Diagnosis of the Use of Web 2.0 Tools in the Portuguese Financial

Institutions

César Sousa and Paula Morais

Innovation, Science and Technology Department, Portucalense University, Porto, Portugal

Keywords: Web 2.0, Enterprise 2.0, Knowledge Management Practices.

Abstract: Web 2.0 tools helps enterprises to increase innovation. Many organizations seek this kind of tools so they

can be competitive in the global world we live today. The Portuguese Financial sector has been very

competitive and has used innovation to leverage over competitors. Considering the potential for innovation

associated with Web 2.0 and the innovation interest of the sector, it's very relevant to diagnose the level of

use of Knowledge Management practices and the adoption of Web 2.0 tools in this sector. This article

presents the results of a study aiming to diagnose the level of use of Knowledge Management practices and

the adoption of Web 2.0 tools by Portuguese Banks. The study was conducted through a survey sent to all

institutions listed in the Portuguese Banking Association, specifically to 26 banks. With a 15.38% success

rate of answers it was possible to infer that in Portugal Knowledge Management practices are present in the

Banking sector, as well as the use of Web 2.0 tools, although not with a homogeneous presence.

1 INTRODUCTION

In today’s dynamic and global business

environment, enterprises face ever-increasing

pressure to stay competitive and achieve sustainable

growth through innovation. The traditional ways of

addressing business challenges overlook a rich

resource – employees’ knowledge. Collaborative

Web 2.0 tools enable enterprises to foster

employees’ critical thinking and creativity while

providing a platform to capitalize on their

innovations for product and process improvement.

Web 2.0 tools, due to the origin of the concept,

are often associated with organizations whose

computer based applications have a production

platform based on the Internet. The Portuguese

financial sector despite being known for its

efficiency, competitiveness and innovation is

considered a traditional sector, that is, its platform is

not based on the Internet.

Considering the potential for innovation

associated with Web 2.0 and the innovation interest

of the sector, we sought to diagnose the level of use

of Knowledge Management (KM) practices and the

adoption of Web 2.0 tools by Portuguese Banks.

The study was conducted through a survey sent

to all institutions listed in the Portuguese Banking

Association, specifically to 26 banks.

From the results it is possible to infer that

Knowledge Management practices are present in the

Banking sector, as well as the use of Web 2.0 tools,

although not with a homogeneous presence.

The paper is divided into three main sections: the

first is a brief description of Web 2.0 tools,

emphasizing those that are commonly used in

organizations. The second section presents the

research methodology and the results obtained are

discussed in the third section.

2 BUSINESS IMPACT OF WEB 2.0

Knowledge Management can be defined as the

systematic organization, planning, scheduling,

monitoring and deployment of people, processes,

technology and environment to facilitate the

creation, storage, sharing, and, utilization, of

knowledge, in order to improve organizational

performance and achieve competitive advantage

(Coakes, 2004; King, 2007).

It is well known that information technology

gives a lot of support to information management,

and more recently, different kinds of Knowledge

Management systems have emerged, in order to

368

Sousa C. and Morais P..

Diagnosis of the Use of Web 2.0 Tools in the Portuguese Financial Institutions.

DOI: 10.5220/0004547203680372

In Proceedings of the International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Information Retrieval and the International Conference on Knowledge

Management and Information Sharing (KMIS-2013), pages 368-372

ISBN: 978-989-8565-75-4

 2013 SCITEPRESS (Science and Technology Publications, Lda.)

support Knowledge Management processes; for

instance knowledge maps, collaboration systems,

workflow systems, competence management

systems, corporative portals, business intelligence

systems (Pinto et al., 2005).

Knowledge is socially constructed, it is created

through discourse in “ba” that is the physical, mental

and/or virtual arena of knowledge creation (Nonaka

and Konno, 1998). How can information technology

support this kind of socially construction? Social

media tools can give a substantial contribution to

this process.

Social media tools have come to be known as

Web 2.0, term closely associated with Tim O'Reilly

(Tim O’Reilly and Battelle, 2009).

