Bob's on the Job

Extensible Markup Language (XML)

noreply@blogger.com (Robert J.F. Sampron) — Sat, 03 Jul 2010 23:48:00 +0000

Extensible Markup Language (XML)

Extensible Markup Language (XML) is a type of metadata tag, a type of folksonomy (O'Keefe, 2009). Metadata tags are attributes that describe a document's content. Rather than using the paragraph tags discussed for folksonomies, authors use metadata to place descriptive tags around layout features designed into a document. One example of a descriptive tag may be the frame for a photograph in a text. This tag creates an “address” for that frame within the document. Users and authors may then quickly search for the tag and populate the area with a different type of frame or none at all.

Consequently, XML is also both a strategy and programming language that separates presentation from content (O’Keefe, 2009). It allows users to create a macro program for presenting content on a media output device, anything from paper to computer screen, before actually creating the content.

For example, let us say a company needs to create 20 different paper-based contracts. Some of the language used in each contract is boilerplate, meaning it contains the same verbiage in the same arrangement. Rather than re-typing the same verbiage, including words, phrases, clauses, paragraphs, and punctuation, into each contract, contract by contract, the writer may simply creates a macro document with the verbiage, assign it an XML tag, and then insert the tag into the appropriate place in each contract. That XML tag then automatically pulls the macro document's verbage, character by character, into the finished contract.

XML tags also allow writers and editors to make quick changes to page elements in existing documents. Using the same example as above, let us say some of the boilerplate verbiage changes in the contracts over time. Rather than going document by document and retyping the changes, which creates a situation ripe for typos, all one need do is change the verbiage in the original macro document. Then, with one keystroke, each contract that contains the original XML tag automatically updates (populates) with the new verbiage.

Figure 6 shows an example of XML coding. For XML to work correctly, a user or author needs to encode the document properly to read the XML page elements.

XML offers many uses throughout eLearning. For example, instructional designers and educators may create document templates of XML text elements by using metadata tags. They may then upload content to populate the document. They may also make changes to one finished document as to 50.

XML is also be useful when creating and updating interactive applications. For example, let us say an instructor wants to create a Web site for an art class. Instead of typing the verbiage page by page, the instructor instead uses XML tagging.

The instructor first designs a Web-based user interfact, such as a Web index page. The instructor then creates a database of XML-tagged macro documents containing verbiage and image elements. The instructor then inserts the XML tags for those documents into the Web page. Consequently, in a few short keystrokes, the instructor created a finished Web, with the content from the XML database's macro documents (verbiage, images, framing devices, tables, etc.) populating the finished Web page. Students then view the content as they would any Web page.

Next, the instructor may poll students using a device of some sort added to the Web site through XML tagging. For example, as part of an introduction to the course, the instructor could solicit student opinions about a number of images, asking with they do or do not consider to be art. At the end of the term, the instructor would then change the images and re-poll the students to see if their opinions changed. Rather than changing the Web site's interface design, the instructor would merely delete the XML tags for the old images and add them for the new. This update then repopulates the Web site with the new images.

If permissions are set accordingly, XML may allow students to directly add or delete images. The students themselves could repopulate the Web site based on the instructor’s original interface design.

XML tagging ultimately saves time, money, and creates a truly interactive experience for both educators and students.
----

O’Keefe, S. (2009, January). Web 2.0: The tipping point for XML. Intercom, 56(1), 31. 31-32. Retrieved February 15, 2009,
from http://www.scriptorium.com/Web2TippingPointXML.pdf

Finding the Hidden Job Market

noreply@blogger.com (Robert J.F. Sampron) — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 22:09:00 +0000

With the following article, we take a break from the discussion of Web 2.0 and 3.0 as they relate to Technical Communication.

Instead, let's look at how to find the hidden job market. I prepared this article for the Metropolitan State College of Denver Office of Alumni Relations.

The Hidden Job Market

© 2010 by Robert J.F. Sampron, B.A., B.Sc.

Two questions normally arise when discussing the hidden job market. They are:

What is the hidden job market?
How do we uncover the hidden job market?

Let us discuss these questions.

What is the hidden job market?

Very simply, the hidden job market includes all unadvertised job openings.

Employers advertise only about 20% of job openings. We may find these jobs advertised in the usual places: newspapers; company/government/organization career web sites; and job search web sites, like Monster.com.

So, why don’t employers advertise all of their job openings? It is probably because ads are very costly to place.

For example, The Denver Post charges $349 for a 30-day, online ad. That listing goes on the web at both Denverpost.com and Yahoo! HotJobs. Yes, that is expensive; however, the cost is small compared to placing a print ad. A two-square-inch “Help Wanted” ad in the Sunday Denver Post costs $1,000. That is for just ONE Sunday. The good news is, for the cost of that print ad, the Post throws in free online listings. That’s expensive!

What does that mean for us? That means 80% of all job openings are out there, hidden from view, ready for the clever job seeker to discover. And, who are those clever job seekers? We are!

How do we uncover the hidden job market?

Where do we find the other 80% of job openings? We find them through word-of-mouth and research.

Word-of-mouth

You know about word-of-mouth. It is simply people sharing what they know with other people.

Let’s say you saw a good movie last week. You tell your friends about it. Then, they either see it alone or invite others to join them. They, in turn, tell other friends. These days, you may also tell the whole world about your movie experience through social media accounts, like Twitter and Facebook. Positive word-of-mouth for a movie can raise ticket sales; negative word-of mouth-can sink sales. Word-of-mouth is a powerful communication tool.

We can learn about job openings using word-of-mouth through the following resources:

friends
family
acquaintances
fraternities and sororities
honors associations
college professors
former business associates and fellow employees
former employers (so, don’t burn bridges when leaving an employer!)
live and web-based social networks
professional/trade associations
volunteer organizations
annual conventions and monthly meetings

We each know many people. Those people know other people, and so on, and so on. With social media, we now know people in the “real” and online worlds. Through word-of-mouth, we can use these real and online networks to learn about job opportunities. It is like a giant game of “telephone,” with one exception: we are transmitting important job information through these social networks.

We begin to uncover the hidden job market simply by asking people if they know about openings. It is that simple.

To maximize the effects of word-of-mouth, we need to make contact with as many people as we can. This means expanding our social circles, attending conventions and events, joining LinkedIn.com, and closing our social media sites.

Expanding our social circles

We must expand our social circles. That means, we must become joiners. By joining organizations, including trade, fraternal, and volunteer organizations, we make new friends, perform needed public outreach, and gain new insights into job opportunities. This means we must shed our introverted ways, as a snake sheds skin, and learn how to make small talk. (Book suggestion: The Fine Art of Small Talk, by Debra Fine – available at area libraries.)

By becoming members of professional associations in the area, we join formal groups of fellow professionals. They may have jobs, right now, in our professions. They may know about hidden job openings in their companies.

Search for these professional associations on your favorite search engine (Google, Bing, Yahoo!, etc.). Ask favorite professors about them. Then, get out there and join. Attend the monthly meetings. We will not only make new friends and acquaintances, we will also keep up on new issues surrounding our professions.

Look in local newspapers, like the Sentinel and Community Courier, for group event announcements. There are great volunteer and professional groups everywhere, including Rotary International, Odd fellows, and Toastmasters International. Go to a meeting. See if the group matches our personalities. Join and participate. That should quickly increase our social circles.

We must become genuinely interested in people, just as Dale Carnegie suggested in his classic book How to Win Friends and Influence People. When we are interested in others, they become interested in us. We become influential in each other's lives. Our employed acquaintances naturally will help us look for job opportunities hidden deep within their organizations. Why? Because, they like us! It is that simple.

Attending events and conventions

Here is another suggestion. Let us attend some events and conventions.

Conventions occur weekly throughout the Denver metro area. They make use of our main convention center and area hotel ballrooms. So do other events. See if you can get in, walk around, and talk to the exhibitors and business people. These people want their business problem solved. We may be the solution to their problems!

