Friday, June 15, 2007

Intranet Implementation and Improvement Part 3 of 3

Keyboard 2

This post is part of a series on intranet implementation and improvement. Please click on the links to read further:

Part 1
Part 2

Arrangement

A typical intranet has a central home page with a hierarchy of pages connected by hyperlinks. Its hierarchy surpasses the traditional linear model of information presentation because data is organized, stored, and accessed in a non-linear fashion through a network of links (Telleen, 1997). Broker pages aid users in accessing content pages, which contain useful information, as well as links to other broker and content pages. Typically, searching and browsing is restricted to hyperlinks or keyword searches. Due to the overall structure of the internet and intranets, most information is hidden unless the user knows the path or keyword to access it.

Conclusion

The purpose of this paper is to explore issues regarding the implementation and improvement of an intranet. Many simple aesthetic, formatting, and textual changes can be utilized to improve an existing intranet without a drastic redesign.

An effective intranet is not a project that ends at implementation. In fact, most of the work involved in making an intranet useful occurs long after its release. The intranet is an organization’s knowledge management tool that reflects dynamic information. To maintain an intranet’s effectiveness, an organization must continue to educate itself about user needs. The result—an intranet that increases the productivity and competitiveness of the organization—is worth it.

Works Cited

Cumming, M., & Cuthbertson, L. (2001). Wired in Whitehall: a survey of internet and intranet use in government. Aslib Proceedings, 53(1), 32-38.

Dan, V. (2002). Users continue to feel pain on navy’s intranet. Computerworld, 36(45), 22-25.

Fichter, D. ( 2006). Making your intranet live up to its potential. Online, 30(1), 51-53.

Garnik, I. (2006). Factors affecting credibility of online vendors. Doctoral dissertation, Gdańsk University of Technology. Gdańsk Wrzeszcz, Poland.

Guengerich, S., Graham, D., Miller, M., & McDonald, S. (1997). Building the corporate intranet. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Jacoby, G. A., & Luqi. (2007). Intranet models and metrics. Communications of the ACM, 50(2), 43-50.

Jen, H.W., Yi, C.C., Jack, C., & Binshan, L. (2007). Closing off the knowledge gaps in IS education. International Journal of Innovation and Learning, 4(4), 357-375.

Lai, V. S. (2001). Intraorganizational communication with intranets. Communications of the ACM, 44(7), 95-100.

Muller, J.N. (2002). Challenges of intranet management. In S. Purba (Ed.), New directions in internet management (pp. 203-221). Boca Raton, FL: Auerbach Publications.

Newell, S., Scarbrough, H., & Hilop, D. (2000). Intranets and knowledge management: De-centered technologies and the limits of technological discourse. In P. Craig, R. Hull, M. Chumer, & H. Willmott (Eds.), Managing knowledge (pp. 103-110). New York: Macmillan Business.

Pedley, P. (1999). Intranets and push technology: Creating an information sharing environment. London: Aslib.

Sherwood, G. (2001). Digital denial: managing the human element of technology. Journal of Property Management, 71-73.

Telleen, S. L. (1997). Intranet organization. New York: Wiley Publishers.

Wen, H. J. & Anandarajan, A. (1998). Intranet: a cost reduction tool for corporate publication. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 98(5), 200-2004.

No comments: