-
Innovation Advice from Procter & Gamble CEO A.G. Lafley – Harvard Business Online’s Scott Anthony
The CEO has to be the “Chief External Officer” to manage external pressure and the “Chief Innovation Officer” to push the innovation agenda forward.
-
Réseautage organisé chez Ernst & Young Canada : Tout sur le Reseau en recherche d’emploi et en poste
-
According to Leisa, they are: small teams, motivated people, limited planning, minimal scope, small projects, rapid release, responsiveness, and iterations. Leisa noted that the essential point of her presentation was that “there are other ways to manage projects than ye olde fashioned waterfall methodology.”
-
Project Management 2.0 Blog: Collaboration. Project Management. Definition of Project Management 2.0
I use the term Project management 2.0 to describe an evolution of project management practices inspired by Enterprise 2.0 tools. Traditional project management software implies project manager acting as a proxy in all project related communications, thus reducing productivity of project manager and the rest of the project team. New tools bring collaboration into the planning process, making the team much more productive and changing not only the technology, but process as well.
-
Big Blue Embraces Social Media
Over the past two years, IBM has been busily launching in-house versions of Web 2.0 hits. “We’re trying to see how things that are hot elsewhere can be fit for business,” says Irene Greif, an IBM Fellow who heads up Collaborative User Experience.
-
How Do You Lead Solcialutions? | socialutions
While fundamentally true the missing link is not considering the adoption of social tools as a means to transform operations, culture and customer interfaces.
The other misunderstanding is the value to internal resources learning how to use the tools to transform the culture into an ongoing quest for Socialutions for all stakeholders benefit.
Links for 05/31/2008
Links for 05/30/2008
-
Ready, Fire, Aim? | socialutions
The difference in applying social technologies to existing business operations is not necessarily changing what you do, i.e. communicate with stakeholders, create new value propositions etc., rather it is more about changing how you do things.
-
- Does the initiative help people resolve problems or does it just mask problems?
- Is the initiative tied directly to improving peoples experience with your business operations?
- Have all the stakeholders (employees, customers, markets etc.) been made aware of and understand the purpose a social media initiative?
- What are the key metrics of measurement for measuring the impact of any initiative?
- Are social media initiatives aligned with other initiatives and tactic that aim at a common strategic purpose?
-
Links for 05/29/2008
-
Bacon’s Rebellion: The Power of People Networks
One of the key concepts in Richard Florida’s new book, “Who’s Your City?” is that of the “clustering force,” a knowledge-economy phenomenon that reward people for congregating in places where they can network and collaborate with one another. (
-
I would submit a hypothesis: The capacity of a region for innovation can be measured by the number of formal and informal networking organizations that create “bridging” opportunities across the broadest possible spectrum of society. The richer and denser the skein of bridging networks, the more easily ideas can be communicated through a region, the more spontaneously creative ideas will erupt, and the more speedily people can convert novel notions into business opportunities.
-
-
Building Social Media Relationships
-
Connect with people through common interests
-
Get to “know” the people I interact with because they share information
-
Constantly learn.
-
Carry on conversations with people as if I were in the next office
-
-
ROI et TCO Le perfologue le blog de la performance
Demeuré pratiquement inchangé depuis le début du siècle dernier (Du Pont de Nemours), le calcul n’envisage que les retours financiers directs. Particulièrement pratique pour évaluer la rentabilité des investissements générant rapidement du cash, il est totalement inadapté pour mesurer la potentialité des projets de nouvelle génération.
-
La principale difficulté se situe d’ailleurs à ce stade de la réflexion. Mettre en place une solution technologique comme un ERP, un produit CRM ou un système de Business Intelligence s’inscrit dans une démarche globale de concrétisation d’une stratégie établie. En aucun cas, un projet de ce type ne peut être entrepris après en avoir découvert le besoin par hasard, en croisant un consultant persuasif ou un client exigeant.
-
-
Projects As Social Interactions — Project Shrink
“A project is a localized energy field comprising a set of thoughts, emotions, and interactions continually expressing themselves in physical form.”
