What’s the ROI of social media for an employer brand ?

Last week I was invited by Weavlink to facilitate a series of workshops on the ROI of social media for employer brands. Attendees were mainly HR people with uneven maturity levels but who were deeply investigating the area. Of course it was not possible to do deep inside the issue in half an hoyr but here’s how I structured my presentation to make them think about their own model.

1°) Introduction

• It’s a concept that’s hard to get with our traditional thinking models. Do you know the “streetlight” story ? A guy is walking around a streetlight in the middle of the night. A passer-by comes and ask him what he’s looking for. “My keys”. “Wait…I’m gonna help you”. After a few minutes of unsuccessful search, he asks : “Are you sure you lost them here ?”. “Not at all but this is the only place where’s there’s enough light to search”. We need to learn to search beyond the streetlight !

• There’s no mathematical model because such systematic models don’t work for activities that are not systematic, that are about working on knowledge and information, where everything is exception and unique. We can’t equate people and interactions.

2°) What’s your goal ?

• Being on twitter, Facebook or wherever is not a goal. It it was, companies would find themselves idle in spaces where they would not know what to do because no one would know the goal that’s strived toward. They would be tossed, react insread of act and put themselves in danger. So, what matters before all is to know why they move into these media.

Quick reminder on Norton and Kaplan’s strategy maps. Working on intangible only creates a potential that has to be used into formal activities to reach tangible goals.

• All successful social media initiatives (internal or external) share a common point : they aim at improving the delivery of a process or activity, in this case it could be recruiting, building a corporate image etc…

• Social media don’t change the nature or goals of an HR department but are one more tool they can use to fullfil their goals. Hence the need for segmentation : social tools (and each of them taken alone) has a varying importance depending on the targeted population (you won’t recruit you CEO on Facebook or a Yer with an ad in the NYT)

• That’s not because no mathematical formula exists that what is done can’t be measured as well as the impact on the efficiency of a given processus.

• 3 challenges for the employer brand : sourcing, image, engagement.

• Then, what matters is not to wonder what are the impact of social media toward these challenges but how to use and include them in strategies that aims at addressing these challenges.

• If any improvement can me measured in the way any action plan is executed in termes of speed, quality, scalability or cost, then we have answers to the ROI question.

[Read more...]

Links for this week (weekly)

  • “I’ve been thinking about this Scott Berkun article for a while : Calling Bullshit on social media.

    This is a question I’ve always asked myself whenever preparing a blog post or a presentation on Enterprise 2.0.

    Sameer Patel defines Enterprise 2.0 as the enterprise state once it has implemented social media inside the organisation. So we’re spot on the topic, and the question is how to make sure we don’t get carried away and start BSing while evangelizing enterprise 2.0 ?

    Ten questions to ask yourself while preparing your homework to make sure you don’t get caught by the @berkun and the @dahowlett of this 2.0 world … And Hypertextual ten answers to convince myself I am not that BullshitCallable.”

    tags: enterprise2.0, evangelization

  • tags: web2.0, enterprise2.0, collaboration, CISCO, casestudies, knowledgesharing, ROI, value, valuecreation

  • “Isaac Getz, professeur en innovation à l’ESCP, a reçu le prix Syntec Conseil en management pour avoir décrypté “une forme d’organisation des entreprises peu répandue mais qui permet aux sociétés d’afficher des résultats supérieurs à leurs concurrentes”. Ce mode d’organisation qu’il appelle “Liberté SA” (Freedom Inc. en anglais) est censé favoriser l’auto-motivation des salariés. L’idée du chercheur étant que “des employés responsables et libres de décider sont plus productifs”. Les entreprises ainsi organisées sont plus performantes ou plus rentables que leurs concurrentes, notamment grâce au surcroît d’implication des employés et à la réduction de l’absentéisme, selon lui. “

    tags: management, empowerment, organization, productivity, hierarchy, financialperformance, initiative, autonomy, isaacgetz

