CoPs Implementation using ESN (e.g. Yammer) and/or Messaging (e.g. Teams) #CoP #Yammer #ESN


Jan Hutter
 

Hi all


I am familiar with the differences between ESN tools (like Yammer or Workpace) and messaging tools (like Teams or Slack) as well as the whole outer/inner loop concept. Nevertheless, I have difficulties to derive some best practices for the implementation of CoPs (assuming Yammer and Teams is the technology stack):

While many blogs and articles are making a hard distinction between Yammer and Teams (e.g. are suggesting to use Yammer for CoPs and Teams for daily interaction-type of work), I have difficulties to buy-in to that separation. In fact, I believe that a CoP could be implemented either on Teams (e.g. as public Team) or on Yammer (as public Group) - depending on the characteristics of that community. Communities which are working closely together on common artifacts might be better off with Teams (due to its content collaboration features) while for other (more loosely organized) communities, a Yammer Group would be sufficient, i.e. more appropriate.


Thus my question: What is your experience with having a mixed setup of CoP implementations, i.e. where some communities are implemented in Teams and others in Yammer? Aside from having to support (i.e. train/document) two kinds of CoP implementation approaches, what other experience have you made?


Thanks!

Jan


Douglas Weidner
 

Jan,

Great insight. 
Having multiple systems creates training and cost issues, not to mention normal human lack of desire to learn yet another system, especially if not used on a daily basis.

But, there are more fundamental issues that lead to CoP success, or are 'barriers' to success.
Typically, the specific tool is not the primary issue.

Douglas Weidner
Chief CKM Instructor



On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 9:23 AM jan.hutter@... [sikmleaders] <sikmleaders@...> wrote:
 

Hi all


I am familiar with the differences between ESN tools (like Yammer or Workpace) and messaging tools (like Teams or Slack) as well as the whole outer/inner loop concept. Nevertheless, I have difficulties to derive some best practices for the implementation of CoPs (assuming Yammer and Teams is the technology stack):

While many blogs and articles are making a hard distinction between Yammer and Teams (e.g. are suggesting to use Yammer for CoPs and Teams for daily interaction-type of work), I have difficulties to buy-in to that separation. In fact, I believe that a CoP could be implemented either on Teams (e.g. as public Team) or on Yammer (as public Group) - depending on the characteristics of that community. Communities which are working closely together on common artifacts might be better off with Teams (due to its content collaboration features) while for other (more loosely organized) communities, a Yammer Group would be sufficient, i.e. more appropriate.


Thus my question: What is your experience with having a mixed setup of CoP implementations, i.e. where some communities are implemented in Teams and others in Yammer? Aside from having to support (i.e. train/document) two kinds of CoP implementation approaches, what other experience have you made?


Thanks!

Jan


Daan Boom
 

Hi Jan:

I would have a hard time selling to management to implement and maintain two platforms with overlapping features. I don't have the practical knowledge of having worked extensively with Teams (I did pilot it though) but the organization opted for Yammer as it links with Sharepoint to act as repository for Yammer documents. In the practical sense, Yammer functions very well as social platform to post and ask questions. There are also some pitfalls in Yammer as it does not support branched out discussions but we learned you can find creative solutions for this. So far Y works fine to connect staff.

On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 1:23 PM jan.hutter@... [sikmleaders] <sikmleaders@...> wrote:
 

Hi all


I am familiar with the differences between ESN tools (like Yammer or Workpace) and messaging tools (like Teams or Slack) as well as the whole outer/inner loop concept. Nevertheless, I have difficulties to derive some best practices for the implementation of CoPs (assuming Yammer and Teams is the technology stack):

While many blogs and articles are making a hard distinction between Yammer and Teams (e.g. are suggesting to use Yammer for CoPs and Teams for daily interaction-type of work), I have difficulties to buy-in to that separation. In fact, I believe that a CoP could be implemented either on Teams (e.g. as public Team) or on Yammer (as public Group) - depending on the characteristics of that community. Communities which are working closely together on common artifacts might be better off with Teams (due to its content collaboration features) while for other (more loosely organized) communities, a Yammer Group would be sufficient, i.e. more appropriate.


