Forum Discussion
Can IC work without SharePoint savvy?
I've seen a few posts on LI recently around the use of SharePoint in IC and associated frustrations. Full disclosure, I'm a diehard advocate of SharePoint but would be the first to admit what it ...
Maybe a controversial point, but I wonder if the reason things are locked down is because those responsible for managing them don't understand the capability of that feature, or the resource to put governance around it? In a recent role, much of the expertise around Microsoft was outsourced to agencies with whom we had no contact; so how can we move on from this command and control structure, if the ownership for our platforms sit with some random who has no personal investment?
A channel strategy created by IC will not be of any use if IC not is up-to-date with the technical possibilities. And should IC really be responsible for what I see as collaboration with team. As I see it we have Communication (SharePoint & Intranet), Stream, Viva Connection) , Close collaboration (Teams) and "Open dialogue"(Viva Engage). All three available through Teams but with differing purpose.
Much of the problem here is - Who is responsible?
Sorry but I do not have time to write more but this discussion really is close to my heart 🙂
Much of the problem here is - Who is responsible?
Sorry but I do not have time to write more but this discussion really is close to my heart 🙂
- Do you mind if I share the opening para of this post on LI? I'm trying to generate some interest from the comms community to pitch in with the comments here...
- Fine with me. Then I can share it as well
- Awesome! Thanks Martin, I'll tag you.
- You're absolutely right, an effective channel strategy can't be created without reasonable technical understanding of the different tools. But broadly speaking - in my experience anyway - there is no role in IT that facilitates this knowledge share 🤔
kvadratmartin “who is responsible?” Is a fantastic question.
I think it challenges the traditional role of IT as gatekeepers and looks at how to become enablers within organisations by knowing what departments need and providing the tools and services to do it. This conversation is a good example of the frustrations of when that doesn’t happen.
I think there’s also an adoption question lurking here too. Say we expand to multiple apps for communications, is it all for nothing if staff just communicate via Teams chat anyway?
- That conduit is definitely a key missing piece I agree. I wonder how the "success" of communication tools implementation is generally defined? Or is it measured at all?
