Today, we are going to see whether you really require an intranet.
The key determinant of intranet value is your organization's information needs. As a very general rule, intranets are most useful to organizations that
* Are geographically dispersed
* Share common business objectives
* Have common information needs
* Value collaboration
As this very basic list suggests, the criteria for intranet utility are both objective and subjective, logistical and cultural. At the very least, for an intranet to be meaningful, it must reflect a central focus-most often a common business or organizational objective shared by diverse individuals or groups.
It's important to keep in mind that not every organization needs an intranet. A small company, operating from a single location, for example, may exchange information more than adequately through memos, meetings, or at the water cooler. Such an organization may well use the Internet as a resource for gathering information or intelligence, but probably doesn't need an intranet's added power and efficiency.
By contrast, a company with multiple sales offices or operating divisions in different locations, or a trade association or not-for-profit group with numerous members or chapters, may benefit significantly from implementing its own intranet. Organizations such as these constantly strive to balance managers' needs for information that is comprehensive and timely; they are burdened by logistical challenges arising from multiple time zones, incompatible computer systems, and erratic local phone service.
As a result of these and other barriers, critical decisions may not have the benefit of full collaboration among key participants-or of comprehensive background information, equally available to all decision-makers. There may be gross inconsistencies between chapters or office locations in terms of their ability to disseminate information to members or staff. Similarly, widely dispersed organizations often experience needless headaches in relaying company data (such as sales figures, financial projections, and so on) to headquarters.
At their most powerful, intranets help create and further a common vision among disparate organizational components by empowering the individual. For many organizations, this is in itself a revolutionary concept: achieving collective clout by distributing-not centralizing-power.
Short of this "ultimate" vision for intranet usage, numerous uses may be less ambitious but offer significant benefits. For example, geographic dispersion alone may suggest the value of a central archive of corporate policy materials, a regularly updated analysis of current news or other information, or automated reporting of quarterly financial data, production statistics, or membership lists. Basic uses such as these help save time and aggravation by streamlining routine reporting and assuring ready access to standard information. Although a WAN can serve as such a central depository for files and possibly share e-mail, a WAN doesn't necessarily mean intranet. A WAN doesn't have nearly the full capabilities of an intranet, which, even in a basic design, overshadows a WAN in its ease and efficiency in performing numerous functions.