Thus my question: What is your experience with having a mixed setup of CoP implementations, i.e. where some communities are implemented in Teams and others in Yammer? Aside from having to support (i.e. train/document) two kinds of CoP implementation approaches, what other experience have you made?


Thanks!

Jan



--
Daan


Lee Romero
 

We have been using Yammer as the primary tool for community communication here for about 5-6 years (I think).  

We recently also implemented Teams, but not as part of our "community strategy" per se.  So our users have the option to use either or both, though there is no specific coordinated push anymore for either one.

So as far as the experience - Yammer for quite some time had a strategic push behind it as the tool for communities and some of infrastructure (learning materials, etc.) for that still does exist and is, to some extent, still known well-enough that I think most people will choose Yammer.  Some people do, however, use Teams, but when they do, they are basically on their own.  What I've seen is that such groups tend to be more technically-oriented than others (people who at some point in the past probably used a tool like IRC or Slack on development projects).

So honestly not a lot of investment as far as a strategy goes, more like just leaving it to the individuals to decide.

On that front, I do hear people wondering about which tool to use.  The help provided to make that decision is usually along the lines of what is technically feasible.  Teams has (as far as I know) a limit of about 1000 members of a team; so if you go over that, you can't use it and Yammer is your only meaningful option.  In our current implementation, Teams is also not deployed globally, so if you would like to support membership from around the world, Yammer is, again, your only choice.  If you can ignore those conditions, it's a much harder decision and I'm not sure what other direction is provided.

I do think you're right - either is a viable tool but it depends on the characteristics of your community.  Size; locations [in our organization, anyway]; functionality needed; potential value of add-ins that are available for one or the other; etc.

Not sure if this is all that helpful, but I thought I'd offer what I could.

Regards
Lee Romero

On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 9:15 AM jan.hutter@... [sikmleaders] <sikmleaders@...> wrote:


Hi all


I am familiar with the differences between ESN tools (like Yammer or Workpace) and messaging tools (like Teams or Slack) as well as the whole outer/inner loop concept. Nevertheless, I have difficulties to derive some best practices for the implementation of CoPs (assuming Yammer and Teams is the technology stack):

While many blogs and articles are making a hard distinction between Yammer and Teams (e.g. are suggesting to use Yammer for CoPs and Teams for daily interaction-type of work), I have difficulties to buy-in to that separation. In fact, I believe that a CoP could be implemented either on Teams (e.g. as public Team) or on Yammer (as public Group) - depending on the characteristics of that community. Communities which are working closely together on common artifacts might be better off with Teams (due to its content collaboration features) while for other (more loosely organized) communities, a Yammer Group would be sufficient, i.e. more appropriate.


Thus my question: What is your experience with having a mixed setup of CoP implementations, i.e. where some communities are implemented in Teams and others in Yammer? Aside from having to support (i.e. train/document) two kinds of CoP implementation approaches, what other experience have you made?


Thanks!

Jan




Robert L. Bogue
 

Lee –

 

For what it’s worth the limit was 2,500 per team and has been expanded to 5,000 per team.

 

Rob

 

-------------------

Robert L. Bogue

O: (317) 844-5310  M: (317) 506-4977 Blog: http://www.thorprojects.com/blog

 

From: sikmleaders@... <sikmleaders@...>
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2019 12:23 PM
To: sikmleaders@...
Subject: Re: [sikmleaders] CoPs Implementation using ESN (e.g. Yammer) and/or Messaging (e.g. Teams)

 

 

We have been using Yammer as the primary tool for community communication here for about 5-6 years (I think).  

 

We recently also implemented Teams, but not as part of our "community strategy" per se.  So our users have the option to use either or both, though there is no specific coordinated push anymore for either one.

 

So as far as the experience - Yammer for quite some time had a strategic push behind it as the tool for communities and some of infrastructure (learning materials, etc.) for that still does exist and is, to some extent, still known well-enough that I think most people will choose Yammer.  Some people do, however, use Teams, but when they do, they are basically on their own.  What I've seen is that such groups tend to be more technically-oriented than others (people who at some point in the past probably used a tool like IRC or Slack on development projects).

 

So honestly not a lot of investment as far as a strategy goes, more like just leaving it to the individuals to decide.