Another way to attend an event or convention is to work for a staffing agency. Many staffing agencies throughout the area supply workers to conventions and events. While there, in addition to working and making a few dollars in the process, we can talk to attendees and pass around a job-search business card, which is like a miniature resume.

Joining 'LinkedIn.com'

LinkedIn, a relatively new social media web site, may help build our social networks. In addition to posting a profile, containing a resume, we can link to all the people and organizations in the Word-of-Mouth list. By using the Events application, found under More in the LinkedIn menu, we can also learn about upcoming events of interest in the area. Be careful with LinkedIn, however. Treat it like a very formal business introduction. Though we can connect our LinkedIn profile to other social media, this is not Twitter, Facebook, or a blog. This is a marketing tool. Use it as such.

Closing social media sites

Close all social media sites. Then, start over using avatar names. Yes, you heard me. Close them and start over.

Why?

I know it is fun to chat with friends and post all sorts of stuff on Facebook. But, guess what? Potential employers are now checking our social media activity. They do so to get a sense of our “real” personalities. They want to see if we match the personality of their organization.

Is this fair? Probably not. There is no way a social media presence can show the full complexity of our lives. Fair or not, though, this is a new trend in hiring. That is why I suggest we delete the accounts and start over.

Use an avatar name instead. Do not use your real name anywhere on the site. Then, when a prospective employer searches for our name, nobody will not find us… except, that is, for our LinkedIn accounts. That is exactly what we want them to see!

Research, research, research

Congratulations to us! We are college graduates. That means we know how to do something most other people do not. We know how to research. So, let us put our research skills to work in the job search!

Now, just because a newspaper has no job ads for us, that does not mean it has no leads. There are tons of leads in every newspaper.

Where do you find these leads? They are primarily in the business section, though they can be anywhere. Look for column headings like “Business Happenings.” These sections contain short articles about new businesses coming to the area or established businesses pursuing new opportunities.

Write down the company names. Find HR department phone numbers and call about opportunities. Better yet, find the address and visit. Talk to them. Ask questions about opportunities. Try something like, “If you were looking for someone with my qualities (tell them what you do), what kinds of jobs would I qualify for?” Ask something like, “I read about your exciting new business/new enterprise in the Denver area. May I invite you to lunch to discuss your company and potential career openings?” If they do not have any, ask who in the industry might. Do not be afraid to ask.

There is another excellent source of newspaper-based information in the Denver area. It is the weekly, The Denver Business Journal. If you do not want to buy a subscription, you can find DJB at nearly every library branch across the Front Range. DBJ also publishes an annual catalog of Denver-area businesses, called The Denver Business Journal Book of Lists. The January 2010 print edition costs $77. The download version is much more expensive, at $169.95. The good news is the Book of Lists is available through the reference desk in nearly every library branch.

Conclusion

Now that we know how to find the hidden job market, using word-of-mouth and research, we have a better chance of working in the professions for which we trained.

Here’s wishing us the best of luck!

Discussing the Tools Available to Professionals and Students through Web 2.0

noreply@blogger.com (Robert J.F. Sampron) — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 00:29:00 +0000

Learning Management Systems/Content Management Systems

The Learning Management System (LMS), a form of the Content Management System (CMS), is a gateway to eLearning. This computer program allows instructional designers and educators to organize both content and tools. Educators may use an LMS as a personalized Website. To teach a specific course, educators grant different types of permission to access the Website.

The LMS includes a home page that links to different pages within the system. The different pages contain hypertext links to course content within and outside the Website. Different pages also contain hyperlinks to specific LMS tools. Depending on the permissions granted, these tools allow stakeholders, meaning the designers, educators, and students who use the system, to take tests, submit assignments, grade tests and assignments, and use social software.

Grodecka, Pata, and Väljataga (n.d.) report, “There is a need for the learning management systems connecting those individualized tools and supporting the learners to contribute to the learning communities.” There are several tools available to LMS users. Some involve personal publishing to the World Wide Web. Others involve social networking. They allow users to interact with course content and each other.

Thus far, the most important tools for creating an educational atmosphere include:

blogs
wikis
podcasts
social network systems
bookmarking systems
folksonomy (tagging) systems
Extensible Markup Language (XML)
Real Simple Syndication (RSS) feeds

While LMS creates a great start for eLearning, it also contains many challenges for stakeholders.

Blogs

An Internet-based blog is a type of online journal, in which articles, called “entries,” appear in reverse chronological order. Normally, a simple what-you-see-is-what-you-get (WYSIWYG) editor allows a blogger, the creator of blog entries, to insert text, images, and audio. Although originally used as a sort of diary, blogs now let bloggers ruminate and communicate. Bloggers create entries about their thoughts on certain topics, such as those about an industry or hobby. They then discuss these thoughts by commenting on entries written by others.

Individual bloggers usually manage a personal blog. However, a group may also publish a blog. According to Grodeka et al, when individuals collaborate through blogs, they create a “blogosphere.”

Blogging serves several eLearning functions. According to Grodeka et al, “Weblogs can promote various types of thinking (analogical, critical, analytical, etc.), creativity, and the ability to associate concepts and ideas.” For example, as bloggers comment on entries made by others, they may offer constructive criticism and encouragement. In an educational situation, this means one student may write the draft for a paper as a blog entry. Then, other students may peer-review that draft by making comments.

Another example comes from a study conducted by Ebner and Maure (2007). Because they understood that learning does not always take place in formal settings, they used a weblog to enhance formal learning and encourage informal learning.

They gave students one topic to discuss within a blogosphere. They then discussed the same topic in class. In the blogs, students recorded their thoughts, theories, and feelings. They then discussed the blog entries with each other, with their peers.

When Ebner and Maure later covered the same topic in class, they discovered the students were more likely to internalize the information first discussed in the blogosphere. The students did so because they already had a conceptual idea of the topic.
Other uses of blogs in education include:

developing a portfolio of class activities
developing a student diary that charts academic progress
providing students with class activity instructions
introducing students socially to each other
working in a “collaborative workspace”

Podcasts

Podcasts are audio broadcasts delivered over the Internet (Berge, Z., & Donnelly, K., 2006). Podcasters post the podcasts to the World Wide Web as computer files using the MP3 or AVI file formats. The MP3 format is for audio podcasts. The AVI file format is for video podcasts.

The podcast user may play the file directly with a desktop or laptop computer. They may also place the files on CD-ROMs and play them with special CD or DVD players. Next, they may place and play files using flash-drive equipped players, such as the Apple iPod. Finally, they may upload them to Digital Video Recorders (DVR) or other media server devices and play them on conventional or digital and high definition televisions.

Podcasting is attractive to users because the files allow portability and time shifting. Portability allows a user to play a pre-recorded file wherever desired, while time-shifting allows the user to play a pre-recorded file whenever desired. Podcasts also allow users to multitask while listening, something they are not allowed to do in a physical classroom lest they interrupt the lesson.

Although podcasting is technically a Web 1.0 technology, it becomes a Web 2.0 technology through “podcatching." Podcatching allows users to select the podcasts they want to hear by subscribing to them using Real Simple Syndication (RSS). RSS then automatically delivers a new file to a subscriber when available.

Podcasting may serve several different educational needs. Podcasts may engage students in different ways, creating a more personal connection with the message. It allows them to hear a message rather than simply read text or view images. As previously mentioned, podcasts also allow for multitasking. They allows the user to complete an instruction set while listening to the podcast.

Tags (Folksonomy)

Tagging, also known as Folksonomy, is a term used by information architect Thomas Vander Wal (2007) to explain the social activity of tagging information on the Web for one's own personal use. Previously, professionals and authors used metadata, which are data about data, to organize and catalog information. For example, they would associate an ‘equestrian training’ tag around all the information within paragraphs of a document that pertained to equestrian training.

Programmers in a Web 1.0 environment build tags into programs. This convention denies users the ability to organize information as they see fit. In the Web 2.0 environment, users now decide which information to tag/index based on their own personal needs.