The term Web 2.0 has been used in many

different ways, it refers to a second generation of

Internet-based tools – such as wikis, blogs, social

networking, social bookmarking, tagging, mashups

and folksonomies – that emphasize online

collaboration and sharing among users (Sutter, 2009;

Raman, 2009).

Web 2.0 originally described tools that were

primarily used in the web by single users. Why are

these tools particularly noteworthy? They are

significant because they can potentially increase

knowledge creation and sharing among organization

members, making knowledge available to those who

need it. They provide a platform for Knowledge

Management (King, 2007). In a highly globalized

world, new ways to cultivate and exploit knowledge

sharing with customers, suppliers and partners are

forcing companies to expand their KM concept and

agenda (Mentzas et al., 2007). We can talk about a

second phase of Knowledge Management where

companies try to exploit a much richer form of

knowledge assets, using Web 2.0 tools and focusing

on the social, collaborative dimension of the Web

(Kirchner et al., 2009).

Recently there have been some research works to

understand the potential of Web 2.0 for business in

different domains, discovering how organizations

are using these tools in pursuit of their missions

(Chui et al., 2012; Raeth et al., 2010; Andriole,

2010; Bughin et al., 2008; Matuszak, 2007).

Matuszak (2007), from KPMG, describes a

survey conducted across a range of industries about

the adaption of “enterprise 2.0” technologies. This

study shows that “enterprise 2.0” adaption could

offer benefits like fostering collaboration, innovation

and enhance productivity. Some respondents also

refer challenges and barriers that must be addressed

before their organizations can take the full potential

of these new tools. Security risks and governance

issues were referred.

Bughin et al. (2008) work focuses on

McKinsey’s second annual survey on the business

use of Web 2.0 technologies: which of these social

and interactive tools the companies have adopted

and for which purposes, what executives are doing

to encourage adoption, and how satisfied they are

with their use of these tools. The survey reveals

continuing investments in Web 2.0, but also suggests

that after an initial period of promise and trial,

companies are coming to understand the difficulty of

realizing some of Web 2.0’s benefits. Only 21

percent of the respondents say they are satisfied

overall with these tools.

The work from Raeth et al. (2010), explores the

processes of Web 2.0 technologies’ adoption in

companies, focusing on identifying how and why

Web 2.0 systems are deployed, comparing the

process with enterprise system adoption projects.

The article from Andriole (2010) describes

research designed to measure the impact of the

business value of web 2.0 technologies in selected

companies and industries primarily in the U.S.; the

results showed that Web 2.0 technologies can help

improve collaboration and communication within

most companies, though many companies are

cautious about deploying them. The work also

shows concerns about intellectual property,

proprietary information, privacy, security, and

control.

The report from Chio et al. (2012) explores the

potential economic impact of the use of social

technologies, by examining their current usage and

evolving application. It is referred, in this report, that

72 percent of companies use social technologies in

some way, very few are anywhere near to achieve

the full potential benefit. It also concludes that to get

the full benefit of those technologies, organizations

must transform their structures, processes, and

cultures: they will need to create a culture of trust

and improve the participation of employees that

should not be afraid of sharing their thoughts and

trust that their contributions will be respected.

In spite of the growing interest in using those

technologies, significant problems with the

implementation and acceptance of Web 2.0 tools

exist in organizations. Particularly in regulated areas

like financial services, serious challenges can appear

when it comes to engaging with the world via social

media.

DiagnosisoftheUseofWeb2.0ToolsinthePortugueseFinancialInstitutions

369

3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The main objective of the research described in this

paper is to understand the business impact of Web

2.0 tools and Knowledge Management practices in

financial organizations. The banking sector was

chosen considering that it operates in a mature and

competitive market and has become an industry

innovator and also a pioneer in the use of

technologies and management methodologies. But

considering the concerns about proprietary

information, privacy, security, and control, the

challenges that can appear when it comes to use

social media tools in this sector, can be relevant.