 

On that front, I do hear people wondering about which tool to use.  The help provided to make that decision is usually along the lines of what is technically feasible.  Teams has (as far as I know) a limit of about 1000 members of a team; so if you go over that, you can't use it and Yammer is your only meaningful option..  In our current implementation, Teams is also not deployed globally, so if you would like to support membership from around the world, Yammer is, again, your only choice.  If you can ignore those conditions, it's a much harder decision and I'm not sure what other direction is provided.

 

I do think you're right - either is a viable tool but it depends on the characteristics of your community.  Size; locations [in our organization, anyway]; functionality needed; potential value of add-ins that are available for one or the other; etc.

 

Not sure if this is all that helpful, but I thought I'd offer what I could.

 

Regards

Lee Romero

 

On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 9:15 AM jan.hutter@... [sikmleaders] <sikmleaders@...> wrote:

 

Hi all

 

I am familiar with the differences between ESN tools (like Yammer or Workpace) and messaging tools (like Teams or Slack) as well as the whole outer/inner loop concept. Nevertheless, I have difficulties to derive some best practices for the implementation of CoPs (assuming Yammer and Teams is the technology stack):

While many blogs and articles are making a hard distinction between Yammer and Teams (e.g. are suggesting to use Yammer for CoPs and Teams for daily interaction-type of work), I have difficulties to buy-in to that separation. In fact, I believe that a CoP could be implemented either on Teams (e.g. as public Team) or on Yammer (as public Group) - depending on the characteristics of that community. Communities which are working closely together on common artifacts might be better off with Teams (due to its content collaboration features) while for other (more loosely organized) communities, a Yammer Group would be sufficient, i.e. more appropriate.



Thus my question: What is your experience with having a mixed setup of CoP implementations, i.e. where some communities are implemented in Teams and others in Yammer? Aside from having to support (i.e. train/document) two kinds of CoP implementation approaches, what other experience have you made?



Thanks!

Jan

 


Ray Sims
 

With Lee Romero (see his separate reply) I used Yammer very extensively starting prior to Microsoft’s acquiring Yammer and up until a year ago when I left the firm. I doubt that in today’s workforce nearly anyone would need to do “training” to learn the app. It is very straightforward. I don’t have first-hand experience; however, my impression is also that the impact of maintaining Yammer is very low for IT…including not much for governance is required, compared to Teams.

 

I have not used Microsoft Teams in production (I have only done some self-study to see its capabilities)…but it strikes me as the more powerful and tailored solution for Communities of Practice (and, yes single function/department or cross-functional teams…hence the name). For example, its use for online meetings exceeds Yammer’s capabilities, and Document Management is more robust.

 

I also buy into the Microsoft framing of inner and outer loop (ref: https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/cloudyhappypeople/2017/09/28/now-it-makes-sense-microsofts-collaboration-story-in-a-single-slide/) with Teams for inner and Yammer for outer.

 

As far as cost, again I’m no expert on Microsoft licensing, but  https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/compare-all-microsoft-365-plans seems to suggest that for one price an enterprise would have both Teams and Yammer, irrespective of it both are implemented or not.

 

My bottom-line thinking is:

  • Yammer for broad enterprise social network / communication
  • Yammer Group for low-maturity, casual, communities – self provisioned with light governance
  • Teams for more mature Communities of Practice, with more governance to ensure desired security and minimizing “sprawl”. And more education required…I’m thinking analogous the SharePoint Team Sites years ago…now replaced by Teams.
  • What wouldn’t make sense is to e.g. use (and pay for) Facebook Workplace when already paying for Yammer. Same for Slack, albeit keeping the free version of Slack out of the enterprise may be a tougher to achieve.

 

I’m anxious to hear from others besides just Lee that are using both in production now. What has been your experience and design-point?

 

Ray Sims

http://the12thchapter.com

 

 

From: Daan Boom daanboom@... [sikmleaders]
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2019 11:41 AM
To: minumittal93@... [sikmleaders]
Subject: Re: [sikmleaders] CoPs Implementation using ESN (e.g. Yammer) and/orMessaging (e.g. Teams)

 

 

Hi Jan:

 

I would have a hard time selling to management to implement and maintain two platforms with overlapping features. I don't have the practical knowledge of having worked extensively with Teams (I did pilot it though) but the organization opted for Yammer as it links with Sharepoint to act as repository for Yammer documents. In the practical sense, Yammer functions very well as social platform to post and ask questions. There are also some pitfalls in Yammer as it does not support branched out discussions but we learned you can find creative solutions for this. So far Y works fine to connect staff.

