Users and organizations often set up their own microblogging service – free and open source software is available for this purpose.[21] Hosted microblogging platforms are also available for commercial and organizational use.
Considering the smaller amount of time and effort to make a post this way or share an update, microblogging has the potential to become a new, informal communication medium, especially for collaborative work within organizations.[22][23] Over the last few years communication patterns have shifted primarily from face-to-face to online in email, IM, text messaging, and other tools. However, some argue that email is now a slow and inefficient way to communicate.[24] For instance, time-consuming "email chains" can develop, whereby two or more people are involved in lengthy communications for simple matters, such as arranging a meeting.[25] The one-to-many broadcasting offered by microblogs is thought to increase productivity by circumventing this.
Another implication of remote collaboration is that there are fewer opportunities for face-to-face informal conversations. Workplace schedules in particular have become much busier and allow little room for real socializing or exchange. However, microblogging has the potential to support informal communication among coworkers and help it grow when people actually do meet afterwards. Many individuals like sharing their whereabouts and status updates through microblogging.[citation needed]
Microblogging is therefore expected to improve the social and emotional welfare of the workforce, as well as streamline the information flow within an organization.[22] It can increase opportunities to share information,[23][26] help realize and utilize expertise within the workforce,[23] and help build and maintain common ground between coworkers.[22] As microblogging use continues to grow every year, it is quickly becoming a core component of Enterprise Social Software.
Dr. Gregory D. Saxton and Kristen Lovejoy at the University at Buffalo, SUNY have done a study on how nonprofit organizations use microblogging to meet their company needs and missions, with an emphasis on Twitter use. Their sample included 100 nonprofit organizations, 73 of which had Twitter accounts, and 59 that were considered “active,” or sent out a tweet at least three times a week. In a one-month time period 4,655 tweets were collected for analysis from these organizations.
They developed three categories with a total of 12 sub categories in which to place tweets based on their functions, and classify organizations based on the purpose of the majority of their tweets. The three head categories include information, community, and action. Information includes one-way interactions that inform the public of the organization's activities, events, and news. The community head category can also be broken down into two sub categories of community building and dialogue intended tweets. Community building tweets are meant to strengthen ties and create an online community, such as tweets giving thanks or showing acknowledgement of current events. Tweets meant to create dialogue are often interactive responses to other Twitter users or tweets invoking a response from users. Action tweets are used to promote events, ask people for donations, selling products, asking for volunteers, lobbying, or requests to join another cite.
Through their analysis, Saxton and Lovejoy were able to identify nonprofit organizations’ main purpose in using the microblogging site, Twitter, and break down organizations into three categories based on purpose of tweets: 1. “Information Sources,” 2. “Community Builders,” and 3. “Promoters & Mobilizers.” In their discussion of the study, they stated that they believe their findings are generalizable to other microblogging and social media sites.[27]