  • “Millennials view work as a key part of life, not a separate activity that needs to be “balanced” by it. For that reason, they place a strong emphasis on finding work that’s personally fulfilling. They want work to afford them the opportunity to make new friends, learn new skills, and connect to a larger purpose. That sense of purpose is a key factor in their job satisfaction; according to our research, they’re the most socially conscious generation since the 1960s.”

    tags: generationy, millenials, humanresources, mentoring

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

Facebook is topping Google ? If I were an IT guy I would wonder why…

As you may have heard these last weeks, Facebook topped Google for the first time. Not in market value but in hits. Anecdote for some, beginning of a new era for others, many things have been said about that. On the other hand, it’s was a general public event and many may have thought that it had very few importance for the walled world of corporate IT and did not deserve more attention than a secondera phenomenon.

In this post I’ll try to measure the extent of the news and, then, wonder if it means anything special for corporate IT departments.

That’s “only” Google !

Let’s stick to the facts : Facebook got more connexions than Google and that’s all. It does not mean that “more than the half of all connections on the web took plage on Facebook”. Google is not the web and Facebook won’t become the web either even if that’s a goal that’s not hidden at all. This only fact is enough to dampen some kind of enthusiasm.

So let’s avoid conclusions such as “people don’t want to live outside of social networks anymore”, “Facebook is the web”, “Facebook will replace the web” etc.. It may become true one day but the existing numbers can’t make us draw such conclusions at this point.

Now imagine we’re at an IT department’s place.

[Read more...]

What do employees need to turn 2.0 ?

The paradox of enterprise 2.0 is that even when businesses manage to go on their fear of the unknown and decide to embrace this new paradigm, they are often not followed by their employees even if they bring a solution to their problems with solutions that are supposed to make their work easier.

Everybody now understands that employees need mor than tools and communication campaigns to adopt new practices and behaviors even if that would be beneficial to them. Even saying “do whatever you want, we trust you” doesn’t work”.

Here’s a little checklist of customer’s expectations.

• What are the expected outcomes ? What am I supposed to “produce” on these tools, and what is expected from the groups / communities I’m a part of.

• What are the limits to my responsability ? To what extent am I autonomous, beyond which point should I ask for permission or refrain from doing anything.

• Is it a part of the job I’m paid to do ? Will my manager or any person paying me with his budget consider my activity as wasted time ? Will they blame me for participating or reward me ?

• What’s my exposure ? How to control it ? What kind of information am I supposed to share ? Facts or opinions that engage me ? Can I set my own limit ? Who can access what ? And what will the information I share be used for ?

• Show me first and then I’ll follow.

• Before asking to me to any new thing, show me how all that can help me to do what I’m already doing today, how it makes it simpler and easier.

• Don’t scatter my attention. I already have so much to do so don’t distract me with pointless information and issues that have no added value according to my objectives and daily tasks.

• Don’t break my “personal workflow”. I don’t have time to play with 3 applications, aggregate information, forward it, copy/past. In this case I’ll focus on the tool that is not the best but that can do a little bit of anything, even not in an efficient way, without having to switch between several apps. (email ?)

• Don’t add but remove. For 50 years, the response to any new issue was a new layer of solution (tools, rules, practices), These layers have been piling up for decades and we’ve reached such a point that they slow me down and are sometimes contradictory the one with the other. Instead of adding new layers, remove those that are actual burdens, doesn’t make any sense anymore and are useless.

• Don’t bring me into one more experiment. I’m not a guinea-pig and the time I’m investing penalizes me in my real work and is even bad for my image and reputiation. I’m ready to learn, to explore, provided it won’t be shut down in 6 months and it will help me in my day-to-day word.

• How information will be used ? Reused ? It will help me to know what to share.

• Teach me, show me how to articulate the structured and unstructured part of my work, the formal and informal ones. And I hope tools take this need for articulation into account because I don’t want to play the human connector.

• Teach me how to seamlessly integrate it in my daily work and how to translate it into a simple, scripte, reassuring routine I’ll follow without thinking about it.

