1

Needs Assessment and AnalysisCollaboration Improvement Report

Michael Gough, Tracy Karceski, Christina Mayes, Galen Stone, and Daria Vaughn

December, 2010

Introduction

• The client requested a workplace collaboration study• Stakeholders wanted to improve collaboration

efficiency and effectiveness of teams, task forces and committees

• Specific management concerns– Duplication of emails / effort– Document control– Email etiquette and professionalism

2

CRO Background / PEST AnalysisPolitical Economical Social-Cultural Technological

•Compliance with changing federal regulations

•Risk of litigation regarding secure electronic data

•Pressure from competition to streamline processes

•Increase in demand of services due to customer outsourcing

•Pharmaceutical industry consolidation has spurred competition among rivals

•Success relies on ability to streamline development and collaboration processes

•International company with diverse culture

•“Machine” organizational paradigm

•Concern regarding the sharing of personal and confidential content

•Management interest in secure company social-networking program

•Increasing global reliance on technological collaboration tools

•Portals and virtual communities for clinical teams

•Collaborative tools to consider based on effectiveness and security

3

Frame Factors

• Project – limits placed by resources– Six week time-frame– No budget– Remote access to consultants

• Organization – limits placed by culture– Busy schedules of associates– Availability of billable employees– Privacy concerns with providing data

• Stakeholder – limits placed by client– No disclosure of company-sensitive data– Limited sample for data collection– Internal consultant to serve as mediator

• Consultant – limits placed by team– Busy schedules / competing priorities– Multiple obligations (school, work, family)– Internal consultant

4

Project Methodology

Approach

• 3 distinct phases– Initial– Data collection and analysis– Final

• Multiple methods

• Quantitative and qualitative data

Methods selection (Werner & DeSimone, 2009)

• Reliability– Consistency of results– Freedom from collection

method bias• Validity

– Devices measure what should be measured

• Practicality– Appropriate resources used to

gather data

Project Methodology, continued

Sample

• Identified by client

• N= 22 (total sample)– N= 5 (Initial interviews)– N= 22 (online survey)

• Management and non-management• Response rates

– 95% (online survey)– 100% (initial interviews)

• Possible bias

Project Methodology, continued

Initial Phase

•Client interview

•Interviews•Literature

review•PEST analysis•Team

collaboration

Data Collection &

Analysis

Phase

•Online survey

•SWOT analysis

•Migration strategy/Force field analysis

•Team collaboration

Final Phase

•Final report

•Client presentation

8

Data Analysis - Interviews

• Collaborating face-to-face is preferred• Less opportunity for “water cooler” discussions with

web conferencing• Online collaboration is better when well

planned/managed• Email can be cumbersome

9

Survey Data

• Email - most effective tool for online collaboration!

• Respondents see themselves as savvy with collaboration tools

• Lots of tools listed!• Respondents willing to

learn new tools

Very good - 10, 45%Good - 12, 55%

Your ability using current col-laboration tools

Very Good - 4, 18%

Good - 18, 82%

Your coworkers’ knowledge and ability using current collaboration tools

10

Data Analysis

SWOT AnalysisStrengths Weaknesses

1. Leadership support2. Existing tools in place3. IT infrastructure4. Existing on-line training5. Employee technological ability6. Collaboration task force

1. No best-practice for existing tools2. Confusion over which tools to use3. Existing training not being used to

its full potential4. Lack of tool compatibility5. Unclear task responsibility /

duplication of effort6. Email etiquette

Opportunities Threats

1. Industry emphasis on streamlining processes

2. Available integrated and secure collaboration systems

3. Cloud computing and Web 2.0 tools4. IT collaboration consultation

1. Security breaches2. Cultural resistance to technological

change3. Competition implementing

collaboration solutions4. Increasing travel costs for face-to-

face meetings

internal

external

11

12

Positive Findings

1. Leadership support– CEO level interest– Top-down change management effectiveness of hierarchical corporate

structure – Utilization of already established Collaboration Task Force

2. Existing tools in place– Virtual meeting technology creates a face-to-face meeting environment– Lotus Notes built-in collaboration features– Some existing on-line training available for certain programs/tools– Learning Management System (LMS)