Figure 5 shows the home page for the Website called “Delicious.com.” This site allows a user to create a personal Delicious site to which he or she posts a link to other Websites of interest. This act of tagging a Website makes it searchable through Delicious.com using keywords. If another user is interested in a topic, for example "Web 2.0," that user may conduct a keyword search using Delicious's database of tagged Web-based content. Eventually, present-day tagging is building the foundations for what technologists are calling the Semantic Web and Web 3.0 (Ohler, 2008). The Web will eventually be able to customize delivery of content to users based on understanding what they need.

Currently, Web 2.0 simply allows for the display of information. However, by using folksonomy, Web 3.0 allows users to assign value to information. In doing so, folks (people) decide the semantic utility value and relationships between different pieces of web content.

From his article, The Semantic Web in Education, Jason Ohler offers this example of how the semantics behind tagging works.

"If you want to know my mailing address, currently you need to go to my Web page and root around until you find it. That is because the current coding system used to build Web pages, largely HTML, displays information without identifying it in any meaningful way. That is, my address is not coded as 'an address,' it is simply presented as a series of characters on the screen.”

Folksonomy and the Semantic Web will have profound impacts on education. According to Ohler, students will no longer spend the majority of their time searching for information; rather, they will quickly comprehend, meaningfully apply, and critically assess the information.

To be continued...

---
Berge, Z. & Donnelly, K. (2006). Podcasting: Co-opting MP3 Players for Education and Training Purposes, Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 9 (3). Retrieved April 8, 2009, from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/fall93/donnelly93.htm

Ebner, M., & Maurer, H. (2007). Blogging in higher education. Lecture Notes Online Retrieved on February 20, 2009, from http://www.iicm.tugraz.at:8080/Ressourcen/Papers/web2_0_technology.pdf

Grodecka,K., Pata, K., & Väljataga, T. (n.d.) Web 2.0 and education. In K. Grodecka, F. Wild, & B.Kieslinger (Eds.) How to use social software in higher education. (pp. 10-13). Retrieved on February 20, 2009, from http://pl.cel.agh.edu.pl/repozytorium/oprog_spol_w_ed_wyz_en.pdf

Ohler, J. (2008). The semantic web in education. Educause Quarterly, 31(4), Retrieved January 30, 2009, from http://www.educause.edu/EQ/EDUCAUSEQuarterlyMagazineVolum/TheSemanticWebinEducation/163437

Vander Wal, T. (2007). Folksonomy. Retrieved February 11, 2010 from http://www.vanderwal.net/folksonomy.html

Discussing the State of Education after the Advent of Web 2.0

noreply@blogger.com (Robert J.F. Sampron) — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 01:14:00 +0000

What would happen if a new technological concept made use of ubiquitous learning? What would happen if that concept allowed educators and instructional designers to create new learning tools? What would happen if these tools allowed students to interact with the curriculum? Stakeholders would consider this a revolutionary concept. This revolutionary concept is Web 2.0.

For education and instructional design, Web 2.0 evolved into eLearning. Instructional designers now investigate new concepts, theories, and technologies with an open mind. This results in designers adopting new technologies to deliver instruction. These technologies cost less and no longer restrict the learning experience to the four walls of a classroom. Learning may now take place through technology and the World Wide Web.

Discussing the State of Education before Web 2.0

noreply@blogger.com (Robert J.F. Sampron) — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 01:08:00 +0000

Beginning with B.F. Skinner’s 1954 essay, The Science of Learning and the Art of Teaching, various studies, theories, and hypotheses of education developed. According to Leigh (1998), Skinner’s movement began to shift pedagogy “…away from the uninformed application of instructional technology to the formulation of theoretical models of learning.”

Part of Skinner’s theory concerned the development of regimented learning. Regimented learning led to the development of a professional class of instructional designers. The first large-scale need for instructional designers developed during World War II. The United States quickly needed to train hundreds of thousands of people to support the war effort. To meet that need, instructional designers developed several regimented learning methods. These methods included the use of propaganda materials, instructional films, and instruction manuals.

In the pre-Web 2.0 environment, instructional designers continued to follow the first wave of education technologies. John Moravec (2008) refers to this period as “Education 1.0.” The pre-Web 2.0 concept did not encourage students to ask questions.

Designers did not evaluate the needs of social stakeholders when defining concepts. The definitions were concrete for all stakeholders in the education process, including instructional designers, educators, and students.

Teaching was essentially a passive activity, with educators verbally lecturing at students in a physical classroom. This meant learning occurred at a specific time and place, with licensed educators teaching in an orthodox manner. Technology, though expensive, was available to facilitate education. However, educators rarely used it.

Various companies hired instructional designers to create the pre-Web 2.0 education tools. These tools included:

textbooks and workbooks
films and videos, including documentaries
sound recordings on long-play vinyl records, vinyl tape, audio compact discs (CD), and compact disc read-only memory media (CD or CD-ROM)
speaker support positive-print slide presentations
overhead projector slide presentations
computer-based speaker-support slide presentations

---

Skinner, B.F. (1954). The science of learning and the art of teaching. Retrieved March 22, 2009 from http://www.decolonizing.com/pdfs/Skinner_ScienceofLearning.pdf

Leigh, D. (1998). A brief history of instructional design. Retrieved March 22, 2009, from
http://www.pignc-ispi.com/articles/education/brief%20history.htm

Moravec, J. (2008) Moving beyond education 2.0. Retrieved March 22, 2009, from http://www.educationfutures.com/2008/02/15/moving-beyond-education-20/

Discussing the Roles of Audience and Creator in the Web 2.0 Environment

noreply@blogger.com (Robert J.F. Sampron) — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 00:59:00 +0000

Three stakeholders participate in creating and implementing an eLearning solution. They are:

instructional designers
educators
students

Instructional Designers
Instructional designers are technical communicators who help develop eLearning tools for educators. Throughout the process of developing tools, instructional designers must be aware of the science and psychology of learning. They must also remain aware of the immediate needs of those who use eLearning tools, the educators and students. Joni Dunlop (personal communication, March 11, 2009), an instructional design professor at the University of Colorado at Denver, believes that because Web 2.0 allows for individualized study, designers should also team with educators to create the ultimate learning experience for students.

Educators
Educators are the content specialists in the eLearning process. They use eLearning tools, created by instructional designers, to convey information and enhance learning.
To create content and learning experiences, educators must also understand the science and psychology of learning. They must analyze the needs of their student audience. Instead of developing lesson plans in a week-by-week fashion throughout the course, in a eLearning environment educators usually prepare materials before students participate in the class. This allows educators time to develop eLearning tools with instructional designers, working out in advance the technical issues that may arise.

Students
Students are the ultimate beneficiaries of the eLearning experience. They are the ultimate audience for eLearning tools. By engaging students through interactive tools, instructional designers and educators give students the responsibility over their own learning experiences. Students no longer have information spat at them; rather, they may now tailor information to meet their personal needs.

Interactive Communication - Discussing the Role of Web 2.0 on Interactive Media Production in eLearning

noreply@blogger.com (Robert J.F. Sampron) — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 00:34:00 +0000

Media professionals produce interactive media to facilitate eLearning. The Encarta Dictionary (n.d.) defines eLearning as “learning using electronic means,” and “the acquisition of knowledge and skill using electronic technologies, such as computer- and Internet-based courseware and local and wide area networks.”

Professionals use a combination of media elements to create interactive eLearning content. These elements include:

text
sound
graphics
animation

For eLearning, professionals use the following systems to deliver Web 2.0-based, interactive, eLearning media to users (Bournemouth, n.d.):

computer games
websites
mobile devices and technologies
webcasts of broadcast television and radio
weblogs (blogs)
podcasts
E-zines and private publishing
CD ROMs
DVD ROMs
web advertisements
web databases
interactive television
on-line learning materials

The most common and widely used platform for interactive media is the World Wide Web, also known as the Internet, the Net, and the Web. Its original purpose was “to meet the demand for automatic information sharing between scientists working in different universities and institutes all over the world” (European Organization for Nuclear Research, n.d.).

The World Wide Web made its first appearance in 1990. By 1994, the Web had 10 million users. Today, it continues to be a revolutionary tool that continues to evolve. Its next stage of development, Web 2.0, is already here.

Web 2.0 significantly affects education. Educators use the Web, and its current incarnation as Web 2.0, as another “place” for learning. Educators call this use of the Web "electronic learning,” or more often “eLearning.” Mark Nichols (2008), an eLearning specialist from Laidlaw College in Auckland, New Zealand, defines eLearning as “pedagogy empowered by digital technology.”

This section of the report explores the effects of Web 2.0-based interactive media production on education, including:

how instructors taught students before and and teach now with Web 2.0
how the role of technical communicators, known within education as instructional designers, evolved
how technical communicators should respond to this new technology

---
(n.d.). Course overview. Bournemouth University Interactive Media Production Department. Retrieved March 22, 2009, from http://onlineservices.bournemouth.ac.uk/courses/course.aspx?course=30

Discussing the Changing Role of the Corporate Communicator

noreply@blogger.com (Robert J.F. Sampron) — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 01:09:00 +0000

Web 2.0 shifts internal organizational communication (IOC) from the hands of corporate leaders to the hands of corporate member-stakeholders (members), now equals in the communication process. Corporations with a record of tightly managed IOC may experience difficulty accepting this shift in standards. Altebockwinkel points out corporations that consider using Web 2.0 must demonstrate a willingness to de-emphasize the corporate hierarchy (p. 25-28).

Members will need to assess whether the corporation is willing and ready to take on Web 2.0. They will likely research how best to use the ever-evolving media. If corporate leaders resist Web 2.0, members may lobby them in its favor, showing them its advantages. If leaders accept the changes, they may expect members to pioneer use of the technology and demonstrate its advantages or disadvantages to all other members.

Prior to Web 2.0, traditional corporate communicators were primary doers. They wrote, edited, and published strategic IOC. They collaborated with other members of the corporation. Ultimately, they created and distributed texts.

Now, Web 2.0 makes every member a potential author and distributor of IOC. Each member becomes an equal stakeholder. Consequently, traditional corporate communicators will need to transfer their skills and knowledge to all other members of the corporation. They should also expect to instruct members to conform to new standards for IOC developed by corporate leaders.

It is unlikely that Web 2.0 will completely remove traditional corporate communicators from their roles as authors, editors, videographers, or publishers. Rather, the context in which they deploy these roles may change.

In additional to training stakeholders on theory and tools, traditional communicators will likely guide members in the use of IOC. They will monitor members' contributions for both content and effectiveness. They also will survey to ensure member IOC achieves organizational objectives while upholding standards.

If not now under present IOC, members soon likely will become strategic thinkers and decision-makers. They will select the Web 2.0 tools that best benefit the corporation. In doing so, they will shift from merely authoring IOC to designing and implementing entire Web 2.0-based corporate communication systems and strategies.

Use of Web 2.0 tools by members will likely require development of usage policies. DiMicco et al (p. 712) write that these policies will minimally concern time limits, participation, networking, permissions, profile currency, appropriate content, and so forth. Members will likely collaborate with corporate leaders to develop these policies.

---
Altebockwinkel, I. (2008). Usability of wikis and blogs in companies. Paderborn University Retrieved on February 22, 2009, from: http://wiwiweb.upb.de/www/WI/WI2/wi2_lit.nsf/1e0465add2cf1292c1256f3c003fe9fe/224a27bd95810535c12573c60031a272/$FILE/ Usability%20of%20Wikis%20and%20Blogs%20in%20Companies.pdf

DiMicco, J., Millen, D.R., Geyer, W., Dugan, C., Brownholtz, B., & Muller, M. (2008). Motivations for social networking at work. Proceedings of the ACM 2008 Conference on Computer-supported Cooperative Work. Retrieved on February 20, 2009, from http://delivery.acm.org/10.1145/147000/1460674/p711-dimicco.pdf?key1=1460674&key2=7929415321&coll=GUIDE&dl=GUIDE&CFID =22913470&CFTOKEN=73613371

Discussing the Effects of Web 2.0 on Internal Communication for Organizations

noreply@blogger.com (Robert J.F. Sampron) — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 21:02:00 +0000

Prior to Web 2.0, internal organizational communication (IOC) conveyed only the dominant ideas and expressions of corporate leaders. By limiting the upward flow of input from subordinates, corporate leaders left underdeveloped countless scores of ideas, knowledge, and information. They let languish a pool of collective knowledge that could lead to further innovation and success.

Web 2.0 may pose a solution to many of the challenges created by traditional IOC because Web 2.0 relies on collaboration.

Take the wiki for example. Numerous individual authors contribute content to one common text. Wikis culminate as a Web site rich in diverse expressions, perspectives, and information. The text benefits from the roles, education, experiences, and perspectives of each author. Therefore, information and ideas published on wikis are much richer than those published on single-authored sites.

Web 2.0 orchestrates a continuous dialogue among all members of the corporation. Members may share and obtain ideas, knowledge, and information through one another. Web 2.0 perpetuates a constant flow of interactive expression that continually creates and re-creates collective knowledge.

Because Web 2.0 permits broad corporate expression, collective knowledge is limitless. Dynamic, shared information may readily stimulate and inspire new ideas. Constant, open-sourced information allows members to play with each others' ideas and arrive at new solutions to business challenges.

When integrated into a corporation, Web 2.0 allows members to become decision makers, or at least contribute to the decision-making process. They gain a responsibility normally reserved for management. This may give members pride of ownership over ideas and, by extension, the corporation. Self-organized communication replaces vertical communication. Ultimately, members decide what identity the corporation will have and project to stakeholders.

Figure 4 depicts how corporations shift toward self-organized, collaborative communication with the integration of Web 2.0.

Web 2.0 also consolidates communication tools. Wikis, blogs, social networks, RSS, folksonomies, and other applications reside on the World Wide Web. Corporate members no longer need to download applications or resort to using numerous communication media when sending and receiving messages.

With Web 2.0, communication tools are either located on or linked to one main source, such as a wiki or Intranet. Consolidated communication streamlines IOC and mitigates disorganized communication. Streamlined IOC facilitates communication across geographical and temporal boundaries.

Gerrits indicates that Web 2.0 may also support cultural assimilation and dissolve departmental segregation. Through Web 2.0, corporate members communicate and collaborate with one another to create text.

Collaborative work allows members to become aware and make sense of each other. Altebockwinkel (2008) found that corporate blogs foster contact and interaction among members outside of the Internet (p. 16-23). Web 2.0 texts take on a face, name, and personality with which other corporate members may form relationships.

Of course, Web 2.0 poses significant challenges to corporate communication. Web 2.0 theory and application are relatively new and unexplored. Traditional communication texts, like memos, meetings, formal training methods, and even E-mail, existed for a long time in corporations. In response to these mediums, corporations developed policy, strategy, and usage standards.
Corporations are yet uneducated in the strategies necessary to manage Web 2.0. They lack rationale for making decisions about its usage in the corporate setting. This will challenge corporations to make sense of theory and application. They must invent usage policies, norms, and protocols.

Corporate communicators must develop standards by which texts reach prescribed audiences to achieve purposeful results. Not all corporate members understand how communication theory and application relate to corporate identity. Chaos may reign when each member of the corporation potentially contributes to internal texts.

Once implemented, leaders have limited control over Web 2.0 content. Hostile, negative, misguided, or other inappropriate communication is possible. Web 2.0 also potentially allows messages to reach and influence external audiences, messages that are antithetical to corporate identity.

Web 2.0 ushers in both positive solutions and negative hazards to corporate communication. As Web 2.0 gains popularity and momentum, corporations must determine whether the positives of integrating Web 2.0 outweigh the negatives.

---
Gerrits, D. (2008). Wikis: a fast track to effective internal communication? INHOLLAND. Retrieved on February 18, 2009, from
http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:3FUQvdtvNG8J:www.inholland.nl/NR/rdonlyres/349F321E83AF44BE87AB1F4CD65AA314/0/Casestudy_report_gerrits_may2008.pdf+%22Wikis:+A+fast+track+to+effective+internal+communication%3F%22&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

Altebockwinkel, I. (2008). Usability of wikis and blogs in companies. Paderborn University. Retrieved on February 22, 2009, from: http://wiwiweb.upb.de/www/WIWI2wi2_lit.nsf1e0465add2cf1292c1256f3c003fe9fe/224a27bd95810535c12573c60031a272/$FILE/Usability%20of%20Wikis%20and%20Blogs%20in%20Companies.pdf (This text is no longer available at Paderborn University's web site.)

Discussing the State of Internal Communication for Organizations in the Web 2.0 Environment

noreply@blogger.com (Robert J.F. Sampron) — Sun, 23 Aug 2009 20:02:00 +0000

(This article was co-authored by Bethany Lamers, Daniel Sutter, and Robert Sampron. It was edited by Robert Sampron.)

Web 2.0 is the latest advancement to revolutionize technical and corporate communication. Web 2.0 and its decedent technologies may neutralize many of the challenges created by traditional IOC.

In their paper describing Web 2.0 business models, Hoeg, Martignoni, Meckel, and Stanoevska-Slabeva (2006) write that Web 2.0 bolsters:

continuous and interactive maintenance of various opinions
interactive accrual of corporate intelligence
interactive exchange of information

These elements may be absent or lacking in traditional IOC. The integration of Web 2.0 transforms managed communication structures into collective, contributive systems. These systems rely on contribution and communication of text from all corporate members. Holtz (2005) writes that the Web 2.0-based tools most likely to affect IOC are wikis, blogs, social networks, Real Simple Syndication (RSS), and folksonomies.

Wikis
Wikis epitomize collaboration, collective knowledge, and ease of use. Gerrits (2008) describes wikis as Internet-based texts that allow users collectively to create and edit the pages of a Web site. Based on permission granted by the corporation, users may add, delete, and modify wiki content. Therefore, wikis nix single-authorship of Web sites. They rely instead on community authorship.

Wiki software allows users to edit text elements over the Internet, without downloading Web-creation software. Wiki software enables authors to add and edit content in real time. Authors can easily learn and use wiki tools. They need not construct Web sites using code. Wikis also support authors who use a wide range of media content. These include:

typed text
video
sound
hyperlinks
other embedded Web 2.0 applications

Wikis are widely applicable for IOC. Gerrits further writes that wikis may rival single-authored, corporate Intranets.

Based on permissions granted by corporate leaders, members may collaborate to build wiki-based Intranets. These author-stakeholders come from diverse backgrounds and have different roles to play when building wikis. Consequently, the content likely contains varying, non-standardized ideas, information, and perspectives. This gives stakeholders, ultimately meaning all members of the corporation, an outlet for expressing ideas and a means for accessing the IOC. Consequently, wikis breed Intranets that contain more expansive expression than top-down Intranets.

Apart from corporate Intranets, Holtz also writes that wikis may be effective tools for managing both corporate projects and knowledge. Wikis create a common forum through which individuals or departments collaborate. Collaborators then gain uninhibited access to information at any time and location.

Because collaborators have latitude to add or alter content, wikis facilitate the forms of group collaboration defined by Jones. When used as either project management or knowledge management tools, wikis serve as one-stop shops for communication.

Blogs
Blogs are Internet journals hosted on a Web site. They list content in reverse chronological order. Jackson, Yates, and Orlikowski (2007) write that some corporations already host blogs on corporate Intranets.

Corporate blogs allow posts, meaning messages and information, to become immediately available to the entire corporation. Traditional mediums confined corporation-wide messages and information to E-mails, memos, etc. Blogs achieve not only IOC output, but also input as readers comment on the posts. By commenting on posts, readers contribute additional information and perspective to the corporation’s collective knowledge.

According to Lee, Hwang, and Lee (2006), blogs take on many forms to facilitate IOC. Bottom-up blogs permit employees across the corporation to both post and respond to other corporate blogs. Top-down blogs encourage leaders to convey information and messages to subordinates.

Leaders may create a top-down blogging strategy that best fits communication and leadership objectives. They may also author their own blogs. One author may write a stand-alone blog. Others may collaborate on a communal blog.

In contrast, bottom-up blogs are not subject to select authorship. All members of the corporation may contribute to bottom-up blogs, creating an "employee-based blogging culture."

Lee et al draw attention to the balancing act between blogger autonomy and strategic IOC control. Blogs created through a bottom-up flow may not contain a more corporate-focused perspective. Leaders may not easily control the messages authored on each blog. On the other hand, top-down blogs maintain tightly controlled IOC. As with pre-Web 2.0 vertical IOC, this strategy restricts collective knowledge and perspective.

Jackson et al also found that apart from collective knowledge and information exchange, blogs provide social benefits to corporate culture and identity. By reading information and perspectives from peers, members derive an understanding of each other. By reading blogs of diverse authorship, members may expand their ideas and understanding of the corporation.

Social Networks
Facebook, Twitter, and MySpace are Web 2.0 applications that have become a part of commonplace technologies. Old and young alike utilize social networking tools to make personal contacts, reconnect with past acquaintances, and conduct interpersonal communication around the world.

IOCs that resemble these Facebook and MySpace may find their way into corporate Intranets. Corporations could utilize public social networking Web sites. However, it is more likely they will utilize private, internal sites. Private sites, located on a corporate Intranet, offer more security than public sites. In addition, network membership is exclusive to those who work for the corporation.

A few corporations already have integrated social networking practices into their array of Internet-based tools. DiMicco et al (2008) studied the effects of IBM’s social networking Web site, Beehive. They discovered social networks in corporate settings allow members to “express themselves in rich, personal ways, so that other users could get an expressive picture of who an individual was on a personal and professional level.”

True to the nature of Web 2.0, corporate members control how others utilize their social network pages. Like wikis and blogs, heavy participation creates great amounts of information and perspective. High participation yields a broad base for collective sharing, community knowledge, and strong social ties.

Dimicco et al found that social networks produce advantages for IBM. They learned that members networked to meet other members, create stronger ties to the corporation, and communicate across different geographic regions and departments.

Dimicco et al further report that members utilize social networks to care, climb, and campaign in a corporation. “Carers” use networks to meet fellow members and learn about their perspectives and corporate responsibilities. “Climbers” use networks to establish a dialogue with those members who control access to job promotions. “Campaigners” use networks to promote and obtain feedback from other members about projects.

In a Web-based social network, communication channels are uninhibited. There is no interference between the senders and receivers of a message. Consequently, social network Web sites permit unimpeded development of both functional and personal relationships, all to the benefit of the corporation. This is the opposite of most vertical IOC policies.

RSS and Folksonomies
Corporations may utilize other Web 2.0 tools. Holtz (p. 25) identifies Real Simple Syndication (RSS) and social tagging (folksonomies) as useful IOC texts.

RSS allows corporate members to subscribe to a Web site, so they may receive notice about new content when added. Members manage their subscriptions through an aggregator. Essentially, corporate members use RSS to track changes to pertinent information on the Internet, Intranet, wikis, and blogs. RSS streamlines the information-gathering process and mitigates the phenomenon of information overload, which is all too prevalent in our technology-driven era.

Members tag Web sites by leaving a text description about the site. Collectively, the tags create a categorization system known as a folksonomy.

Corporations deploy folksonomies to streamline the information-sharing process across the corporation. Members tag Web sites and blogs they perceive as essential or helpful to the corporation. As members construct the folksonomy, they access and share information. This allows them to build easily collective corporate knowledge.