Just read “Sales 2.0″ : it’s not about technology

I often mention salesteam to demonstrate the benefits of social networks to support more effective business practices. There are many reasons to that : this is a field where indicators are eay to find, it’s a result-oriented population (more than any other) and it’s strategic enough to make businesses take it seriously instead of using it as a screen of smoke before letting it decline far from people’s eyes.

But Sales 2.0 is much more than that and that’s the subject of a book I rencently read : Sales 2.0: Improve Business Results Using Innovative Sales Practices and Technology Those who think it’s only about using new tools for buzz or lead generation may be disappointed. For the others, here’s what you’ll learn :

• Before all it’s about rethinking processes. People often confuse 2.0 and vague. Sales are a process and there’s no reason to change it. In the other hand the steps, means and players have to change and evolve.

• A state of mind : people involved in the process have to change priorities, to switch from a “how to make them buy” attitude to a “how to create value together” one/

• A larger scope : switching from “us the salers and them the customers” to “all together to solve a problem”.

• Sales activity will look more and more like consulting, supplier/customer relationship will turn into a sustainable partnership.

• It’s, as usual, a matter of alignement. Sales and marketing team have to work closer and head in the same direction. Evaluations, bonuses, incentives, rewards must be aligned with this new way of doing things.

• New roles are emerging : “inside sales”, “Sales Devs” are essential to this new approach to built consistent and efficient teams.

• Technology matters but comes after : it’s used as a catalyst but is neither the process nor the challenge.

The book first defines what “sales 2.0″ are and are not, then tackles proccess, roles and leadership issues, a few detailed case studies and ends with some advices to start the transformation process.

L’ouvrage commence par définir ce que les “Sales 2.0″ sont et ne sont pas, aborde les notions de process, de rôle, de leadership, enchaine avec quelques cas pratiques et termines avec quelques pistes pour démarrer le processus de changement chez soi.

To know more about Sales 2.0…just order it.

Notice : this is not a book about social CRM. Don’t confuse…

Links for this week (weekly)

  • The objectives and intensity of collaboration networks and social networks are almost entirely different. This key distinction leads to the manner and means of networking that that are indeed different. Sure enough, there is some overlap between the two types of networks but this is neither an imposing nor a driving fact.

    tags: collaboration, socialnetworking, collaborationnetworks, socialnetworks

  • “As you can easily imagine, the point that concerns me most is the fact that you can not really make Social CRM works (but the same could be said for good social media marketing initiatives) if you are not ready to involve the entire organization, preferably before even starting with social media. Doing this requires an Enterprise 2.0 and a structure that maps external communities to appropriate internal interactions in order to socially produce the best answers and to implement smoothly/profitably the insights from the market.

    Starting from the inside has also the effect of connecting different silos, helping them to trust each other and to gain the necessary sensitivity, beginnig to work together for the external community without necessarily waiting for the entire organization to evolve in a manner consistent with the needs of social media .”

    tags: enterprise2.0, socialcrm, customers

  • “As you can easily imagine, the point that concerns me most is the fact that you can not really make Social CRM works (but the same could be said for good social media marketing initiatives) if you are not ready to involve the entire organization, preferably before even starting with social media. Doing this requires an Enterprise 2.0 and a structure that maps external communities to appropriate internal interactions in order to socially produce the best answers and to implement smoothly/profitably the insights from the market.

    Starting from the inside has also the effect of connecting different silos, helping them to trust each other and to gain the necessary sensitivity, beginnig to work together for the external community without necessarily waiting for the entire organization to evolve in a manner consistent with the needs of social media .”

    tags: enterprise2.0

  • “« Les DSI et DRH seront souvent une même personne parce que toutes les opérations seront conduites ou coordonnées par l’informatique. » Cette prédiction du Dr Wilhelm Bauer, directeur de masters à l’université de Stuttgart, conclut l’étude « L’avenir au travail », menée par le cabinet Future Foundation pour le compte de Google. Elle s’inscrit dans la partie prospective : l’entreprise en 2020.”

