Collaborative Computing to Improve Work Process - Selecting a Collaborative Creativity Tool for a...

Just an initial demo map, so that you don't start with an empty map list ...

Get Started. It's Free
or sign up with your email address
Rocket clouds
Collaborative Computing to Improve Work Process - Selecting a Collaborative Creativity Tool for a Pre-sales team. by Mind Map: Collaborative Computing to Improve Work Process - Selecting a Collaborative Creativity Tool for a Pre-sales team.

1. Negatives

1.1. Mind42/Mindmeister

1.1.1. Cost of Internal Maintenance and initial license cost

1.2. SharePoint

1.2.1. Not as easy to visualize the problem or solution

1.2.2. Not seen as a fun tool to use.

1.2.2.1. Blog tool is good

1.2.2.2. Document management is a chore

1.2.2.3. Seems like a redundant task to use it rather than a value added tool.

1.2.3. No clear way to mark opinions.

1.2.4. Document is not linked to the thought process as easily as using a map.

1.2.5. Cost of internal maintenance

2. Mindmeister

2.1. Tool is a bit too simple in use, need more shortcuts to building the visualization

3. Problem Statement

3.1. The Company

3.1.1. Criteria of Evaluation

3.1.1.1. Allows for Collaborative Creativity

3.1.1.1.1. Through collaborative discussion

3.1.1.2. Clearly communicates relationships between items posted, who posted them, referential documentation, and further tasks required

3.1.1.2.1. Solution discussion among team members

3.1.1.2.2. Trust and reputation of poster

3.1.1.2.3. Dated information to ensure it is up to date information

3.1.1.2.4. Source of information for further research

3.1.1.2.5. New node

3.1.1.3. Provides team members with confidence that they understand the problem and solutions suggested.

3.1.1.3.1. Can question information or opinions

3.1.1.3.2. Validates the problem statement

3.1.1.4. Available 24/7

3.1.1.4.1. Time Zone independence

3.1.1.5. Secure access via a web portal

3.1.1.5.1. Cloud based or internal VPN based as long as it is secure access.

3.1.1.6. Fun and easy to use, so the team accepts it as a tool of their work with the team

3.1.1.6.1. Acceptance of the tool is critical to success

3.1.1.6.2. Ability to learn the tool quickly without training

3.1.1.7. Total Cost of Ownership

3.1.1.7.1. License Cost Per year for 10 users

3.1.1.7.2. Extra costs due to maintaining the site, if any.

3.1.2. Team

3.1.2.1. Subject Matter Expert (SME)

3.1.2.1.1. Could be multiple SME's.

3.1.2.2. Project Manager

3.1.2.3. Developer

3.1.2.3.1. Could be multiple Developers

3.1.2.4. Implementor

3.1.2.5. Sales Person

3.1.3. Competition

3.1.3.1. Are we effectively competing in the market place after using this collaborative creativity tool?

3.1.3.1.1. Stay ahead of the competition.

3.1.4. Customer Based Customized Solution

3.1.4.1. Are we getting good feedback from the customer on the final results of the solution provided?

3.1.4.1.1. Would they agree to be a reference?

4. Possible Solutions

5. Recommnedations

6. Our Wiki

6.1. Solutions

6.2. Problem Definition

6.3. Recommendations

7. Grad Project

7.1. Collaborative Manufacturing for a Chocolate Plant

7.1.1. Products

7.1.2. Demand Factors

7.1.3. Manufacturing Scenario

7.1.3.1. Customer Demand

7.1.3.1.1. Order Entry

7.2. Agility in Consumer Packaged Goods Company

7.2.1. MFG Scheduling

7.2.2. MFG Line Team

7.2.3. MFG Quality

7.2.4. MFG Raw Materials Procurement

7.2.5. MFG