Proceedings of the 3rd European Conference on Intellectual Capital

Sheryl Buckley and Apostolos Giannakopoulos
Question 2: The portal is currently not being used. Would you be interested in such a portal in
<strong>the</strong> future?
Fifty five percent <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> respondents stated that <strong>the</strong>y would be interested in a portal in <strong>the</strong> future and
45% were not interested. The reasons given for <strong>the</strong> positive response were that virtual communities
encourage participants to make use <strong>of</strong> electronic documents and record keeping, something that <strong>the</strong>
typical knowledge worker should do, but sadly, rarely does.
Checking every day in case <strong>the</strong>y were missing something on <strong>the</strong> portal was considered a waste <strong>of</strong>
time by six respondents.
The portal was created and made available to all those who wanted to add value in <strong>the</strong> department. It
was a convenient ga<strong>the</strong>ring place, whe<strong>the</strong>r formal or informal, which allowed for a more voluntary
exchange <strong>of</strong> ideas. The respondents felt that <strong>the</strong>re was a need for o<strong>the</strong>r academics to participate for
<strong>the</strong> portal to be successful. However, such participation would have to be voluntary. Some
respondents felt it was “a waste <strong>of</strong> time reading everyone’s junk and too time-consuming” and this
could contribute to 18% not actively participating (see question 1).
Ano<strong>the</strong>r respondent felt that <strong>the</strong> portal “was a platform that enables us to speak freely” and that it
should have a strong “academic focus”. Some respondents indicated that <strong>the</strong>y preferred face-to-face
communication. This statement reinforces <strong>the</strong> idea that human beings thrive on real-life, real-time
communication so <strong>the</strong>y can see body language and similar means <strong>of</strong> communication.
On <strong>the</strong> negative side, some respondents felt that <strong>the</strong> portal did not work because <strong>of</strong> academics not
participating, so <strong>the</strong>y did not see it working in <strong>the</strong> future as “it was not used correctly”. Some
respondents felt a lot <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> information on <strong>the</strong> portal could have been accessed via e-mail.
Question 3: How <strong>of</strong>ten did you use <strong>the</strong> portal?
Twenty six percent <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> respondents used <strong>the</strong> portal twice a day and ano<strong>the</strong>r 26% more than twice
a week (see Table 1). The low percentages could be attributed to <strong>the</strong> workloads <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> academics.
Table 1: How <strong>of</strong>ten did you use <strong>the</strong> portal?
Usage Percentage
Once a day 12%
Twice a day 26%
Less than twice a week 12%
Twice a week 12%
More than twice a week 26%
Once a month 12%
Question 4: From where did you access <strong>the</strong> portal?
The majority, 87%, <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> respondents indicated that <strong>the</strong>y accessed <strong>the</strong> portal from work, 6% from
home and <strong>the</strong> rest did not answer <strong>the</strong> question.
Question 5: Was <strong>the</strong> portal easy to access?
Seventy two percent <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> respondents indicated that <strong>the</strong> portal was easy to access. This high
number is surprising because in question 2 some respondents stated that “it was a pain to get into”
and <strong>the</strong> rest said it was difficult to access. Those that found <strong>the</strong> portal easy to access said it was
“easy to navigate, very simple layout”, “it was just a matter <strong>of</strong> pointing my browser to <strong>the</strong> web” and “it
was installed on my favourites, making it easy to access <strong>the</strong> logon page provided”. Some used <strong>the</strong>ir
personal Internet account from home, as <strong>the</strong>y found that <strong>the</strong> portal used very little bandwidth, which
made it affordable compared to <strong>the</strong> university web-based e-mail service. Its easy accessibility made
its use more attractive. This eliminates <strong>the</strong> possibility <strong>of</strong> some academics not using <strong>the</strong> portal owing to
107