---

Gerrits, D. (2008). Wikis: a fast track to effective internal communication? INHOLLAND. Retrieved on February 18, 2009, from
http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:3FUQvdtvNG8J:www.inholland.nl/NR/rdonlyres/349F321E83AF44BE87AB1F4CD65AA314/0/Casestudy_report_gerrits_may2008.pdf+%22Wikis:+A+fast+track+to+effective+internal+communication%3F%22&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

Hoeg, R., Martignoni, R., Meckel, M., & Stanoevska-Slabeva, K. (2006). Overview of business models for Web 2.0 communities. University St. Gallen, Institute of Media and Communication Management. Retrieved on February 20, 2009, from
http://www.alexandria.unisg.ch/EXPORT/DL/Robert_Martignoni/31412.pdf

Holtz, S. (2005). The impact of new technologies on internal communication. Strategic Communication Management, 10 (1) Retrieved on February 11, 2009, from
http://www.melcrum.com/offer/scm/_pdf/Impact%20of%20new%20technologies.pdf

Lee, S., Hwang, T., & Lee H. (2006). Corporate blogging strategies of Fortune 500 companies.Management Decision, 44 (3). Retrieved on February 18, 2009, from
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insigh/viewContentItem.do;jsessionid=EA91C103FABB55E788BDCA049EE6F257?contentType=Article&hdAction=lnkhtml&contentId=1550188

Jackson, A., Yates, J., & Orlikowski, W. (2007). Corporate blogging: building community through persistent digital talk. Proceedings of the 40th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Retrieved on February 20, 2009, from
http://www2.computer.org/portal/web/csdl/doi/10.1109/HICSS.2007.155

Reporting the Results for Corporation Communications - Part 4

noreply@blogger.com (Robert J.F. Sampron) — Sun, 23 Aug 2009 18:35:00 +0000

(This article was co-authored by Bethany Lamers, Daniel Sutter, and Robert Sampron. It was edited by Robert Sampron. The last section of the report was posted on May 13, 2009.)

Figure 3 depicts the typical horizontal IOC described by Vasu et al. Horizontal collaboration occurs among members of one department or between members of all or several departments. Members collaborate and communicate to produce projects, reports, and other tangible texts.

As with vertical IOC, horizontal IOC may challenge the collective knowledge of a corporation. Belasen notes that IOC texts are often unique to the department from which they originate. Members from different departments may experience difficulty collaborating and communicating with one another because of textual differences (p. 5).

Several factors hampered horizontal IOC in the pre-Web 2.0 environment:

Communicators did not have a common forum for collaboration.
Communicators in different parts of the world had to perform a complicated balance between a medium, like E-mail, and their independent calendars.
Communications in the fast-paced, global business environment were often disorganized, lengthy, and inefficient.

The trend towards corporate globalization creates challenges for horizontal IOC, especially when combined with the trend towards the virtual office. Members who function outside of the physical corporation frequently do not expose themselves to corporate culture or other members. A lack of exposure likely limits both corporate integration and cultural assimilation. Collaboration likely suffers when members neither understand nor embody the corporation’s identity and culture.

Explaining the Absense of a Month

noreply@blogger.com (Robert J.F. Sampron) — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 21:43:00 +0000

Sorry for the interruption, dear readers, but many activities absorbed my time since my last blog entry.

Those activities included:

attending online a summer course in "Writing for the Environment"
receiving software training certificates from Lynda.com
applying for technical writing jobs

The summer course is over in three weeks. When it is, I will resume the blog fully.

I discovered Lynda.com by chance. What a helpful, inexpensive way to learn new software. They charge $25 per month, without practice exercise sets, or $37.50 per month with. So far, I've gone without and created my own practice sets from their examples. I think that by creating the practice exercises myself, I'm learning the software even better.

So far, I've earned the following certificates:

Getting Started with Acrobat 8
Google Sketch-up Essential Training
Animation Principles

I'm also about two-thirds of the way through Flash CS3 Fundamentals. Flash is animation software, and a blast to use. If you can believe it, I created a 3D bouncing ball that actually responds properly to gravity.

You may ask, what's the big deal about Flash? Well, technical media professionals create whole web sites using Flash. With my brief exposure to writing in Flash, I can easily imagine how useful it is in day-to-day technical media work.

So far, I've contacted the following prospective employers:

Harrah's Entertainment (Las Vegas)
BAE (Denver)
The Family Tree (a Denver-based non-profit internship)
A California-based defense contractor who shall remain nameless

Of course, I would love to work in Colorado. That is where my family lives. The prospect in Las Vegas sounds fascinating, though. The cost of living is relatively low. Best of all, Denver is only a few hours away by air. I could be home easily if need be.

You might find this interesting. Of the internships applied for in the Spring semester, I received exactly one reply. It made me ask if we were finally at a point in this recession when interns couldn't "give" it away?

That one employer did have an opening and was very interested. I was interested, too. Unfortunately, that employer wanted more time than I could give with my school schedule. That's a pity. It sounded like a good opportunity.

An interesting dilemma popped up, and I am not sure how to address it. These days, job searchers tend to submit resumes through company web sites. When doing so, sometimes even minimal formatting gets removed. Sometimes it does not. For the cases in which it does not, should I format the upload and let the system remove it? Or, should I remove it and not worry?

Until next time...

GE's Next Generation Storage Disc

noreply@blogger.com (Robert J.F. Sampron) — Thu, 21 May 2009 18:13:00 +0000

I am taking a break from the thread on Web 2.0 to post this video.

Apparently GE developed a holographic storage technology that puts up to 500gb of data on a disc the size of a CD-ROM.

This is very exciting if you're a tech geek, and gets us past a threshold for data storage.

First Resume Sent

noreply@blogger.com (Robert J.F. Sampron) — Sun, 17 May 2009 06:03:00 +0000

Friday's e-mail came from Monster.com as usual. Most of the jobs sought the usual five years of experience. However, one from a company in California did not. It seemed perfect for my skill level and advancement.

So I thought, why not?

I customized my resume and cover letter to the situation, and sent it through the company's web-based system. I would like to send paper copies to follow up. Sadly, I cannot find their snail mail address.

It felt good to send out the first resume.

Reporting the Results for Corporate Communication - Part 3

noreply@blogger.com (Robert J.F. Sampron) — Fri, 15 May 2009 19:37:00 +0000

(This article was co-authored by Bethany Lamers, Daniel Sutter, and Robert Sampron. It was edited by Robert Sampron.)

Discussing the Structure of Internal Communication for Organizations Prior to Web 2.0 - Bottom-Up Communication

Tightly managed IOC ensures that messages align with the image and identity of a corporation. For this reason, gatekeepers review and filter messages sent by subordinates, preventing messages from unnecessarily reaching an organization's leaders. Only select or modified texts reach the leaders, their intended, higher-level target audiences.

Figure 2 depicts the traditional, bottom-up pathway described by Vasu et al. Texts trickle from corporate subordinates up to corporate leaders, passing through gatekeepers along the way.

This censoring, however, may have a negative effect. When censoring these messages, gatekeepers may deprive leaders and the broader organization of innovative ideas, knowledge, and information. The gatekeepers in a vertical IOC may essentially deprive the organization of more helpful collective knowledge.

Reporting the Results for Corporate Communication - Part 2

noreply@blogger.com (Robert J.F. Sampron) — Fri, 15 May 2009 16:40:00 +0000

(This article was co-authored by Bethany Lamers, Daniel Sutter, and Robert Sampron. It was edited by Robert Sampron.)

Discussing the Structure of Internal Communication for Organizations prior to Web 2.0 - Top-Down Communication

Organizational leaders dictate IOC. Because IOC bolsters many important activities, organizational leaders develop communication policy. Cornelissen also explains that corporations often develop communication departments to oversee communication processes and policies.

Organizational communicators write, edit, and publish IOC texts to ensure that messages align with strategy and identity (p. 31-34). Communicators manage both the vertical and horizontal activities of an organization (p. 125).

Vasu, Stewart, and Garson (1998) describe two pathways for the flow of an IOC text in an organization. The first is a vertical, top-down pathway from leaders to subordinates. The other is a bottom-up pathway from subordinates to leaders.

As seen in Figure 1, leaders may disseminate texts directly to subordinates in a top-down flow. In doing so, they often deploy the hierarchical and group collaboration methods described by Jones.

Leaders often deploy the hierarchical and group collaboration methods described by Jones to create and distribute various documents. These include:

memos
letters
newsletters
training program documents
publications

To convey messages effectively, leaders also collaborate with internal departments, including the communications department, to decide which:

audiences to target
messages to distribute
forms to use

Leaders often use either the communications or the information technology (IT) departments to design and distribute messages within an organization. Much of the time, they do so through Intranets. An Intranet functions much like the Internet, except organizations use them strictly for internal communication. Therefore, Intranets are subject to top-down communication.

