Kathleen Lepori
EDC 638C.21
CYCLE 2: REPORT
In cycle one, the action I took was to form a group of advisors, present my project (a
peer-to-peer (P2P) Support Group) to them for approval and feedback. The goal of establishing a
peer support network within my place of employment, WestEd, is to help reduce the number of
calls to the company’s internal help desk. The purpose of actions taken, in all three cycles, was
designed to help resolve an on-going problem, generate new knowledge and deepen my
understanding of WestEd’s infrastructure.
My action for cycle two was to bring together willing participants, design and post a pre
survey and map the results of that survey (see Figure 1 p. 6). While the actions I took in cycle
two generated new ideas and valuable reflections, the objective and prominent question of my
research project remained unchanged, “In what ways does a peer-to-peer support group within
WestEd alleviate the demand on our Information Services help desk?” It is important to realize
that the ultimate goal of an action research project is not to have a fixed outcome that can be
applied everywhere, but to produce a personal theory and invite others to learn along with the
researcher (McNiff & Whitehead, 2006). One of the primary purposes of my project is to turn a
predicament into a problem, and then solve it (Lave & Wenger, 1991). And we are faced with
just such a predicament at WestEd—an already overburdened help desk that is facing the roll out
of a new email system.
Framing the issue (predicament) was not as much a “complex task” as depicted by
authors Coghlan and Brannick in their book, Doing Action Research in your Own Organization.
Most employees were fully aware that WestEd would soon be converting to a new email system
and were apprehensive about the transition and how it would personally affect them, their work
1
Kathleen Lepori
EDC 638C.21
and their clients. WestEd’s help desk personnel already had a recurring problem with response
time and solvability issues. It was feared, by many employees, that this new web-based email
system would only intensify the existing problem. The real challenge for me was establishing the
criteria for selection and evaluation of who should be Peer-to-Peer (P2P) Support Group
members.
Forming the P2P was a somewhat arduous process. Only after having received
permission from my advisory panel and from Richard Wenn, Director, Information Services, did
I solicit volunteers within the Mathematics, Science and Technology program. McNiff, Lomax &
Whitehead highly recommend in their book, You and Your Action Research Project, that
participants be provided written communication including an ethics statement and an assurance
of confidentiality. I constructed, and later distributed, a letter of introduction, a
guidelines/consent form and a one-page summary of my action research project. The purpose of
my letter was to promote a spirit of co-operation and collaboration, which I feel is vital to action
research.
I received an immediate, overwhelming response and was able to select twelve
participants from a pool of interested staff. Richard Wenn had asked me to send him the list of
participants so that his staff could set up special features for just our P2P support group. If
feasible, in addition to my own study, we were asked to beta test Zimbra Chat for Richard’s
department—Information Services.
Fortunately, I learned early on that using Zimbra Chat, previously selected as our main
source of communication, would not be possible. Zimbra Chat itself is in beta testing and there is
no current method of texting more than one person at a time. It is important to my research to be
2
Kathleen Lepori
EDC 638C.21
able to use group chat because it is a fast, effective means of communication for a group our size.
Since I am already very familiar with Skype, I chose it as our principal method of
communication. Volunteers were connected via Skype and given instructions.
Additionally, participants were asked to complete a simple, five-question pre survey
using SurveyMonkey. Within two days, all members had established their Skype account, taken
the survey, read the guidelines for participation and signed the consent form. Although very
impressed (and pleased) with the quick response, I was not totally surprised at the reaction to the
request for participation. While researching the literature review, I learned that “people who have
a strong organizational orientation are likely to be sensitive to the needs of help seekers and to
adjust their advice to the requirements of those asking for help” (Constant, Sproull and Kiesler,
Mar/Apr96, p. 121).
The results of the survey proved interesting and vital to understanding the individual
profiles of the P2P membership. The survey indicated that 73% call the help desk at least once a
month and that 18% call at least once a week. The reasons for calling the help desk varied. The
group responded with multiple answers that included software questions (55%), server and
connectivity issues (72%), and other technical problems (64%). Most employees responded that,
before calling the help desk, they first tried to figure the problem out by themselves. Many stated
that they would ask a fellow employee, but a large number, 18% percent, indicated that they
would call the help desk first. (See figure 1 below).
