to goals according to own competences•Joint planning and commitments towards achievements•High visibility of status and contributions•Lateral communication and problem solving

Fast, high quality,lowest effort, fosters

innovation

Flexible, but error prone,high stress levels

Efficient in short term, but often rework,

low innovation

Backup

[Source: Lühring, 2006; Löh and Katzy, 2008; Sari et al., 2007]