<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Who drives your organisation&#8217;s collaboration strategy?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://ozcollab.com/2010/01/04/who-drives-your-organisations-collaboration-strategy/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://ozcollab.com/2010/01/04/who-drives-your-organisations-collaboration-strategy/</link>
	<description>The Australian Collaboration Software Report</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 04 Mar 2011 22:53:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Taino Cribb</title>
		<link>http://ozcollab.com/2010/01/04/who-drives-your-organisations-collaboration-strategy/#comment-42</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Taino Cribb]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Jan 2010 04:17:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ozcollab.com/?p=53#comment-42</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I find this quite facinating that this question really doesn&#039;t align with the next one either... &quot;do you have a strategy&quot;.  I wonder how many &quot;people-focused&quot; functions have a strategy compared to &quot;technology-focussed&quot; functions.

The &quot;build it and they will come&quot; attitude is now  archaic, however it seems to have been unfortunately replaced with &quot;hey lets put it in and see what happens&quot;.  People-focussed streams seem to understand that users demand more usable and useful systems and that stakeholders demand ROI on business goals.  One thing that seems to be forgotten in the whole &quot;collaboration revolution&quot; is that we collaborate already. How fantastic must new technology be to get us off our phones and email, or is the expectation that we must now monitor internal AND external networking sites, email, personal mobiles, blackberries /iphones / laptops/desktops daily?

Acknowledging that we don&#039;t live in a perfect world where strategies always drive implementations (and the cart rides behind the horse at all times), at least having some ownership of the successful implementation AND Change Management is much more important than installing the newest software on an enterprise server.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I find this quite facinating that this question really doesn&#8217;t align with the next one either&#8230; &#8220;do you have a strategy&#8221;.  I wonder how many &#8220;people-focused&#8221; functions have a strategy compared to &#8220;technology-focussed&#8221; functions.</p>
<p>The &#8220;build it and they will come&#8221; attitude is now  archaic, however it seems to have been unfortunately replaced with &#8220;hey lets put it in and see what happens&#8221;.  People-focussed streams seem to understand that users demand more usable and useful systems and that stakeholders demand ROI on business goals.  One thing that seems to be forgotten in the whole &#8220;collaboration revolution&#8221; is that we collaborate already. How fantastic must new technology be to get us off our phones and email, or is the expectation that we must now monitor internal AND external networking sites, email, personal mobiles, blackberries /iphones / laptops/desktops daily?</p>
<p>Acknowledging that we don&#8217;t live in a perfect world where strategies always drive implementations (and the cart rides behind the horse at all times), at least having some ownership of the successful implementation AND Change Management is much more important than installing the newest software on an enterprise server.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