    tags: hr, IT, ITdepartment, collaboration

    • Un grand compte qui a déployé un réseau social d’entreprise explique ainsi avoir remplacé le libellé “expertises” par “centres d’intérêt” par peur d’un blocage de la part de la DRH. La gestion de l’expertise fait en effet partie de ses prérogatives, et il n’est pas certain, par ailleurs, qu’elle aurait accepté l’idée de l’auto-déclaration.
    • Les DRH doivent porter les projets collaboratifs, car ils impactent les usages et le management
    • e rôle de la DRH va devenir plus central et les DSI vont redevenir DSI & Organisation. Il est indispensable que les deux entités soient jointes ».
  • tags: enterprise2.0, collaboration, socialnetworks, typology

    • typology3.png
  • “What to do When Process Modeling Doesn’t Work”

    tags: process, processmodeling, bpm, adhoc

  • “Here are several tips for building and managing a buyer-centric sales process.”

    tags: sales2.0, sales, marketing, leadgeneration

    • Teach your prospects. Give them something unexpected. Help them do their jobs, or lead their lives, easier, better, faster. Become a trusted source of information not about what you’re selling, but the outcome it enables and represents
    • The right buyers want what you’re selling. They want to remain in control. They will make decisions based on their own criteria, not yours
    • You need to become an active part of the community in which your buyers exist, and you need to do it by participating as a peer, not as a seller.
    • If you make the sale, provide a product or service worth talking about, enable your customers to become sellers on your behalf.
  • tags: socialmedia, B2B, marketing, communication, innovation, crisiscommunication

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

Setting up a pilot is not only a matter of sizing

Andrew McAfee recently raised the question Michael Idinopulos discussed some months ago :  is the concept of “pilot” relevant to enterprise 2.0 and should we drop it. Some (excellents) thoughts can also be found on Emanuele Quintarelli‘s blog.

In fact the cause of the discussions comes from some assumptions that are not always true :

1°) Pilot applies to over-the-flow activities

2°) The only thing that makes a pilot different from a mainstream project is the number of participants

In this case where reaching a critical mass is…critical, limitating the number of participants is an heresy that is equivalent to shooting oneself in the feet at the beginning of the projet. If something as to be limitated, rather limit the duration than the size (what was brilliantly done at CSC for instance).

That said, thninking that the underlying question with pilots is only about sizing may be a bit hasty.

1°) The question of a preliminary phase

Before going further, what matters is to know if a preliminary phase is needed before scaling up the project. Obviously the answer is yes : businesses need to be sure they can manage things and get some kind of benefits on a smaller scale before applying a new concept to the whole organization.

So the issue is not there but in what this phase is made of. Starting with its goal.

2°) What goal ?

I won’t elaborate too much since I already tackled this issue a few weeks ago. It’s important to know whether this phase aims at taming new approaches that will be implemented on a larger scale anyway or at assessing if the new approaches have to be implemented or not. The stake is not trivial : it’s hard to involve employees in something that can be shut down anywhen, with no certainty about its durability.

3°) What name ?

As strange as it may seem, the way this phase is called is not neutral. On the user side first (pilot = be sure we won’t give up…but may seem a little bit top down / experimentation : you are guinea-pigs, we don’t promise anything) but also on the business side, some namings making it easier to get the “strategic project” label and the exectuive sponsorship that comes with.

Maybe some have found the “magical name” that reconcile both needs.

4°) What kind of social experience ?

Maybe that’s where things should start. Deploying enterprise 2.0 logics and tolls is not about doing something uniform. As I mentioned in the past, there is “social for communities” and “social for teams“. In other words, gathering an undefined population around some topics and optimizing the “organic” functioning (departments, teams…) of an organization are two complementary but different logics. I won’t elaborate on the management and leadership differences between both and the difference bewteen conversations and interactions, what matters is that in the one case a critical mass is needed and in the other a deeper work on alignment and integration in workaday practices and actions is  key. In short, that’s one more case where distinguishing between in the flow and over the flow matters, and that’s a part of the pre-rpject analysis that’s too often overlooked.