A quantitative study was made through a

questionnaire sent to all institutions listed in the

Portuguese Banking Association, in 2009,

specifically to 26 banks.

The questionnaire was developed, with the aim

of identifying the KM organizational practices

carried out, related to the creation, sharing, storage

and use of knowledge and to diagnose the level of

use of such practices. It was also intended to identify

the level of use and implementation of Web 2.0

tools.

The questionnaire was structured in two blocks.

The first refers to the issues related to Knowledge

Management practices and the second to the issues

related to Web 2.0 tools.

The first block is subdivided into five groups

related to KM practices: Policies and Strategies;

Leadership; Incentives; Knowledge capture and

acquisition and Training and Learning. This

structure was based on the questionnaire used in the

study "Pilot Knowledge Management Practices

Survey," (CFL 2002). This questionnaire uses a list

of practices which can be used in Knowledge

Management, taken as representative of what is

considered best practice. This same questionnaire

was also used by Almeida (2007) in a work that

sought to identify, from a list of 23 Knowledge

Management initiatives, which ones were the most

and the less used; it was carried out in small and

medium size enterprises (SMEs) in the northern

region of Portugal.

The second block begins with two questions

about employees' Internet access and Intranet use in

the organization. The next seven questions aim to

identify the Web 2.0 tools used by the organizations

through the Web 2.0 components (McAfee, 2006).

The last group of questions aims to find out the

degree of use of these tools.

All the questions considered five alternative

answers: 1: Yes, before 2007; 2: Yes, after 2007; 3:

No; 4: No, but intend to use in the next 24 months;

5: Does not know.

In December 2009 questionnaires were sent via

e-mail addresses to the 26 banks. At the same time

questionnaires were sent directly to four employers

personal e-mail addresses, obtained through direct

contacts of one of the author of this study that works

in this sector.

All questionnaires sent to general addresses had

no answer. All the direct contacts got answers,

giving a success rate of 15.38%. It must be

emphasized that responses came from four out of

five largest national banks in terms of market share

in both loans and deposits from customers. All

people who answered to the questionnaire are male,

graduates and holding positions of leadership in the

organizations.

4 RESEARCH RESULTS

The results were analyzed using Microsoft Excel and

SPSS for Windows. Table 1 presents the average

values related to Knowledge Management practices

and table 2 presents the results related to Web 2.0

tools.

Considering the specificities of the sector it was

considered appropriate to compare the results with

those reported by Almeida (2007), which discusses

the use of KM practices, but in Portuguese SMEs;

we concluded that the average values in banks are

higher than in the SMEs. Is noteworthy to know

SMEs are more than 90% of Portuguese enterprises.

It was also concluded the Intranets are more

available in banks than in SME companies. On the

other hand, although the investigation submitted in

banks shows a greater access to the Internet,

statistically speaking the difference is not

significant.

The institutions believe they have good systems

for information search. The use of warning systems

and content authoring systems was also a reality,

although not with a significant existence in the

surveyed institutions.

5 CONCLUSIONS

This study allows inferring that Knowledge

Management practices exist in the banking sector,

and that Web 2.0 is also present, although there is no

uniformity in its use.

It can also be noticed that practices related to

KMIS2013-InternationalConferenceonKnowledgeManagementandInformationSharing

370

Table 1: KM practices average values.

Table 2: Web 2.0 tools in Portuguese banks.

knowledge capture and acquisition are most

common, together with practices related to the

increase of workers skills, that is, knowledge

creation.

Web 2.0 tools can improve knowledge sharing

and are mostly used internally and not widely used

in banks' websites, probably due to the

characteristics of these organizations. This sector is

ruled by bank secrecy and characterized by the high

use of information control.

For future study, our research will be directed to

understand how the next generation of proactive,

contextual and adaptive web tools, will drive further

innovation in the financial sector, overcoming the

challenges of privacy, security and proprietary

information.

The new direction for the mobile network opens

enormous new possibilities for business. The study

of how the adoption of these tools will affect banks

is another direction for future research.

