Read the assigned chapters, identify one/two themes/concepts from each chapter, and briefly write about how they relate to workplace/organizations and, if possible, articulate how they relate to you.  (a) introduction — your perception of the assigned chapter, (b) discuss the themes/concepts you like in the chapter in relation to a workplace / organizations, (c) conclusion — synthesize the themes/concepts,   12 attachments Slide 1 of 12 attachment_1 attachment_1 attachment_2 attachment_2 attachment_3 attachment_3 attachment_4 attachment_4 attachment_5 attachment_5 attachment_6 attachment_6 attachment_7 attachment_7 attachment_8 attachment_8 attachment_9 attachment_9 attachment_10 attachment_10 attachment_11 attachment_11 attachment_12 attachment_12 ER2 Chapter 3 .267 293 321 349 377 SOCIAL MEDIA AS COLLABORATIVE MEDIA IN WORKPLACE LEARNING 107 41 69 nd S. Human Resource Development Review 12(3) 329–344 © 2013 SAGE Publications Social Media as Collaborative listopher J. Thomas’ and Mesut Akdere 12 Keywords Reprints and permissions: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/1534484312472331 hrd.sagepub.com SAGE social media, collaborative media, okplace learning, knowledge management University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA Antalya International University, Antalya, Turkey Corresponding Author: Kristopher J. Thomas, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, 644 Enderis Hall, 2400 E. Hartford Ave., Milwaukee, WI 53211, USA. Email: [email protected] SOCI CHAPTER 108 cultur to ad Such the employees stay continually engaged in the organization’s knowledge media “provides an online medium to maintain and foster social capital with management efforts. Similarly, Piotrowski (2012) argues that collaborative others and staying connected’ (pp. 79-80), which is crucial in successful would present untraditional venues of collaboration for all organizations implementation and completion of OD interventions. Furthermore, they members. If properly implemented, knowledge management systems created through collaborative media tools can help ensure the sustainability and to cu trust collak the c competitiveness of the organization. in tu CHALLENGES TO USING COLLABORATIVE MEDIA anxie colla lack AS LEARNING TOOLS Leveraging collaborative media for learning or for any reason is not as simple man as obtaining the technology, integrating it to the organizational processes, and introducing it to the organizational members. Jue et al. (2009) astutely to m 441 59 F question ‘Once we invite participation, how do we guide the effort so the it is most productive? How do we combat organizational fears? How do re engage those leaders who may be skeptical about changing their behaviors? (p. 3). Not all organizations embrace or foster an organizational environment and culture that supports collaboration, learning, or new technologies in general. prin 2009 to u exac The use of collaborative media tools-particularly for workplace learning-is predicated largely on the assumption that all organizations wat their members to freely share information so that the members can lem and grow. We can also generally assume that an organization encourago und lear coll syst coli tec the me Pu tee collaboration among its members. However, organizations may have what Wegner, McDermott, and Snyder (2002) refer to as an antilearning culture An organizational culture may discourage learning, reflection, and knowledge sharing-for instance, by putting value exclusively of also discourage participation. In such organizations, communities of individual tasks and performance. Often, policies and infrastruct We can then assume that in such organizations, the use of collaborative media as learning tools or for any purpose would not be encouraged or and achievement, collaborative media might be viewed as only serving to supported. If such an organization is focused solely on detract from one’s goals. The counter to this version of an antilearning sta practice are easily marginalized. (p. 156) Ac sit production individual Pr to, kr ER2 Chapter 3 .267 293 321 349 377 SOCIAL MEDIA AS COLLABORATIVE MEDIA IN WORKPLACE LEARNING 107 41 69 nd S. Human Resource Development Review 12(3) 329–344 © 2013 SAGE Publications Social Media as Collaborative listopher J. Thomas’ and Mesut Akdere 12 Keywords Reprints and permissions: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/1534484312472331 hrd.sagepub.com SAGE social media, collaborative media, okplace learning, knowledge management University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA Antalya International University, Antalya, Turkey Corresponding Author: Kristopher J. Thomas, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, 644 Enderis Hall, 2400 E. Hartford Ave., Milwaukee, WI 53211, USA. Email: [email protected] CHAPTER 100 Abstract media use of social media in branding, marketing, and in general corporate As a result of rapid changes in technology, much is discussed about the proliferated is staggering. Increasingly important is the role of social wikis, Twitter, instant messaging (IM) and Facebook, among others-have communications. The intensity with which social media tools-blogs, management. To more accurately