 

On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 1:23 PM jan.hutter@... [sikmleaders] <sikmleaders@...> wrote:

 

Hi all

 

I am familiar with the differences between ESN tools (like Yammer or Workpace) and messaging tools (like Teams or Slack) as well as the whole outer/inner loop concept. Nevertheless, I have difficulties to derive some best practices for the implementation of CoPs (assuming Yammer and Teams is the technology stack):

While many blogs and articles are making a hard distinction between Yammer and Teams (e.g. are suggesting to use Yammer for CoPs and Teams for daily interaction-type of work), I have difficulties to buy-in to that separation. In fact, I believe that a CoP could be implemented either on Teams (e.g. as public Team) or on Yammer (as public Group) - depending on the characteristics of that community. Communities which are working closely together on common artifacts might be better off with Teams (due to its content collaboration features) while for other (more loosely organized) communities, a Yammer Group would be sufficient, i.e. more appropriate.



Thus my question: What is your experience with having a mixed setup of CoP implementations, i.e. where some communities are implemented in Teams and others in Yammer? Aside from having to support (i.e. train/document) two kinds of CoP implementation approaches, what other experience have you made?



Thanks!

Jan


 

--

Daan

 


Dan Ranta
 

Dear Jan - I would like to share my opinion based on knowledge of all the technology enablers in question here.  With any of these enablers, there is ZERO chance you will have a world class community.  To back this up, I offer a world class dinner to anyone who can prove me wrong.  Recently Matt Moore (who I have never met in person...to my knowledge) suggested that I was an overly happy American with too much positivity.  Well, on this occasion, I am being a bit of a naysayer - so a bit of a more negative / dour / dubious take from me on this topic...helping to balance out my apparent unbridled optimism associated with my nationality!

Best - Dan

On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 9:23 AM jan.hutter@... [sikmleaders] <sikmleaders@...> wrote:
 

Hi all


I am familiar with the differences between ESN tools (like Yammer or Workpace) and messaging tools (like Teams or Slack) as well as the whole outer/inner loop concept. Nevertheless, I have difficulties to derive some best practices for the implementation of CoPs (assuming Yammer and Teams is the technology stack):

While many blogs and articles are making a hard distinction between Yammer and Teams (e.g. are suggesting to use Yammer for CoPs and Teams for daily interaction-type of work), I have difficulties to buy-in to that separation. In fact, I believe that a CoP could be implemented either on Teams (e.g. as public Team) or on Yammer (as public Group) - depending on the characteristics of that community. Communities which are working closely together on common artifacts might be better off with Teams (due to its content collaboration features) while for other (more loosely organized) communities, a Yammer Group would be sufficient, i.e. more appropriate.


Thus my question: What is your experience with having a mixed setup of CoP implementations, i.e. where some communities are implemented in Teams and others in Yammer? Aside from having to support (i.e. train/document) two kinds of CoP implementation approaches, what other experience have you made?


Thanks!

Jan


Jan Hutter
 

Hi Douglas

Thanks for your comments. Agree, tools are not the primary issue for the success of CoP's and I am aware of that. Nevertheless, when tools are considered/needed, I would like to give meaningful guidance, in particular when the available tool stack provides different possibilities. That's why I asked this question.

Cheers
Jan 


Jan Hutter
 

Hi Daan

Both Teams and Yammer are part of Office 365 and Microsoft does sell them as complementary. While there are more obvious use cases where one can see the differences (e.g. when thinking about the inner/outer loop concept), I don't think that's so obvious/clear when thinking of communities of practice. Teams has far more capabilities than Yammer, in particular when thinking about content collaboration and thus I would currently not be able to reasonable sell the usage of Yammer just for the sake of using only one tool.


Jan Hutter
 

Hi Lee

Thanks for your thoughts - indeed, they are helpful. Yes, I am thinking about a scenario where there are no special constraints about the availability of each tool nor the max amount of members. In such a situation, I find it quite challenging to give reasonable guidance.

