Wiki professionnel et coopération en réseaux

Abstract

Résumé Le thème fédérateur du web 2.0 s’applique aux technologies de l’information les plus récentes, dont l’une des propriétés essentielles correspond à une diffusion élargie dans les sphères privées et professionnelles. L’objectif de cette contribution est d’apporter un éclairage sur ses usages en entreprise au travers d’une étude exploratoire axée sur l’un des ses outils les plus emblématiques, le wiki. Un double regard est porté sur d’une part les processus d’appropriation par les individus et d’autre part les effets de la dynamique des organisations qui les sous-tendent. L’analyse théorique et la pluralité du recueil de données de l’étude empirique (observation de trafic, étude quantitative et qualitative) soulignent la diversité des situations rencontrées et mettent en évidence les processus d’ajustements entre les différents niveaux organisationnels et individuels.

What Does Really Matter in Technology Adoption and Use? A CCO Approach

“…The authors describe a case in which the research division manager of a large information technology company asks his teams to write all the documents concerning the planning of their activities on a wiki so as to make every researcher more knowledgeable about the research conducted by the other teams. Although less explicitly, the de-compartmentalization process also appears in other studies where the authors report that the teams who installed the wikis were inspired by Wikipedia (Holtzblatt et al, 2010; Stocker et al, 2012) or, more broadly, by “the Web 2.0 culture of self-organization and free-participation” (Caby-Guillet et al, 2009, p. 204, see also Stocker et al, 2012, pp. 317-319).…”

“…Relying on telephone interviews and questionnaire analyses, the first studies on the subject were able to confirm the sustainable presence of wikis in numerous organizations (Majchrzak, Wagner, & Yates, 2006), but contributed little to understanding the actual uses of this technology. The situation started to change in subsequent years with the publication of a few detailed case studies based on direct observations, interviews, and/or traffic analysis (Caby-Guillet et al, 2009; Danis & Singer, 2008; Holtzblatt et al, 2010; Stocker et al, 2012).…”

“…They also report that the researchers do not feel they have the right to edit or comment on the pages of the other teams. Caby-Guillet et al (2009) report that people use the wiki mainly to disseminate information and to cooperate with their close collaborators. Holtzblatt et al (2010) identify a set of social and technological factors that impede broader usage of wikis for knowledge sharing.…”

“…All the studies reviewed tend to rely on preconceived categories. Danis and Singer (2008) look at “the interplay of technology, work practice, and organization” (p. 495), Caby-Guillet et al (2009) examine the “interaction processes between the users, the technology and the global environment of the activity” (p. 201), whereas Holtzblatt et al (2010) distinguish between “social and cultural factors” (p. 4666) on one side and technology-related factors, “the reliance on other channels of communication” (p. 4668), on the other side. Far from making the analysts’ work more accurate, we believe that these types of precategorizing might actually prevent them from precisely describing a process such as a de-compartmentalization and what is causing it to fail.…”

“…We will first discuss the literature on organizational wikis and, more precisely, the de-compartmentalization of document writing that is generally associated with the introduction of wikis in organizations. We will see that despite the publication of a few detailed case studies (Caby-Guillet, Guesmi, & Mallard, 2009; Danis & Singer, 2008; Holtzblatt, Damianos, & Weiss, 2010; Stocker, Richter, Hoefler, & Tochtermann, 2012), the substance of this de-compartmentalization and the reasons for its often-reported failure remain unclear. Following Orlikowski’s (2007) insights, we will argue that these shortcomings come from preconceived categories that keep the material and the social worlds separate from one another.…”