The truth is that both approaches have to articulate and live together in the organization, so it should be the same in a pilot. In the other hand, according to the goals (it’s possible to experiment many social experiences at the same time) businesses should now that some experiences have a defined and limited number of participants by definition and some others need a critical mass.

So the matter is neither sizing nor “pilot or not pilot” : it’s about knowing what is aimed at, what the organization is trying to validate, assess, learn…and the rest will naturally come.

Community Management is a “processus in processum”

Even if community management is still an unclear concept with changing boundaries, many senseful and insightful things are slowly emerging about it. A few weeks ago, I came across a very interesting web tv show about it (sorry…it’s in french). While watching the video, a sentence grabbed my attention. You know, the kind of thing that makes you think “yes…that’s it…he/she gets it all right”. The sentence was “community management is a processus” (and the author Sandrine Plasseraud from We are Social).

It’s possible that I’ll go a little bit far from what they said and meant on the video in the following lines but I’d like to go further in this discussion that I find senseful. As just once won’t hurt, I’ll mainly address external community management issues even if, as we’ll see, they have very little value if not connected to the inside.

Community Management is a processus

I’d like to apologize to those who like the pretended “freestyle” and “village fest” side of community community management, but not only it’s a processus but a processus that has to be tightly managed. Whatever are the autonomy and the seniority of the person in charge (and most of all when both are low), it’s about:

• defining the goals of the activity

• defining its scope, the issues to address and not address, what to talk about and what to never talk about.

• defining how information will be processed : what kind of information has to be pushed, what kind of information has to be pulled to internal business people and what to do with it, how follow-up will be managed, what kind of reporting, what actions ?

• Autonomy level : how far community managers can do, what kind of initiative can he take, to what extent can he speak in the name of the company.

• Organizing subsidiarity : when out of the autonomy scope, to whom must he refers, ask an anwer, a permssion, an action.

• Setting-up support for community managers : in the above-mentioned case, be sure that the person who’ll be asked something by the community manager know that answering and taking any necessary action is not facultative and that it should be done in a time limit that’s compatible with customer or audience’s expectations.

• Define the “online style” : what tone to adopt, how close and friendly can the community manager be.

I agree it’s a little bit constraining but that’s the price to pay to make community managers feel comfortable, make them sure they won’t be any mistake. It will also help the company to be comfortable with its communitu manager, trust him. Community managers need to know what they can and can’t do, that they’ll be supported in their initiatives and get the needed help in the same way that organizations need to be sure their CM won’t put them at risk. It’s a matter of reciprocal trust : guidelines are the best way to carry on while waiting for trust to emerge and each player to deserve it.

But that’s not all. The above statements make it clear that community managers are not isolated protuberances on the web isolated from the rest of the company but their actions have to take place within clearly definined and known business areas. If community management is a processus in itself, it has to take place within more traditional processus. [Read more...]

Links for this week (weekly)

  • “In short, intranet 2.0 is very similar to a social intranet, but you can have 2.0 tools and not have a social intranet. Intranet 2.0 is simply a vague label (just as vague as the Web 2.0) applied to the collection of social media tools being used on the corporate intranet.”

    tags: intranet2.0, socialintranet, socialmedia, participation

    • For the record, intranet 2.0 (note the consistent use of a non-capitalized “intranet”) merely describes, albeit vaguely, an intranet that features 2.0 or social media tools. Intranet 2.0 applications can include all of the fine social media we’ve come to love and overuse:
    • I defined the social intranet last week with the release of The Social Intranet white paper:

      An intranet that features multiple social media tools for most or all employees to use as collaboration vehicles for sharing knowledge with other employees. A social intranet may feature blogs, wikis, discussion forums, social networking, or a combination of these or any other Web 2.0 (intranet 2.0) tool with at least some or limited exposure (optional) from the main intranet or portal home page.