---
Cornelissen, J. (2004). Corporate communications: A guide to theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications

Vasu, M., Stewart, D.W., & Garson, G.D. (1998). Food science and technology #68: Organizational behavior and public management. (3rd Rev. ed.). New York: CRC Press.

Reporting the Results for Corporate Communication

noreply@blogger.com (Robert J.F. Sampron) — Fri, 15 May 2009 16:24:00 +0000

(This article was co-authored by Bethany Lamers, Daniel Sutter, and Robert Sampron. It was edited by Robert Sampron.)

Discussing the State of Internal Communication for Organizations before Web 2.0

Prominent across the globe, corporations and other organizations (organizations) unite human capital to reach strategic goals and secure financial profit. Over time and through competition, organizations may evolve into complex entities.

Organizations employ a diverse number of individuals who function in various roles. They also subdivide into functional departments. Because organizations are composed of diverse factions, they require management and coordination to regulate affairs, identity, and ensure that the organization functions as a whole.

Communication is the vehicle that drives the collective actions of members of an organization. Communication both regulates organizational affairs and facilitates collaboration. Belasen (2008) depicts organizational communication as a tool used to “lead, motivate, persuade, and inform numerous audiences inside and outside the organization” (p.4).

Organizations also use communication to organize and structure the enterprise. Cornelissen (2004) notes that, in the eyes of internal and external stakeholders, organizations control communication to manage their identities (p. 23).

Organizations communicate with both external and internal audiences. External audiences include investors, regulatory agencies, other organizations, and target markets. The internal audience includes all members of the organization.

Organizations use internal organizational communication (IOC) to target internal audiences. According to Belasen (pp. 102-107), IOC allows:

members to seek and provide the information needed to perform role functions and build the corporate knowledge base
members to share ideas and build collective knowledge to motivate action and inspire innovation
leaders to direct and regulate the collective action of members towards a super ordinate goal
members to create and re-create the organization’s identity
members to integrate with and comprehend the organization

---
Belasen, A.T. (2008). The theory and practice of corporate communication: A competing values perspective. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications

Cornelissen, J. (2004). Corporate communications: A guide to theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications

Reporting the Results

noreply@blogger.com (Robert J.F. Sampron) — Fri, 15 May 2009 16:04:00 +0000

(This article was co-authored by Bethany Lamers, Daniel Sutter, and Robert Sampron. It was edited by Robert Sampron.)

Over the next few articles, the authors will report research results. The authors organized this section by concentration as follows:

corporate communication
interactive communication
technical writing and editing

Though the authors discuss many of the same Web 2.0 tools throughout, they do so based on each tool's uses within a specific concentration.

Researching Web 2.0

noreply@blogger.com (Robert J.F. Sampron) — Fri, 15 May 2009 15:43:00 +0000

(This article was co-authored by Bethany Lamers, Daniel Sutter, and Robert Sampron. It was edited by Robert Sampron.)

The authors used the following research methods to create this report:

1. Secondary resource materials

scholarly and trade journal articles
scholarly research papers
scholarly research projects
books
tutorials
industry magazines

2. Databases

Google Scholar
Academic Search Premier (Ebsco)
LexisNexis Academic
IntegraConnect
Skyline at Auraria Library
Academic OneFile

3. Interviews with experts in technical communication, e-learning, and corporate communication, from:

departments of higher education on the Auraria campus
the Denver metropolitan area's business community

4. Seminar information on the use of weblogs in technical communication

5. Heuristics, using available Web 2.0 tools, including:

Discussing the Role of Web 2.0 in Technical Communication

noreply@blogger.com (Robert J.F. Sampron) — Fri, 08 May 2009 15:32:00 +0000

(This article was co-authored by Bethany Lamers, Daniel Sutter, and Robert Sampron. It was edited by Robert Sampron.)

Technical communicators, wearing the hats of their many concentrations, provide texts in several forms using Web 2.0 concepts and tools. These include:

online help, user manuals, and professional manuals
narration and scripts for games
video scripts
game scripts
graphic presentation scripts
content for online classrooms
content management system scripts

Web 2.0 allows stakeholders to do something not easily done until now. With Web 2.0, they may collaborate online to create technical, scientific, and professional texts. Until now, they traditionally printed texts on paper or displayed on computer screens.

Futurist Ray Kurzweil demonstrates in The Singularity is Near (2005) that, regardless of economic or social trends, people create new technologies. This should remain true for the future of technical communication.

An inspection of several college and university Web sites shows they organize technical communication courses around theory and application (Metropolitan State College of Denver, n.d.; Regis University, n.d.; University of Colorado at Denver, 2008). They also include courses that prepare students to use software applications common to the profession.

To graduate competent professionals, academic programs should keep curriculum current with evolving technology concepts that affect the profession. Graduates must master the emerging, influential technology for the profession. Without technological competency, the money spent on curriculum by government, endowments, students, and higher education institutions may be for naught. The authors hope this report clarifies opportunities for developing an integrated curriculum for this emerging revolutionary use of technology.

Research suggests that, over the next five years, Web 2.0 may create a revolution in how all communicators, and especially technical communicators, create texts. It also suggests that employment opportunities should flow to those who master Web 2.0 concepts. Equally as important, these concepts will likely advance opportunities for collaboration within the profession.

---
Kurzweil, R. (2005). The singularity is near: When humans transcend biology. New York: Viking.

Metropolitan State College of Denver. (n.d.). Department of Technical Communication and Media Production: Overview. Metropolitan State College of Denver. Retrieved February 5, 2009, from http://thunder1.cudenver.edu/clas/communication/gradCertTech.html

Regis University. (n.d.). Technical Communication Certificate. Regis University. Retrieved February 9, 2009, from http://www.regis.edu/regis.asp?sctn=cphss&p1=ap&p2=mls&p3=cert&p4=tc

University of Colorado at Denver. (2008, December 18). Graduate certificate in technincal and professional communication. University of Colorado Denver, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, Department of Communication. Retrieved February 9, 2009, from http://thunder1.cudenver.edu/clas/communication/gradCertTech.html

Discussing Collaboration in Technical Communication

noreply@blogger.com (Robert J.F. Sampron) — Thu, 07 May 2009 14:09:00 +0000

(This blog was co-authored by Bethany Lamers, Daniel Sutter, and Robert Sampron. It was edited by Robert Sampron.)

Professionals have different thoughts about the meaning of collaboration. This blog makes use of the definitions offered by Jones (2007). These include:

contextual collaboration
hierarchical collaboration
group collaboration

Professionals most frequently use contextual collaboration. It comes in two forms: genre use and document borrowing.

Genre-use collaboration occurs when an author employs the genres, templates, and models created by others to form sections of a text. Authors employ this form more than any other in Jones's typology.
Document-borrowing collaboration occurs when an author recycles text elements from previously written texts.

Professionals moderately use hierarchical collaboration. It also comes in two forms: author-centered and sequential.

Author-centered collaboration occurs when a single author creates all elements for a completed text. These elements include original text, edits, and graphics.
Sequential collaboration occurs when a different technical communicator edits the copy of an original author.

Professionals least often use group collaboration. It comes in four forms: horizontal-division writing, group single-authored writing, reactive writing, and joint writing. Each form requires the interaction of two or more authors to create a text.

Horizontal-division writing occurs when "units" of writers work with little interaction on sections of the same text.
Group single-authored writing occurs when one author creates the majority of a text, while others contribute small sections.
Reactive writing occurs when a group of authors shares the work, separately creating each unit.
Joint writing occurs when a group of authors interacts throughout the process to create a whole text. Professionals use this form the last.

Despite Jones's findings, this report contends that professionals will collaborate more because of Web 2.0. If you build it, they will come. This is because, compared to conventional technical communication, the interactive nature of Web 2.0 makes collaboration relatively easy and inexpensive.