describe the purposes for which tools as a way to enhance and advance workplace learning and knowledge media. The clarity brought by this term serves to help HRD professionals and knowledge management strategy and to attain organizational within organizations adopt collaborative media tools as a workplace learning for such tools at the highest level and capacity. Also discussed is the need for future research by HRD scholars that facilitates the role of collaborative media tools in workplace learning and knowledge management. media tools are utilized within organizations, SOCIAL we propose the term collaborating suppor This article takes the position that Human Resource Development T (HRD) has the ownership and should champion full responsibilin for utilizing social media for the purposes of workplace learning and performance improvement. As organizations become more reliant on ever- changing and ever-expanding social media tools to help their members leam and share knowledge, it is imperative that HRD professionals and scholars position and utilize these tools differently in the organization. Considering that social media tools lend themselves to multiple functionalities including both organizational and personal purposes, we argue that these tools should instead be termed collaborative media for HRD purposes because they and should be used in organizational settings to foster learning, C20 increase productivity, and manage knowledge. HRD When viewed in the context of knowledge management, collaborative professionals are well positioned to design and implement ways to integrate collaborative media tools throughout the organization. Furthermore, professionals can utilize a system of knowledge management to ensure that captured and stored. Once the capacity to collect, archive, and the organizational knowledge that is created and shared via collaborative distribute organizational knowledge is achieved, the true potential and value of collaborative media for the purpose of HRD goals and objectives realized (Thomas & Akdere, 2011). 101 ze several AL MEDIA AS COLLABORATIVE MEDIA IN.. with HRD leading initiatives to implement collaborative media tools, 1/ degree to which collaborative media are used for problem solving Lopportunities for future research and practice. First, HRD should assume responsibility to design studies that demonstrate to design solutions that maximize the learning and collaboration that knowledge sharing. Second, both HRD professionals and scholars wsible via collaborative media. Finally, future research is needed to the perceptions and experiences of both employees and leaders i best practices for the implementation and integration of these tools organizations to validate the utility of collaborative media tools and to anizational efforts for learning and continuous improvement. be argued that the use of collaborative media tools st challenges in today’s global organizations. Some of these issues atracting and retaining technologically savvy employees versus those echnologically inclined. Also, firms must learn to properly utilize these ir the purpose of achieving organizational goals. Furthermore, as ations become more global in nature, their capacity to work across zphic and time boundaries and to thoroughly leverage global talent spend heavily on their ability to utilize and incorporate collaborative tools into their core HRD processes and functions. Consequently, implications to the practice of HRD warrant further explanation aploration. Specifically, this conceptual article (a) proposes the term vrative media to illustrate how HRD professionals and scholars can pion the implementation of social media tools by gaining the support of swational leaders and management, (b) demonstrates how organizations ne collaborative media tools to facilitate knowledge management and 13 processes in the workplace, and (c) explores the role that HRD S 3 1 ? e e e essionals and scholars play in ensuring the effective implementation of sc tools for the purpose of workplace learning. (KGROUND: COLLABORATIVE MEDIA AS ARNING TOOLS IN THE WORKPLACE uvein both ourpersonallives and in our workplaces, the use of technology the members have started to increasingly use various technologies in arous. With the latest developments in technology, both organizations boration in various ways and forms. These technologies are formally wyplace. Some of these technologies facilitate communication and elzs social media, which are “a set of technologies and channels targeted it e d ? e CHAPTER 102 to at forming and enabling a potentially massive community of prostore of blogs, wikis, Twitter, instant messaging (IM) and Facebook productively collaborate’ (Bradley, 2010, n.p.). Social media theo begun to utilize social media not only as tools for increased communcern strictly social in purpose; corporations and other large organizations bet with customers and for broader branding efforts but also as a means 2010). A survey of 400 companies demonstrated that “a full 94 percent of improve learning within their organizations (Huang, Yang, Huang, & Homes organizations maintained or increased their investment in online comme their marketing and public relations purposes. According to the