Goldgruber Eva, Gutounig Robert, Schweiger Stefan, Dennerlein Sebastian
2016
Gutounig Robert, Goldgruber Eva, Dennerlein Sebastian, Schweiger Stefan
2016
Dennerlein Sebastian, Gutounig Robert, Goldgruber Eva , Schweiger Stefan
2016
There are many web-based tools like social networks, collaborative writing, or messaging tools that connectorganizations in accordance with web 2.0 principles. Slack is such a web 2.0 instant messaging tool. As per developer, itintegrates the entire communication, file-sharing, real-time messaging, digital archiving and search at one place. Usage inline with these functionalities would reflect expected appropriation, while other usage would account for unexpectedappropriation. We explored which factors of web 2.0 tools determine actual usage and how they affect knowledgemanagement (KM). Therefore, we investigated the relation between the three influencing factors, proposed tool utility fromdeveloper side, intended usage of key implementers, and context of application, to the actual usage in terms of knowledgeactivities (generate, acquire, organize, transfer and save knowledge). We conducted episodic interviews with keyimplementers in five different organizational contexts to understand how messaging tools affect KM by analyzing theappropriation of features. Slack was implemented with the intention to enable exchange between project teams, connectingdistributed project members, initiate a community of learners and establish a communication platform. Independent of thecontext, all key implementers agreed on knowledge transfer, organization and saving in accordance with Slack’s proposedutility. Moreover, results revealed that a usage intention of internal management does not lead to acquisition of externalknowledge, and usage intention of networking not to generation of new knowledge. These results suggest that it is not thecontext of application, but the intended usage that mainly affects the tool's efficacy with respect to KM: I.e. intention seemsto affect tool selection, first, explaining commonalities with respect to knowledge activities (expected appropriation) and,subsequently, intention also affects unexpected appropriation beyond the developers’ tool utility. A messaging tool is, hence,not only a messaging tool, but it is ‘what you make of it!’
Kraker Peter, Dennerlein Sebastian, Dörler, D, Ferus, A, Gutounig Robert, Heigl, F., Kaier, C., Rieck Katharina, Šimukovic, E., Vignoli Michela
2016
Between April 2015 and June 2016, members of the Open Access Network Aus- tria (OANA) working group “Open Access and Scholarly Communication” met in Vienna to discuss a fundamental reform of the scholarly communication system.By scholarly communication we mean the processes of producing, reviewing, organising, disseminating and preserving scholarly knowledge1. Scholarly communication does not only concern researchers, but also society at large, especially students, educators, policy makers, public administrators, funders, librarians, journalists, practitioners, publishers, public and private organisations, and interested citizens.