Confidence from until

PoliciesandStrategies‐

Yourfirmororganisation:

hasawrittenknowledgemanagementpolicyorstrategy 2,75 0,50 0,80 1,95 3,55

hasavaluessystemorcultureintendedtopromoteknowledgesharing 2,75 0,50 0,80 1,95 3,55

haspoliciesorprogramsintendedtoimproveworkerretention 2,03 1,37 2,18 ‐0,15 4,20

usespartnershipsorstrategicalliancestoacquireknowledge 2,28 1,45 2,31 ‐0,03 4,58

Leadership‐

Inyourfirmororganisationknowledgemanagementpracticesare:

aresponsibilityofmanagersandexecutives 3 0,00 0,00 3,00 3,00

aresponsibilityofnon‐managementworkers 2,00 1,41 2,25 ‐0,25 4,25

aresponsibilityoftheknowledgeofficerorknowledgemanagementunit 3,00 0,00 0,00 3,00 3,00

explicitcriteriaforassessingworkerperformance 2,25 1,50 2,39 ‐0,14 4,64

Incentives‐

Yourfirmororganisationspecificallyrewardsknowledgesharingwith:

monetaryincentives 1,50 1,73 2,76 ‐1,26 4,26

non‐monetaryincentives 1,5 1,73 2,76 ‐1,26 4,26

Knowledgecaptureandacquisition‐

Yourfirmororganisationregularly:

capturesandusesknowledgeobtainedfromotherindustrysourcessuchasindustrialass

3,00 0,00 0,00 3,00 3,00

capturesandusesknowledgeobtainedfrompublicresearchinstitutionsincludinguniversi

2,28 1,45 2,31 ‐0,03 4,58

dedicatesresourcestodetectingandobtainingexternalknowledgeandcommunicatingit

3 0,00 0,00 3,00 3,00

encouragesworkerstoparticipateinprojectteamswithexternalexperts 3,00 0,00 0,00 3,00 3,00

1.5TrainingandLearning‐

Yourfirmororganisation:

providesformaltrainingrelatedtoknowledgemanagementpractices 2,28 1,45 2,31 ‐0,03 4,58

providesinformaltrainingrelatedtoknowledgemanagement 2,28 1,45 2,31 ‐0,03 4,58

usesformalmentoringpractices,includingapprenticeships 2,25 1,50 2,39 ‐0,14 4,64

encouragesexperiencedworkerstotransfertheirknowledgetoneworlessexperienced

3 0,00 0,00 3,00 3,00

encouragesworkerstocontinuetheireducationbyreimbursingtuitionfeesforsuccessfull

3,00 0,00 0,00 3,00 3,00

offersoff‐sitetrainingtoworkersinordertokeepskillscurrent 3,00 0,00 0,00 3,00 3,00

PortugueseBanks

ConfidenceInterval=95%

KMPractices

verag

Standard

deviation

Web2.0components

Confidence from until

Yourorganization

Search‐Ithasaneasierinformationsearchsystem? 2,75 0,50 0,80 1,95 3,55

Extensions‐Ithasapplicationswithsearchenginesthataswellasprovidingtheinformationrequested,also

recommendssimilarinformation?

0,75 1,50 2,39 ‐1,64 3,14

Signals‐Ithasapplicationsthatalertusersofitsnewscontent? 1,75 1,26 2,00 ‐0,25 3,75

Authoring‐ Ithasapplicationswhereuserscanenterandshare

information? 1,75 1,26 2,00 ‐0,25 3,75

Links‐Allowsuserstocreatehyperlinksbetweenpagesoftheintranetand/orotherapplications? 0 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00

Tags‐Ithastoolsintheapplicationsthatallowuserstosortand/ororganizetheconte nt? 0,78 1,48 2,36 ‐1,59 3,14