Institutions of higher education, for example, have embraced these tools for for customers, employees, and partners versus 2008” (Palmer, 2009, p. 6, firm McKinsey & Company, ’69 percent of executives of companies that have implemented a social media strategy report that their companies bas to the consules gained measurable business benefits, including better access to and higher revenue’ (Henneman, 2010, p. 4). knowledge Though various social media tools are seen primarily as a means o communicate and exchange information, we have just begun to explore të potential as learning tools . Consequently, we have been unable to idenci a significant amount of literature surrounding the use of social media as: means to foster informal learning and the acceptance of social media as a set of tools that contributes to and enhances workplace learning. The tem collaborative media, thus, is proposed to illustrate how social media can be beat implemented and accepted as a successful alternative for sustaining and increasing organizational knowledge through workplace learning. Jacobs and Park (2009) define workplace learning as “the process used by individuak when engaged in training programs, education and development courses a competence necessary to meet current and future work requirement.” 134). Training has traditionally been viewed as a series of planned some type of experiential learning activity for the purpose of acquiring the events that optimal means of can analyze a task, process or function to discover an provide learners with specific job skills and that “assumes that organizatie performing it, document that optimal method, and then prescribe the requin skills or expertise that a learner must master to perform the task” Marsid & Volpe, 1999, p. 2). Training, however, tends to be singularly focused 001 Because collaborative media tools are asynchronous and mobile in nature, we argue that they best lend themselves to informal learning. and Volpe (1999) define informal learning as learning that is specific skill set intended for a specific task or set of tasks. predominantl co 103 CER 3 SOCIAL MEDIA AS COLLABORATIVE MEDIA IN. 22ry out their daily work [and that is a result of people’s choices, preferences, zastructured, experiential, and noninstitutional that happens as employees and intentions’ (p. 1). That is, because learning that takes place anytime and anywhere requires tools and approaches that are available anytime and nywhere, informal learning and collaborative media tools complement and opport each other quite effectively. Such a flexible and learner-centered pproach can prove advantageous to both the learner and the organization. ipants world ce not have ations ans to cording to Marsick and Volpe (1999), Hsiao, ent of inities When organizations make available to employees the means to pull p. 6). ols for sulting information and knowledge into the workplace at the exact time they Learning is then maximized throughout the organization and can be used to improve the capability of less experienced, less knowledgeable employees to enhance overall organizational effectiveness. (p. 3) es that s have vledge ans to e their dentify la as a Additionally, because our focus is on purposeful learning in which be learner consciously participates and of which the learner is fully aware, informal learning is the most appropriate approach for utilizing collaborative reda tools for workplace learning. Collaborative media, then, can enable the organization’s members n interact with each other unconventionally and more rapidly, eliminating he traditional time and space restrictions. Collaborative media ‘is about participation most often it takes the form of communicating, connecting, ad collaborating with anyone anywhere, anytime’ (Jue, Alcade-Marr, & Kassotakis, 2009, p. 4). Bingahm and Conner (2010) call this phenomenon ta social learning, and note that “it reframes social media from a marketing ategy to a strategy that encourages knowledge transfer and connects pople in a way consistent with how we naturally interact’ (p. 6). By using la as a e term pe best ig Jacobs viduals ses, or ng the ts’ (p. ts that zations MY OWNS ans of quired Tarsick ed on a system Create a profile that details their expertise. collaborative media tools, members of an organization can communicate sequently and easily, sharing their knowledge and improving their individual s Travelocity and other travel reservation systems, has created an ind collective performance. For example, Sabre Holdings, the company Somal online learning community called Sabre Town (Galagan, 2009, P. de that connecting them was critical to sharing the knowledge that each can than ask questions that are directed by Sabre’s social betworking software to all employees that have the expertise required for that tellow employees espective question. An online dialogue follows until a satisfactory answer bile in larsick inantly created in which employees create a R3 Chapter 4 ASSESSING THE EFFECTS OF ‘BIG BROTHER’ IN A WORKPLACE: THE CASE OF WAST Sarpong’, Donna Rees sywords: thother, Technology, Electronic monitoring, WAST, Staff, Workplace mesponding author. Tel.: +44 7951942833. E-mail address: sam.sarpong@smu. tak (S Ildy doi. 122 