3
Kathleen Lepori
EDC 638C.21
Figure 1. Peer-to-Peer Pre Survey Results
The pre survey was an excellent indicator for plausible reasons why the help desk is so
overwhelmed with calls and help tickets. If 18% of my group (who are considered fairly
technically savvy) call the help desk as a first line of defense, and 18% call at least once a week,
9% ever other week and 73% at least once a month, then WestEd with a population of over 700
employees, generate approximately 56 calls a day to the help desk. Considering the sheer number
of calls that the IS department field on any given day, they do a respectable job keeping up with
the demand.
Another interesting element uncovered by the survey, is that the majority (67%) of
respondents were more satisfied with the response time and answers they received from their
peers than from the help desk (30% satisfied). This suggests that a type of peer-to-peer support
system, already in use within WestEd, is preferred over utilizing the services of the help desk
4
Kathleen Lepori
EDC 638C.21
staff. Learning theorists Lave and Wenger would call this a community of practice—groups of
people who share a passion for something and learn how to do it better as they interact
regularly. However, even though employees favor asking each other for assistance (as the
numbers indicate), they still call the help desk far too often.
Zimbra, WestEd’s new email service, was introduced to staff on Monday, April 6th. The
IS department spent the weekend converting staffs’ email from Thunderbird to Zimbra.
Employees had not yet been trained on the new email system and came into work Monday
flooding the help desk with phone calls and help tickets. On Tuesday, April 7th, the P2P support
group officially began collaborating as a team, assisting each other with Zimbra questions, using
Skype as the primary mode for communication.
Skype worked very well for our purpose. As evidence, I have eighty-one pages of chat
text as part of my qualitative documentation. Not only were numerous questions asked and
answered, members shared some valuable insights as to how the newly formed P2P Support
Group was working for them. One member typed that he was “off to [company sponsored]
Zimbra training” which triggered an instant reply from another P2P member who had just taken
the training the day before, “Good luck with training! I think we're much more advanced as a
group.”
Not all members were able to be online and actively participate every minute of every
day. I anticipated that this would be the case, however, I didn’t foresee the following text from a
P2P member, “I wasn't on yesterday so am trying to catch up on reading the chat messages.
Looking forward to this week's Q&A!”
5
Kathleen Lepori
EDC 638C.21
By the end of the study, participants were starting to understand the purpose of our
support group as one member affirmed, “I have a question regarding accessing the server
remotely. Is there special software or something I can set up (without bugging IS) to be
able to upload to the server?” She understood the big picture—don’t bug the help desk
unnecessarily—ask the P2P Support Group first.
Critical conversations about the research should take place at all stages of the process
(McNiff, Lomax, Whitehead, 2003). During one such exchange, my advisors thought it might be
interesting to find out why the twelve employees accepted the invitation to participate in my P2P
Support Group: Was there any bias because they know me personally, or because the members
were all within the MST program and they have some sense of loyalty?; Did they have expertise
already with Zimbra?; Did they enlist because they thought it would further their career at
WestEd?; Did they participate because they wanted to be the first and only employees using the
chat feature in Zimbra?; or, Were they legitimately interested in helping each other in a
collaborative, supportive environment? Rather than ask these very personal and revealing
questions on an online survey, I have decided to save them for the individual interviews in cycle
three.
Knowing when and where to look for data is essential. Seeing and recording how
learning enters into action and not merely looking at the action itself is central to good data
collection (McNiff & Whitehead, 2006). In order to help generate quantitative data, my advisors
suggested that I ask each participant to keep a record of the number of times they help one of
their peers outside of the P2P support group with Zimbra questions.
6
Kathleen Lepori
EDC 638C.21
I designed a self-reporting form (using Excel) on which each participant would keep a log
of:
o
What question/s was asked?
o
What action was taken?
o
Was the problem resolved to the requestor’s satisfaction?
o
How much time did it take?
o
What form of communication was used (email, chat, IM, telephone, etc.)?