Reaching strategic goals : intangible assets matter. The Strategy maps approach to Enterprise 2.0
As I said in a previous post, there’s one and only one way to know whether something is worth or not : whether it supports the enteprise’s strategy, whether not. In the first case it’s worth being done, in the second it’s worth being forgotten. In concrete termes, that mean the only question in the enterprise 2.0 debate should be to explore if, and in which way, it can support strategy.
As enterprise 2.0 aims at taking the most of intagible assets, we have to wonder if those assets are really useful or if they’re just “nice to manage”, and if what we put in this big bag called enterprise 2.0 can really help to harness them. This will be the purpose of a coming series of posts.
The problem with intangible things is that even if we feel they are very important, i’s hard to mathematically quantify their contibution. We know they help to create value without being able to say how and how much. Because of that, when it’s time to make a decision about investment, this area is often left aside.
Since I needed a starting point, my first though took me to the balanced scorecard. Without any prejudice, just because ar first sight I felt there were some possibilities there.
My first thought were confirmed : even if it’s reaaly interesting and powerful, it’s often partially applied, and our balanced scorecard becomes unbalanced due to the priority given to the financial side.
Norton and Kaplan must have come to the same conclusions since they improved their system with the concept of Strategy Maps. Unfortunately most companies focus on the original concept expressed in 1992. Strategy maps dates from 2001 and obviously too few companies really paid attention to what was really important with that.
Instead of presenting different perspectives and hope an equal importance will be given to each, strategy maps show the correlation between all the perspectives in the purpose to support strategy. And the result is meaningful
Of course it’s only a framework that has to be adapted to each particular case but we have things to learn from that.
For example we can see that organization capital, information capital and human capital are the base of every formal business process which contribution in value creation we know how to measure. This sound obvious but shown like that it makes things clear. Without the appropriate clture it’s impossible to support any strategy. It’s the same for key competences, information, management methods etc.
In 60% cases, enterprises have the right strategy but they fail to support it. Perhaps because fundamentals are neglected.
In the coming posts we’ll talk about those differents aspects, what they mean, how to measure them, how to value them. And once we’ve finished we’ll be able to say whether enterprise 2.0 can help, in its technical and organizational side.
Some elements to begin :
• Value creation is indirect : intangible assets don’t create value by themselves, but through their use in business process.
• Value is contextual : the value of intangible assets depends on their alignment with strategy
• Value is potential : if business process don’t use those assets, their value remain potential and can’t be fully realized.
• Assets are bundled : intangible assets have to be use in conjuction with tangible assets.
For those who want to go furher I recommend you to read the excellent “Strategy Maps“.
Links for 05/26/2008
-
Blonde 2.0 » Blog Archive » Incentives In Online Social Communities
-
The conference was focused on building online communities, community platforms, and the business case for extending the conversations among employees, customers, and partners through mediated and facilitated online means [...] This experience helped me to understand better how work will change as more and more of our work and interactions will be conducted in these online communities.
-
Their definition of a what constitutes a “2.0 Community” succinctly suggests the boundaries and features:
-
-
HR a talent let down – paying attention to the elephant under the table
Whilst this is yet another example of HR bashing I am concerned that the profession does not seem to be focusing on the right issues at the moment. In the current environment where issues such as the “credit crunch” (and other elephants) demand focus on matters such as talent, organisational design and lean processes this research suggests that we are otherwise engaged
-
1. More than 70 percent of HR Organizations focus on Risk Avoidance rather than Risk Taking;
-
5. While only 22% of leaders were assessed as expert, only 15% were considered expert by non-HR respondents.
-
Links for 05/24/2008
-
Mais une nouvelle génération de collaborateurs arrive, plus imprégnée par cette culture du jeux en ligne, ce qui pourrait faire évoluer les mentalités. De plus, les nouveaux logiciels sociaux facilitent aussi le travail collaboratif. Finalement, une révolution dans les organisations n’est peut-être pas si lointaine…
-
Time for proof – how concrete are the results of Componence?
So what are the concrete results then of Componence? Can I quantify them into hard cold financial benefits? What are the soft results? I guess both, I’ll try to give it a shot.
You can find the "original" french version of this blog here