Abstract CHAPTER years. This organisations has resulted in considerable debate over the The extensive and growing use of electronic performance monitoring in (WAST), a provider of emergency services for the people of Wales, in monitoring at its call centres and determining whether employees focuses on workplace monitoring at the Welsh Ambulance Services Tros. the UK. The key objectives include examining the nature of performance micromanaged through the use of workplace surveillance. The findings cover staff (both management and non-management) perceptions, gathered study areas. The findings revealed that workplace electronic monitoring is through a questionnaire and interviews as well as observations made in the not intrinsically all good or all bad. It is value neutral and offers a win-win © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights r od ostal be situation. reserved INTRODUCTION 08 t has been estimated that the average person in a major UK city is seen on closed circuit television (CCTV) between 8 and 300 times every day – (Biressi & Nunn, 2003). Though there is nothing new in individual or societal surveillance, the intensity and the way surveillance or monitoring i carried out often draws in a lot of concerns. In recent years, many workers here also been subjected to high levels of monitoring (Smith, 2007). Early accouets of large-scale organisations emphasis how the development of informatie ‘systems’ gave businesses the ability to police their internal structures on 1 grand scale and gain competitive advantage (Ball, 2010). The monitoring, as Sewell (1999) argues, may be couched in the language of performance monitoring, and annual appraisals. In spite of that, it is invariably dependen on some form of surveillance. big brother which metaphorically denotes i term for surveillance, represents the tremendous capabilities technology ha provided for employers to keep track of what their work force is up to these days. The paper begins with a discussion on the controversy surrounding the although many writers now tend to draw a distinction between them. The terms, monitoring and surveillance’. These have been used interchangeable contemporary metaphor used to describe surveillance. The use of the paper also uses the term, big brother’, which is perhaps the most popular expression in popular culture as a term for shadowing, scrutinising or tailing 123 PTER 4 oring in is paper es Trust Jales, in ASSESSING THE EFFECTS OF ‘BIG BROTHER’IN adings follow next in order followed by a conclusion, anor be overstated. The methodology adopted for the study and the PLOYEE MONITORING RSURVEILLANCE? is during working hours using employer equip-ment/property (Raposa aployee monitoring is the act of watching and monitoring employees’ Mujtaba, 2003). Yet, if such monitoring were being done to uncover vehic wrongdoing, then it can be classified as surveillance (D’Urso, 2006). monitoring can be seen as surveillance to others as the lines between y employee surveillance’ have been used interchangeably, it is important to e seemingly blurred. Although both terms ’employee monitoring inded by terminological ambiguity. a thorough understanding of these two distinct terms which seem to be According to Botan and Vorvoreanu (2000), the term, ‘monitoring Dimance ees are findings athered e in the Oring is vin-win R?. e two are vrea served. s seen more ry day ual or ring is shave prezic and can be applied to all automated collection of information work , regardless of purpose, whilst surveillance, on the other hand, narrowly refers to a relationship between some authority and those ose behaviour it wishes to control. Ball (2010), meanwhile, notes that monitoring and surveillance denote similar practices and both can have sive and negative consequences, they have different connotations to their diences . She notes the connotative differences between psychologists and ciologists on the issue and stresses that the connota- tive differences and et associated epistemological and political commitments serve to split watch on workplace surveillance in an unhelpful way. Although a large span of explanations have been offered for these blems by some researchers, what is clear, however, is that apart from the that monitoring and surveillance have different connotations to their ounts ation on a pring, lance dent tes a 7 has hese workplace. We used the two terms interchangeably in order to feed into the ably The ular that aces, each can be used benignly depending on one’s viewpoint. This per uses both terms to describe the kind of activities that are observed at to viewpoints. The tag, ‘big brother’ refers to an authoritative force that ge Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four novel and its fictitious character t was being monitored. In the book, the concept of ‘big brother brother who was used to intimidate citizens into believing that their Meer and has become a popular euphemism for Britain’s comprehensive ved largely. It was an omniscient, ever present, somewhat malicious ling 124 CHAPTER system of surveillance cameras. It connotes activities that are intrude into people’s lives. ‘big brother’ is, thus, synonymous with a that seeks to curtail the freedom of individuals