Cheers
Jan


Jan Hutter
 

Hi Ray

That's a great summary! Your bottom-line thinking pretty much represents with own current understanding. Thus I am also very much interested in hearing some more thoughts from people using both tools simultaneously (or any other ESN/messaging combination).

Jan


Jan Hutter
 

Hey Dan - Sure, I understand and agree that a successful community is not about technology (only). Nevertheless, technology is part of an implementation of a global community thus I wonder what best practices have worked on the technology front.

Jan


Matt Moore <innotecture@...>
 

Hi,

There's been lots of good advice so far. I just want to add something else.

This conversation echoes broader confusion in the market about Microsoft's Office365 collaboration offerings. Everyone is a bit puzzled. Now Microsoft have gotten better at this over the last year (hence the inner and outer loop messaging) but I still get people asking me "What the heck is Teams for?" And the correct answer "Microsoft released Teams because they were terrified of Slack" doesn't make much sense if you have never seen Slack.

Product roadmaps are a bit of a mugs game but they are worth bearing in mind as you use these tools:
- Microsoft is loading more and more of the "unified communications" functionality into Teams. As Skype for Business is being deprecated and only available via Teams, Teams is being positioned as a competitor to both Slack and Cisco. If you want to do things with voice & video conferencing then Teams is the place to go.
- After a bit of a fallow patch, Yammer is now basically positioned as the competitor to Facebook Workplace. It is a whole of enterprise thing but also acts as a kind of collaborative glue across a number of Office365 workloads (by providing comment functionality on things like Stream).

My bottom line advice would be: don't get to heavily invested (esp. don't go down the heavy customization path) in any one part of Office365 because there are no guarantees that Microsoft won't change on you. Both Teams and Yammer seem fairly stable for the moment but who knows where we will be in 3 months. A lot of this will depend on what its competitors do in the marketplace and whether new players emerge.

Regards,

Matt



On ‎Monday‎, ‎20‎ ‎May‎ ‎2019‎ ‎11‎:‎23‎:‎30‎ ‎PM‎ ‎AEST, jan.hutter@... [sikmleaders] wrote:


 

Hi all


I am familiar with the differences between ESN tools (like Yammer or Workpace) and messaging tools (like Teams or Slack) as well as the whole outer/inner loop concept. Nevertheless, I have difficulties to derive some best practices for the implementation of CoPs (assuming Yammer and Teams is the technology stack):

While many blogs and articles are making a hard distinction between Yammer and Teams (e.g. are suggesting to use Yammer for CoPs and Teams for daily interaction-type of work), I have difficulties to buy-in to that separation. In fact, I believe that a CoP could be implemented either on Teams (e.g. as public Team) or on Yammer (as public Group) - depending on the characteristics of that community. Communities which are working closely together on common artifacts might be better off with Teams (due to its content collaboration features) while for other (more loosely organized) communities, a Yammer Group would be sufficient, i.e. more appropriate.


Thus my question: What is your experience with having a mixed setup of CoP implementations, i.e. where some communities are implemented in Teams and others in Yammer? Aside from having to support (i.e. train/document) two kinds of CoP implementation approaches, what other experience have you made?


Thanks!

Jan


tman9999@...
 

Jan - I’d start by considering these two questions:
1. What tools/platforms are already deployed; and of those, which ones have good traction?
2. What business issue are you aiming to address with CoPs?


Laurence Lock Lee
 

This is a discussion that I suggest will go on for some time yet. We have conducted detailed analytics on Yammer, Teams and Workplace by Facebook across many organisations (see our website for benchmark reports https://www.swoopanalytics.com/benchmarking/ -free download). As technical platforms go no doubt Yammer has the heritage for communities, Workplace is servicing the same space now and as other posters have indicated, Teams has more than enough features to match both Yammer and Workplace. 

So how do you choose? I suggest one of the first tasks for the community is to agree on the technical platform they will use and then just go with that. Whatever the choice, it will do the job required of it.

What I have found more interesting from our analytics is whether people in ‘groups’ even think about what type of group they are? Are they a community, team, forum? This is important if they are to achieve their goals/purpose effectively. As an example, when establishing a group in Workplace you are forced to nominate what type of group you are (Team/project, community, Forum, Social). Workplace advertises itself as a community platform, but nearly 60% of groups self identified as a team/project. Of that 60%, the average team size was over 250 members (no doubt there are some communities and forums in there!)