13

Positive Findings, Continued

3. IT Infrastructure– Highly skilled workers to maintain or build collaborative workspaces – Resources available to Monitor security risk and exposure

4. Available collaboration systems– Inexpensive collaborative tools are available on the web – Eliminate geographical time zone barriers– Shared workspaces connect collaborators and eliminate duplication

5. Employees have high technical skills– Employees have training options available for collaborative tools– Employees are interested in learning new tools for collaboration

14

Negative Findings

6. Communication– Preference for face-to-face meetings (mentioned in 3 of 5 interviews)– Some lack e-mail etiquette– Unclear task responsibility results in duplication of efforts– Cultural over-reliance on e-mail (63.6% feel it is most effective tool for

collaboration)

7. Existing training not being used to its full potential – 41% of respondents reported they have received no training – Some advocated for more targeted training

15

Negative Findings, Continued

8. No best practice for existing tools – Too many tools to choose from (22 different tools listed)– Confusion over which tool to use– Lack of tool compatibility – Confusion over how to select tools– Functionality overlap (three types of web conferencing software applications)

9. Technological change– Concerns over security breaches – Cultural resistance (50% and 68.2% of respondents reported they have not used social

networking or online discussion forums)

10. Costs associated with not improving collaboration efforts– Loss of revenue to competition with better streamlined collaboration tools and faster

project turnaround– Increasing travel costs for face-to-face meetings

16

Migration Strategy Phase 1

17

Migration Strategy Phase 2

18

Migration Strategy Phase 3

Recommendation 1

Relaunch the Collaboration Task Force to create renewed focus for improving collaboration – Regroup to review the results of the needs analysis– Encourage buy-in from all CTF members– Determine division of labor and next steps

Critical Success Factors– Top-down support (management driven)– Collaboration Task Force involvement– Must promote CEO level interest and encourage employee buy-in

19

Recommendation 2

Standardize workplace collaboration tools– Research best tool for web-conferencing– Identify duplicate tools– Condense tools to eliminate duplication

Critical Success Factors– Top-down support (management driven)– Collaboration Task Force involvement– Must establish best practices for the organization

20

Recommendation 3

Create an approved online collaboration guide– List approved tools and explain their intended use– Incorporate job aids for each tool but focus on best practices rather than just

the basic mechanics of use– Continue existing technical training as appropriate

Critical Success Factors– Top-down support (management driven)– Collaboration Task Force involvement– Must be published and communicated company wide

21

Recommendation 4

Design a workshop for communicating and managing projects at a distance– How to overcome the challenges of online collaboration– How to set communication "ground rules" upfront– How to make everyone feel comfortable with contributing to the conversation– How to choose the best tool(s) for collaborating

Critical Success Factors– Top-down support (management driven)– Collaboration Task Force involvement– Must be attended or reviewed by all employees

22

Recommendation 5

Implement a work-friendly social network or online community– Set ground rules for usage– Encourage buy-in from employees– Promote the “water cooler” experience

Critical Success Factors– Top-down support (management driven)– Collaboration Task Force involvement– Must be regulated and monitored to ensure appropriateness of content

23

24

References• Brooks, K. (2010, June) CRO Industry Update. Retrieved from

http://www.contractpharma.com/articles/2010/06/cro-industry-update• Collaborative Tools Strategy Task Force Report [Final Draft]. (2008, November 21).

Retrieved from University of Washington website: http://www.washington.edu/uwit/im/reports/CTSTF_Report_Final_Draft.pdf

• Folinsbee, S., Jurmo, P. (1994). Collaborative Needs Assessment: A Handbook for Workplace Development Planners. ABC CANADA

• Template - http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/templates/CT010145006.aspx#pg:3|ai:TC030006145|