or society as a whole. perceived any activin AN OVERVIEW staff has increased over the past years and this has particularly been helped The use of technology in workplaces for the protection and monitoring of derived from internet browsing where control aspects are disguised (Haggen by organisational computer networks and the use of hidden clickstream dati & Gazso, 2005; Regan, 2002). According to the American Management increasing every year. The resort to technology has helped management Association (AMA, 2001) electronic surveillance of employees has been to manage workers without the need for direct supervision as would bare of technology in monitoring as just a natural evolution of the old assembly supervisors on the assembly line. Nolan (2003) for instance, sees the we lines. He draws similarities with the Fordist assembly lines where staff wers watched closely by supervisors on the assembly line. The difference between traditional monitoring by a visible supervisor and today’s monitoring is that, a line where there is no need for a physical presence of anyone. So today’s supervisor might not even be visible but can record employees’ movement and productirir quite easily. Some of the most common reasons for employee monitoring include performance reviews; legal compliance, and cost control (AMA, 2001). Other reasons that have often been cited include protection of business information, security and safety. A number of these technologies involve the use of dom swipes , CCTV, telephony adherence and activity reports, computer logo and activity reports, printer and photocopier log-in details. The Automate va Caller Display (ACD) software is also used extensively in call centres. This is used to monitor call volumes, customer service advisor availability, duration of calls, duration of agents’ idle time in between calls and how many calls takes. Other firms also require knowledge of the amount o time available for incoming calls. This enables the organisations to forecast successfully for the number of staff they need to answer the expected cl volume and also to meet the required service level agreements. The reliance on technology in call centres provides for effective operations and considerable checks on staff. But management of such 125 ER 4 red to ctivity SESSING THE EFFECTS OF ‘BIG BROTHER’ IN. way of quality performance often due to staff’s concern over extensive commitment, labour turnover, the effectiveness of supervision and the hanisms of monitoring or surveillance. No sector of British industry has and more publicity in recent months than ‘call centre’ operations (Taylor 1999). They have been portrayed, for example, as the new ‘dark azie mills’ (see IDS, 1997: 13). The fact is that the integration of telephone computer technologies, which defines the call centre, has produced new velopments in the Taylorisation of white-collar work (Taylor & Bain, 1999). Ball (2010) acknowledges that the widest range of monitoring sniques can be found in the service sector, although manufacturing es alone, it is estimated that around 20 million workers are electronically industries also monitor their employees. In the United ir employees’ online activities while at work (Hofmann et al., 2003). The 2 big brother’ aptly describes the present situation (Schulman, 2001). At goyees fuelling fear and stress in the workplace (Silicon.com., 2011). This seven incurred the wrath of union leaders who feel high technologies are ng of elped data gerty ment some primary been ment ? have d by big brother style technologies are now watching half of the UK’s use nbly vere Teen hat, ight vity das a weapon to control the workplace and watch its workers (Lee, 2007). Monitoring and surveillance do not only undermine workers’ rights to sacy , they can also create high levels of stress and anxiety leading to ill-health poor performance, according to the British trade union, Amicus (Amicus aide , 2005). Some studies, meanwhile, have linked anxiety, depression, and srous disorders to the stress induced by workplace monitoring. Hence, use who are monitored are believed to be constantly apprehensive and bied due to the constant presence of an unseen audience (Ariss et 2002) . In spite of this apprehension, there have always been legitimate suas and justifications for workplace monitoring. A number of reasons dited for this are that monitoring can lead to an increase in productivity, ude her on, bor -in atic sis dace absenteeism and ensure the security of staff and site and health and on lls kety issues. of ast all MPLOYERS’ RATIONALE FOR SURVEILLANCE at many years. In recent years, however, advances in technology have been hed, employers have always gathered information about their employees senatic, and have facilitated information gathering in ways that in the past eyers could never have imagined possible (Hoffman et al., 2003). Kizza Sanya (2005) have attributed the growth of employee monitoring to ve ch OD Purchase answer to see full attachment Explanation & Answer: 2 pages Tags: expansion of technology organizational functioning Technological Determinism learning tools organizational culture User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool’s honor code & terms of service.