I suggest that there are many ‘communities’ operating on your digital platforms that are not self identifying as such. They will also need some help from those that know about communities. To help in this regard we have developed the idea of ’Team Personas’ (Single Leader, Self Directed, Community, Forum and Disconnected) from MS Teams membership and interaction patterns. Our hope is that if a group is interacting like a community, it can be directed to those in the organisation that know about communities…like the good folk on this list!

rgds

Laurence Lock Lee
Chief Scientist and CoFounder
SWOOP Analytics




Stan Garfield
 

Jan, I refer you to Sue Hanley's presentation from March, 2018, especially slides 17 and 18:


Jan Hutter
 

Thanks, Stan - a very valuable presentation!
The presentation suggests Yammer for CoP's though. I do question this strict separation as a CoP is for me also an inner loop (at least for a CoP with members knowing each other). Anyways, still good content.


Douglas Weidner
 

Thanks for comments Dan,
You are actually confirming my earlier statements about the ultimate success of any CoP goes well beyond the selection of the best tool.

Yes, I am an American optimist, but also a realist, when evidence dictates.

Douglas Weidner
Chief CKM Instructor


On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 1:46 PM Daniel Ranta danieleranta@... [sikmleaders] <sikmleaders@...> wrote:
 

Dear Jan - I would like to share my opinion based on knowledge of all the technology enablers in question here.  With any of these enablers, there is ZERO chance you will have a world class community.  To back this up, I offer a world class dinner to anyone who can prove me wrong.  Recently Matt Moore (who I have never met in person....to my knowledge) suggested that I was an overly happy American with too much positivity.  Well, on this occasion, I am being a bit of a naysayer - so a bit of a more negative / dour / dubious take from me on this topic...helping to balance out my apparent unbridled optimism associated with my nationality!

Best - Dan

On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 9:23 AM jan.hutter@... [sikmleaders] <sikmleaders@...> wrote:
 

Hi all


I am familiar with the differences between ESN tools (like Yammer or Workpace) and messaging tools (like Teams or Slack) as well as the whole outer/inner loop concept. Nevertheless, I have difficulties to derive some best practices for the implementation of CoPs (assuming Yammer and Teams is the technology stack):

While many blogs and articles are making a hard distinction between Yammer and Teams (e.g. are suggesting to use Yammer for CoPs and Teams for daily interaction-type of work), I have difficulties to buy-in to that separation. In fact, I believe that a CoP could be implemented either on Teams (e.g. as public Team) or on Yammer (as public Group) - depending on the characteristics of that community. Communities which are working closely together on common artifacts might be better off with Teams (due to its content collaboration features) while for other (more loosely organized) communities, a Yammer Group would be sufficient, i.e. more appropriate.


Thus my question: What is your experience with having a mixed setup of CoP implementations, i.e. where some communities are implemented in Teams and others in Yammer? Aside from having to support (i.e. train/document) two kinds of CoP implementation approaches, what other experience have you made?


Thanks!

Jan


Douglas Weidner
 

Jan,

It was a good question to ask.

But for many, that is the only question they ask, which would be a big mistake.
Hence my comment. 

I didn't mean to in any way offend you, but rather serving in my instructional role to all KMers.

Cheers to you as well,
Douglas Weidner
Chief CKM Instructor

On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 3:18 PM jan.hutter@... [sikmleaders] <sikmleaders@...> wrote:
 

Hi Douglas


Thanks for your comments. Agree, tools are not the primary issue for the success of CoP's and I am aware of that. Nevertheless, when tools are considered/needed, I would like to give meaningful guidance, in particular when the available tool stack provides different possibilities. That's why I asked this question.

Cheers
Jan 


Douglas Weidner
 

Jan, tman

Good questions, but I'd rank another even higher.
Do we know how to make CoPs successful? That question might be a few key bulet points of which tman's two are included.

But if prioritized, the order of the two would no doubt be reversed.

Douglas Weidner

On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 9:02 PM tman9999@... [sikmleaders] <sikmleaders@...> wrote:
 

Jan - I’d start by considering these two questions:
1. What tools/platforms are already deployed; and of those, which ones have good traction?
2. What business issue are you aiming to address with CoPs?