<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!--Generated by Squarespace Site Server v5.11.5 (http://www.squarespace.com/) on Fri, 30 Jul 2010 14:28:09 GMT--><rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" version="2.0"><channel><title>All Collaboration</title><link>http://allcollaboration.com/home/</link><description></description><lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 Jun 2010 18:00:05 +0000</lastBuildDate><copyright></copyright><language>en-US</language><generator>Squarespace Site Server v5.11.5 (http://www.squarespace.com/)</generator><item><title>Effective Collaboration is Supposed to Look "Messy"!</title><category>People</category><category>Tools</category><category>Wikis</category><dc:creator>Lamont</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 23 Jun 2010 17:32:24 +0000</pubDate><link>http://allcollaboration.com/home/2010/6/23/effective-collaboration-is-supposed-to-look-messy.html</link><guid isPermaLink="false">431568:4782750:8065342</guid><description><![CDATA[As I lament how poorly most people use today's collaboration tools, I also put some of the "blame" on the collaboration tool makers for making people think the work effort is supposed to be pretty. &nbsp;I am a great fan of wikis, but many of the examples they show look more like clean web layouts than successful collaboration.]]></description><wfw:commentRss>http://allcollaboration.com/home/rss-comments-entry-8065342.xml</wfw:commentRss></item><item><title>You Couldn't Do This By TelePresence</title><category>Michael Sampson</category><category>People</category><category>Place</category><category>Process</category><category>Purpose</category><category>TelePresence</category><category>Virtual Teams</category><dc:creator>Lokesh Datta</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 10 Jun 2010 15:11:46 +0000</pubDate><link>http://allcollaboration.com/home/2010/6/10/you-couldnt-do-this-by-telepresence.html</link><guid isPermaLink="false">431568:4782750:7941963</guid><description><![CDATA[<p><strong>Sometimes you just have to be there ...</strong></p>
<p><object width="500" height="301"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ZosBRSOwhIQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ZosBRSOwhIQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="500" height="301"></embed></object></p>
<p>&nbsp;This is <a href="http://currents.michaelsampson.net/">Michael Sampson</a>'s idea! Thanks Michael!</p>
<p>What lessons can we draw from this about virtual vs. face-to-face?</p>]]></description><wfw:commentRss>http://allcollaboration.com/home/rss-comments-entry-7941963.xml</wfw:commentRss></item><item><title>How’s your collaboration effort going?</title><category>4 Ps Diagnostic Tool</category><category>People</category><category>Place</category><category>Process</category><category>Purpose</category><category>Strategy</category><dc:creator>Lokesh Datta</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 07 Jun 2010 21:12:43 +0000</pubDate><link>http://allcollaboration.com/home/2010/6/7/hows-your-collaboration-effort-going.html</link><guid isPermaLink="false">431568:4782750:7894587</guid><description><![CDATA[<p>Congratulations, if your collaboration is going fabulously. Otherwise, something is missing. We can use the 4 Ps Diagnostic Tool, based on the <a href="http://allcollaboration.com/home/2009/12/15/the-four-ps-of-effective-collaboration.html">4 Ps Framework for Effective Collaboration</a>, to understand what might be less than adequate in your collaboration effort.</p>
<p>﻿<span class="thumbnail-image-block ssNonEditable"><span><a href="javascript:showFullImage('/display/ShowImage?imageUrl=%2Fstorage%2F4%2520Ps%2520Diagnostic.gif%3F__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION%3D1275945962110',249,515);"><img src="http://allcollaboration.com/storage/thumbnails/4782749-7242249-thumbnail.jpg?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1275945979270" alt="" /></a></span></span></p>
<p>Missing &ldquo;&radic;&rdquo; represents one of the 4 Ps that needs extra effort.</p>]]></description><wfw:commentRss>http://allcollaboration.com/home/rss-comments-entry-7894587.xml</wfw:commentRss></item><item><title>Empowerment: Owning problems, and NOT merely tasks!</title><category>Empowerment</category><category>Enterprise 2.0</category><category>People</category><category>Problem Solving</category><category>Process</category><category>Purpose</category><category>SMArt</category><category>Strategic Mind Art</category><category>Strategy</category><dc:creator>Lokesh Datta</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 07 Jun 2010 19:22:07 +0000</pubDate><link>http://allcollaboration.com/home/2010/6/7/empowerment-owning-problems-and-not-merely-tasks.html</link><guid isPermaLink="false">431568:4782750:7893692</guid><description><![CDATA[What if we could …