Until now, collaboration was difficult. It spanned geography and time zones. It required collaborators to use relatively expensive, compatible software and hardware. At times, collaborators transported the draft text by mail or overnight courier. This likely increased the costs beyond the grasp of many independent professionals. If used at all, electronic communication was by e-mail or instant messenger applications.

Also until now, technical texts traditionally flowed one-way, from communicator to user. Feedback came through various forms of usability testing. Users had little direct input into the process of creating the text.

Web 2.0 changes all of this.

The changes begin with terminology. The authors suggest that we no longer use the words “author” and “user” to express Web 2.0 communication relationships. Rather, the more appropriate term seems to be “stakeholders.” Any participant in the process is a stakeholder. Each now has a potentially direct role in creating and editing a technical text.

Web 2.0 allows stakeholders to work:

without the restrictions of time and space
with online technologies at little or no cost
with otherwise incompatible hardware
with Web-based, communal software.

Ultimately, Web 2.0 means text no longer flows in a top-down, one-way path from communicator to user/audience. Instead, information flows interactively throughout a network based on the choices made by stakeholders. This may irreversibly change the top-down nature of technical communication.

--
Jones, S. (2007). How we collaborate: Reported frequency of technical communicators collaborative writing activities. Technical Communication, 54 (3). Retrieved February 22, 2009, from http://docserver.ingentaconnect.com/deliver/connect/stc/00493155/v54n3/s2.pdf?expires=1236391990&id=49264744&titleid=10262&accname=Society+for+Technical+Communication+Members&checksum=921EE66D1BA3D6D2219EB6281D203B7E

What is Web 2.0?

noreply@blogger.com (Robert J.F. Sampron) — Wed, 06 May 2009 13:56:00 +0000

(This blog was co-authored by Bethany Lamers, Daniel Sutter, and Robert Sampron. It was edited by Robert Sampron.)

Web 2.0 is the term first coined by John Musser to symbolize the next generation of activities on the World Wide Web. Along with Tim O'Reilly, Musser theorizes that Web 2.0 makes use of trends in society, the economy, and technology to drive the convergence of Web-based technologies. This convergence allows users to participate interactively in networks to achieve various goals.

The networks may be as large as the World Wide Web or as small as a home-based Local Area Network. We now stand at the advent of this next generation of Web activities.

Ryan Schmid (2007) observed that, at first, it appears people interact with Web 2.0 through play. Players currently use the following environments to participate in both real-time and delayed interaction:

online gaming environments, like World of Warcraft and Everquest, that reside on online servers

social network software, like Second Life, that resides on a combination of local computers and online servers

social network Web sites, like Facebook and MySpace, that reside on online servers

media display Web sites, like YouTube and Daily Motion, that reside on online servers

file swapping software, like iTunes and Rhapsody, that reside on a combination of local computers and online servers

Collaborating to Communicate Texts through Web 2.0

Web 2.0 offers stakeholders a new concept for creating texts. They may now collaborate online to create any type of text imaginable.

In this sense, the word “text” does not necessarily mean the conventional output of textual and visual elements, like words and images, to paper or computer screens. Rather, text refers to every imaginable form of computer-based creative expression.

Either separately or in combination, Web 2.0 presently allows for expression through:

video media
games
animation
fine art
music
films
graphic presentations
podcasts
streaming netcasts
textual and/or visual elements output to paper
textual and/or visual elements displayed on various types of computer-based or computer-like output devices

The next blog article discusses the role of collaboration in technical communication.

---
Schmid, R. (2008, August). Real text in virtual worlds. Technical Communication, 55 (3). Retrieved February 5, 2009, from: http://docserver.ingentaconnect.com/deliver/connect/stc/00493155/v55n3/s6.pdf?expires=1236391700&id=49264705&titleid=10262&accname=Society+for+Technical+Communication+Members&checksum=42A323B36D8A8F80C192A44A3AC51AA0

What is Technical Communication?

noreply@blogger.com (Robert J.F. Sampron) — Wed, 06 May 2009 13:30:00 +0000

(This blog was co-authored by Bethany Lamers, Daniel Sutter, and Robert Sampron. It was edited by Robert Sampron.)

Technical communication is the practice of conveying technical, scientific, and professional information to a specific, well-defined audience. Professionals produce technical texts that meet the needs of this audience (Lannon, 2008).

The audience uses technical texts in a variety of contexts and industries. This audience also uses texts under a variety of physical conditions, from well-lit office buildings to sparsely lit coalmines.

A technical text provides its audience with information. This information helps the audience maintain awareness, make correct decisions, take correct actions, and remain safe and alive while doing so. The technical communicator must therefore construct an easily used, easily understood text for the audience.

Professionals serve many roles. They use both traditional and innovative media technologies to create and disseminate information. Traditional media may include the simple pen and paper. Innovative media may include state-of-the-art, computer-based eLearning systems. Consequently, technical communicators perform a wide range of activities with all sorts of media.

---
Lannon, J. (2008). Technical communication. New York: Pearson Education.

Studying Technical Communication

noreply@blogger.com (Robert J.F. Sampron) — Tue, 05 May 2009 20:01:00 +0000

My previous blog talked about why I decided to blog about my quest.

This blog talks about what I studied at Metro State.

The courses were useful, interesting, and comprehensive. After I complete my degree the summer, I will continue to take courses both at Metro State and elsewhere.

My writing and editing skills are advanced. Consequently, I am now interested in developing skills to help employers with the approaching Semantic Web.

The Semantic Web, called Web 3.0, will allow users to tag information throughout the World Wide Web and corporate intranets for interactive personal and communal use. The web will no longer be “read-only,” as with Web 2.0.

This means designers must become versed in a different style of design. We will not just read large libraries of textual and visual design elements as now. Instead, we will interact with these elements in ways we cannot yet imagine.

Studying for the Degree

I completed the following courses while studying for this degree:

communication law
designing technical publications
designing presentation graphics
technical writing
technical editing
writing and editing for translation
writing for the environmental industry
writing for hardware documentation
writing for international audiences
writing for user software documentation
writing proposal and grant applications

Throughout these blogs, I will include some of my work. You can see one example right now. It is the masthead, up at the top of the blog page.

I own my own copy of Adobe’s Creative Suite, which includes InDesign, Illustrator, and Photoshop. Because I own the software, I can prepare graphics and design documents at home or on the road.

Next on the agenda, I will acquire and learn Adobe’s Technical Communication Suite, and will work towards improved skills in Web design.

Why a Blog?

noreply@blogger.com (Robert J.F. Sampron) — Tue, 05 May 2009 19:11:00 +0000

This year, I graduate from Metro State's Bachelor of Science program in Technical Communication. That means it is time to find an internship that allows me to develop my skills in a professional workplace.

I always enjoyed writing. One day I wondered aloud, how could I earn a living as a writer? Within a few days, I had an answer: technical communication, with an emphasis on writing and editing.

Already having a Bachelor of Arts degree from Metro State, I looked into the program. It is comprehensive, and features four concentrations.

The concentrations include:

corporate communication
interactive media production
video and media production
technical writing and editing

I chose to follow the concentration in writing and editing. In addition, this program gives students a general grasp of most concentrations.

This means I now have a proven record of presenting complex ideas, tasks, and processes in easily understood, audience-focused media. I have a record of creating innovative, positive solutions for training, informing, motivating, and educating my audience.

While researching my senior thesis, I became an expert on the "next big thing" in web-based business and technical communication. That next big thing is a change in web-based environments. In the short-term, the environment is Web 2.0. In the long-term, the environment is Web 3.0, also known as the "Semantic Web."

Based on research, here is my prediction. Businesses and organizations that cannot create content for these environments may find it difficult to survive let alone thrive on the web.

I already know how to create and coordinate content for this environment, and I continue to learn more every day.

In the next blog entry, I will discuss what I studied in the program and how it helps potential internship employers.

So, why did I choose to blog about my quest? I did so because this is part of the Web 2.0 environment.

Thank you for your good wishes, thoughts, and any ideas you might have to help improve my quest. Please feel free to make comments.

Please accept my best wishes for you.