SomeoftheseWeb2.0featuresinpreviousquestions(queries,recommendations,alerts,etc.)arepresent

yourorganizationwebpage? 1,25 1,50 2,39 ‐1,14 3,64

Intheapplicationswithintheorganizationandareusedbymostusers? 2,00 1,41 2,25 ‐0,25 4,25

Intheapplicationswithintheorganizationbutarelittleused? 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00

Onlyinonedepartmentornotpresentinorganizationmostimportantdepartments? 0,53 0,98 1,57 ‐1,04 2,09

Inseveraldepartmentsoressenciallyinthemostimportantde partme nts? 2,50 0,58 0,92 1,58 3,42

verag

Standard

deviation

PortugueseBanks

ConfidenceInterval=95%

DiagnosisoftheUseofWeb2.0ToolsinthePortugueseFinancialInstitutions

371

REFERENCES

Almeida, G. F. de O. C. de, 2007. Diagnóstico da

maturidade da gestão do conhecimento nas pequenas

e médias empresas portuguesas. Universidade do

Minho. Available at: http://repositorium.

sdum.uminho.pt/bitstream/1822/7030/1/Tese.pdf.

Andriole, S., 2010. Business Impact of Web 2.0

technologies. Communications of the ACM, 53(12),

p.67-79.

Bughin, J.; Manyika, J.; Miller, A. 2008. Building the Web

2.0 Enterprise. Available at: http://

download.mckinseyquarterly.com/Web2.0.pdf

Chui, M., Manyika, J., Bughin, J., Dobbs, R., Roxburg, C.,

Sarrazin, H., Sands, G., Westergren, M. 2012. The

social economy: Unlocking value and productivity

through social technologies. Available at: http://

www.mckinsey.com/insights/mgi/research/technology

_and_innovation/the_social_economy

CFL, C. for L. 2002, OECD Knowledge Management

project Report - Danish pilot-survey, Available at:

http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/23/56/2756535.pdf.

Coakes, E., 2004. Knowledge Management – a Primer.

Communications of the Association for Information

Systems, 14, p.406-489.

King, W. R., 2007. Keynote paper: knowledge

management: a systems perspective. International

Journal of Business Systems and Research, 1(1), p.5-

28.

Kirchner, K., Razmerita, L., & Sudzina, F. 2009. New

Forms of Interaction & Knowledge Sharing on Web

2.0. In M. D. Lytras, E. Damiani & P. O. d. Pablos

(Eds.), Web 2.0 The Business Model. New York:

Springer.

McAfee, A. P. 2006. Enterprise 2.0: The Dawn of

Emergent Collaboration. MIT Sloan Management

Review(Spring 2006), 21-24.

Matuszak, G., 2007. Enterprise 2.0: the benefits and

challenges of adoption, Available at: www.kpmg.com

Mentzas, G., Kafentzis, K., & Georgolios, P. 2007.

Knowledge services on the semantic Web

Comunications of the ACM, 10(50), 53-58.

Nonaka, I. & Konno, N., 1998. The concept of “Ba”:

Building a foundation for knowledge creation. In

California Management Review. pp. 40-54.Use the

"Insert Citation" button to add citations to this

document.

Pinto, M.P., Castro, F. & Morais, M.P., 2005. A

Framework for Characterizing Knowledge

Management Systems. In European Conference on

Knowledge Management (ECKM 2005).

Raman T. V., 2009. To ward 2

, beyond web 2.0.

Communications of the ACM, 52(2).

Raeth, P. et al., 2010. The Adoption of Web 2.0 in

Corporations : A Process Perspective. In Americas

Conference on Information Systems. Available at:

http://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2010/405.

Sutter, J., 2009. Tutorial : Introduction to Web 2.0.

Communications of the Association for Information

Systems, 25(1).

Tim O’Reilly & Battelle, J., 2009. Web Squared : Web 2.0

Five Years On. Available at: http://

assets.en.oreilly.com/1/event/28/web2009_websquared

-whitepaper.pdf.

KMIS2013-InternationalConferenceonKnowledgeManagementandInformationSharing

372