    * Break-down the business problem/challenge into sub-problems, to whatever level appropriate
    * Maintain and highlight inherent dependencies (precedence) of sub-problems; that is, the order in which they should be solved
    * Highlight the expertise needed to solve sub-problems and thus identify any skills/capabilities gaps
    * Translate collection of sub-problems into a “Solution Plan” (similar to a Project Plan)
    * Develop contingency plans for inherently visible dependencies
    * Have collaborators own sub-problems, for which they easily and clearly understand the impact and contribution of their efforts in the context of the larger business challenge
    * Effectively communicate the progress in terms of solution progress, instead of task status
    * Create an organization of problem-solvers, not task-performers]]></description><wfw:commentRss>http://allcollaboration.com/home/rss-comments-entry-7893692.xml</wfw:commentRss></item><item><title>What Empowerment? Enterprise 2.0 Meets Taylorism!</title><category>Empowerment</category><category>Enterprise 2.0</category><category>Leadership</category><category>People</category><category>Process</category><category>Strategy</category><category>Taylorism</category><dc:creator>Lokesh Datta</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 04 Jun 2010 17:35:16 +0000</pubDate><link>http://allcollaboration.com/home/2010/6/4/what-empowerment-enterprise-20-meets-taylorism.html</link><guid isPermaLink="false">431568:4782750:7866454</guid><description><![CDATA[One buzzword of Enterprise 2.0 is EMPOWERMENT. The reasoning goes that empowerment leads to ownership, motivation, creativity, learning & growth, and superior performance, and so on (insert other organization development buzzwords here!). Proponents of the Enterprise 2.0 movement tell us what we should do and why, vis-à-vis empowerment. But, when it comes to the “how” in the real-world, the guidance is a bit sketchy. Here is what we face. We still use methods to manage collaborative efforts that go back to the command & control mindset of Taylorism, with task orientation and assignments. Sometimes, these tasks can be down to hourly or daily levels. Sophisticated tools exist and are in use today that allow for near real-time update and monitoring of progress.]]></description><wfw:commentRss>http://allcollaboration.com/home/rss-comments-entry-7866454.xml</wfw:commentRss></item><item><title>Microsoft Sharepoint 2010 - Pretty Pictures or Good Results?</title><category>Sharepoint</category><category>Strategy</category><category>Tools</category><dc:creator>Lamont</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 03 Jun 2010 16:35:59 +0000</pubDate><link>http://allcollaboration.com/home/2010/6/3/microsoft-sharepoint-2010-pretty-pictures-or-good-results.html</link><guid isPermaLink="false">431568:4782750:7856078</guid><description><![CDATA[<p>I have been reading much of the hype about Sharepoint 2010 and have yet to use it myself. &nbsp;But I found the <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/galleries/windows/reviews/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=224701355&amp;pgno=1&amp;isPrev=">image gallery at Information Week</a> enlightening -- and disappointing. &nbsp;To me, it looks like a combination of all the pretty editing functions of Powerpoint, Excel, Visio, Project, and so on, all bundled into a so-called collaboration tool.</p>
<p>It strikes me the emphasis is on making the results look pretty, rather than getting to the best solutions. &nbsp;In other words <strong>form over substance</strong>. &nbsp;I have <a href="http://lamonaco.com/blogs/2007/3/30/death-by-powerpoint.html">ranted</a> many times about the abuse of Powerpoint, where the presenter puts more effort into the graphics and animation, at the expense of a compelling story line. &nbsp;My fear is that Microsoft is turning Sharepoint into a tool to do the same thing for collaboration.