The results of these participant logs will be reported in cycle three.
The advisory panel thought it would be advantageous to pose the same question to the
help desk as was asked in the P2P support group to see how the answers and response time from
the help desk staff compared with that of the P2P. I thought this was an excellent suggestion, but
realistically, it would defeat the purpose of my action research project, which is to reduce the
number of calls to the help desk.
We decided, at the last advisory panel meeting, that 30 days would be an adequate
amount of time for the study to run. After the study’s completion, it was suggested that I conduct
one-on-one interviews with each of the P2P members in order too provide additional qualitative
data to my final report. Using a standard, open-ended interview format will help me gain a better
understanding of each participant’s perspective on the pros and cons of being part of a
supportive, collaborative environment.
In part, I have been able to maintain the focus of my action research project by defining
“a desired future state” (Coghlan & Brannick, 2005, p. 95). I define that future state as being a
thriving community of collaboration and continual peer support within WestEd. Greer et al,
7
Kathleen Lepori
EDC 638C.21
reports that a successful organization is one in which its workers feel empowered and take pride
in the things they do helping one another meet the organization's mission.
As I reflect on the cycle two process, I am grateful for the opportunity to have
experienced personal growth and learning from knowledgeable peers; increasing my profile
within the WestEd organization; and, experimenting with newly acquired knowledge (Coghlan &
Brannick, 2005). Situated learning is an excellent model of learning in a Community of Practice
(CoP). The improvement in my personal practice has already begun to develop throughout the
spiral of both action research cycles and, in addition, has increased the capacity for self and
group reflection (Fisher, K., Bennett-Levy, J. & Irwin, R., 2003). My action research attempts to
do just that—the learning is situated in a specific context and embedded within a particular
environment.
I am now about halfway through my cycle-three action in which the quasi-experimental
study has ended and the data collection begins. Participants have received a post survey,
submitted their logs and will soon be interviewed. I will soon receive data that the help desk has
been collecting, on my behalf, during the study.
8
Kathleen Lepori
EDC 638C.21
References:
Coghlan, D & Brannick, T. (2005). Doing Action Research in Your Organization (2nd ed). Sage
Publications: London
Constant, D., Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. (Mar/Apr96). The Kindness of Strangers: The Usefulness
of Electronic Weak Ties for Technical Advice. Constant, Organization Science,
Mar/Apr96, Vol. 7 Issue 2, p119-135, 17p; (AN 4434877). Retrieved on October 7, 2008
from
http://sd8zr6ln7t.search.serialssolutions.com.lib.pepperdine.edu/?sid=CentralSearch:EBR
&genre=article&atitle=The+Kindness+of+Strangers%3A+The+Usefulness+of+Electroni
c+Weak+Ties+for+Technical+Advice.&volume=7&issue=2&title=Organization+Scienc
e&issn=1047-70
Greer, J., McCalla, G., Collins, J., Kumar, V., Meagher, P., & Vassileva, J. (1998). Supporting
Peer Help and Collaboration in Distributed Workplace Environments. International
Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 9(159-177). Retrieved on August 23, 2008
from
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Supporting+peer+help+and+collaboration+in+distri
buted+workplace&hl=en&lr=&btnG=Search
Fisher, K., Bennett-Levy, J. & Irwin, R. (2003). What a GAS! Action research as a peer support
process for postgraduate students. UltiBASE. Retrieved on August 22, 2008, from
http://ultibase.rmit.edu.au/Articles/nov03/fisher1.htm
McNiff, J. & Whitehead, J. (2003). You and Your Action Research Project (2nd ed). Sage
Publications: London
9
Kathleen Lepori
EDC 638C.21
McNiff, J. & Whitehead, J. (2006). All You Need to Know About Action Research. Sage
Publications: London
Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate peripheral participation.
Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press.
Situated learning. (2008, November 18). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 00:17,
April 22, 2009, from
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Situated_learning&oldid=252559623
10