</p>]]></description><wfw:commentRss>http://allcollaboration.com/home/rss-comments-entry-7856078.xml</wfw:commentRss></item><item><title>The PEOPLE Affected by Collaboration</title><category>4 Ps Model</category><category>CEOs</category><category>Cleints</category><category>Contractors</category><category>Customers</category><category>People</category><dc:creator>Guest Poster</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 01 Jun 2010 22:30:30 +0000</pubDate><link>http://allcollaboration.com/home/2010/6/1/the-people-affected-by-collaboration.html</link><guid isPermaLink="false">431568:4782750:7832957</guid><description><![CDATA[As a reader of this blog, you are well aware of what I am about to say - effective collaboration can only be achieved through a holistic approach consisting of the 4 P’s: Purpose, People, Process and Place. And while I am in agreement with this approach, I firmly believe that PEOPLE is the most important of the 4 P’s. Without people, there would be no collaboration. You need other PEOPLE around you to work with you in your PLACE to identify a PURPOSE and collaborate within your business PROCESSES. So who are the people that are most important in collaboration?]]></description><wfw:commentRss>http://allcollaboration.com/home/rss-comments-entry-7832957.xml</wfw:commentRss></item><item><title>BP Oil Spill - Unmitigated Disaster in Collaboration</title><category>4 Ps Model</category><category>BP</category><category>Oil Spill</category><category>People</category><category>Process</category><category>Purpose</category><category>Trust</category><dc:creator>Lokesh Datta</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 27 May 2010 19:58:37 +0000</pubDate><link>http://allcollaboration.com/home/2010/5/27/bp-oil-spill-unmitigated-disaster-in-collaboration.html</link><guid isPermaLink="false">431568:4782750:7793628</guid><description><![CDATA[I must begin by saying that this is not a political post; this is not about bashing BP or the US administration. Second, although I do confess to being a news-junkie, I have the same limited knowledge of the situation that is available to all of you. I am no more plugged into the administration or BP than I am plugged into the hole one mile underwater in the ocean. More than one month after the start of this disaster, here is how I see it from a collaboration standpoint. I shall use our 4 Ps Model for Effective Collaboration: Purpose, People, Process and Place.]]></description><wfw:commentRss>http://allcollaboration.com/home/rss-comments-entry-7793628.xml</wfw:commentRss></item><item><title>Sources of Complexity in Collaboration</title><category>CCollaboration Gap</category><category>Complexity</category><category>People</category><category>Surveys</category><category>Virtual Teams</category><dc:creator>Lokesh Datta</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 26 May 2010 19:04:37 +0000</pubDate><link>http://allcollaboration.com/home/2010/5/26/sources-of-complexity-in-collaboration.html</link><guid isPermaLink="false">431568:4782750:7782958</guid><description><![CDATA[Despite its growing importance, we see a “collaboration gap” between the desired versus current state of collaboration in the enterprise. Managing complexity in collaboration to successful conclusions is a key to promoting a culture of collaboration in the enterprise. In this post, we identify the sources of complexity in collaboration using empirical evidence. The data used in this post comes from our primary research, Assessing the State of Collaboration: Return to Essentials.]]></description><wfw:commentRss>http://allcollaboration.com/home/rss-comments-entry-7782958.xml</wfw:commentRss></item><item><title>Leveraging A “Change Model” for Collaboration</title><category>4 Ps Model</category><category>Change Model</category><category>People</category><category>Place</category><category>Process</category><category>Purpose</category><category>Strategy</category><dc:creator>Lokesh Datta</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 25 May 2010 17:20:01 +0000</pubDate><link>http://allcollaboration.com/home/2010/5/25/leveraging-a-change-model-for-collaboration.html</link><guid isPermaLink="false">431568:4782750:7773468</guid><description><![CDATA[I recognize that there are many “change models,” but this particular one caught my attention, for its simplicity and insights. I do not know who the author is. I feel that this change model applies to collaboration as well. Granted that change initiatives are at a grand scale, and we usually speak of collaboration "efforts," unless an organization is embarking on a change initiate to create a strong culture of collaboration. According to the change model, successful change has 5 key elements: i) Vision, ii) Skills, iii) Incentives, iv) Resources, and v) Action Plan. With these ingredients, the model lays out 5 possibilities:]]></description><wfw:commentRss>http://allcollaboration.com/home/rss-comments-entry-7773468.xml</wfw:commentRss></item></channel></rss>