  • “# The Entrepreneurial Scope Assessment Framework: This tool enables CIOs and other business executives to evaluate the magnitude of the opportunity for an entrepreneurial organization. It is a requisite assessment to understand the scope of the task facing IT, as well as other business units.
    # The Strategic Change Road Map: This level-by-level tool provides a clear-cut assessment of the tasks that must be performed by an organization in moving from the current mind-set and behaviors of cutting costs to a mind-set that is entrepreneurial. It delineates today’s situation, compared with the desired future and identifies the changes that will transform today’s organization, infrastructure, processes and mind-sets into tomorrow’s state.”

    tags: gartner, IT, costreduction, costs, ITdepartment, culture

  • “I’ve been getting quite a few questions and comments about intranet 2.0 and social intranets. Here are a few footnotes and suggestions for supporting intranet social media:”

    tags: intranet, intranet2.0, socialintranet, process, changemanagement, culture

    • Process
      Intranet 2.0 needs process and procedures. Moreover, it requires change
      management. The success of intranet 2.0 has more to do with the latter, change
      management (not technology). If you build it they will not come… necessarily.
      Most employees haven’t heard of a wiki so why would they use one? Employees
      need to be educated, sold, and cajoled to use these tools initially until they
      become a repetitive action that is part of the culture.  
  • “What is government 2.0? Tim O’Reilly describes it as government working as a platform. Others might describe it as applying the technologies that make up Web 2.0 to the practice of government, including blogs, wikis, social networking and crowdsourcing. The simplest way of describing government 2.0 may be any technology that helps citizens or agencies solve problems, either for individuals or the community, and enables government to operate more efficiently or effectively.

    The following are five ways that the U.S. government is using social media to deliver services or engage citizens in making better policy.”

    tags: government2.0, socialmedia

  • “My fundamental belief is summarised in this statement:

    The challenge is that the technology needs to become embedded in the business processes. If ERP was all about business processes, Enterprise 2.0 has to do with business relationships.”

    tags: socialmedia, organization, erp, businessprocess

    • You never know what will click in an organisation. There is a steel organisation where professionals with more than 20 years of experience working in a brick and mortar company suddenly took to microblogging. It happened because it takes less time to use and learn. They did not take on to the bigger tools that allowed them to upload fle, because it was diffcult to include in the day-to-day working.
  • The slide represents the results of polling customer, throughout the conference, about their concerns, their questions, about adding social channels to their customer service efforts. I know the slide is a little fuzzy but I am hoping to make it just a bit clearer through this post.

    tags: customers, customercare, customerengagement, socialmedia, conversations, customersupport

    • - In order to be successful in the long run you must define a business plan and understand how social media will weave into your existing strategy.

      - You need to set up Social Media Usage guidelines and make these part of your HR policies, IT policies, and train current staff as well as all new hires.

    • Typically, management of social media begins in marketing.  In my view the most important thing is that marketing and customer service jointly own, jointly take part, in the customer communication.
    • How do we measure satisfaction with Social Media?

      Let me ask you this…. How do you measure satisfaction today?  Social media is just another channel to interact on, right?

  • “It’s still a given that Enterprise 2.0 apps won’t end up standing alone. But putting them together with goal management tools could give them a more pivotal role than if they just get sucked into generic collaboration or business software suites. “

    tags: enterprise2.0, collaboration, content, contentmanagement, processes, goals, cubetree, successfactors

    • Since projects are usually tackled by people working in teams rather than individuals operating in isolation, that data needs to be presented in a team context.
    • Sharepoint will not help you form or manage teams. It won’t identify the data that’s necessary to complete the project.”
    • If you’re forming a team, you start with the people. The content and data they access is determined by who they are
  • “My previous post, Skip the buy-in and get ’em addicted, is about using a Proof of Concept and beyond model as a fast track to your fulfilling your vision. A way to penetrate the hierarchy in an unorthodox way, and get them to “feel it” and see living proof of it’s usefulness, rather than a Powerpoint pitch, or proposal document (or as living proof of your proposal).

    It’s cheeky, but you are doing them a favour at the same time, as you have living contextual proof of the viability (by going ahead and doing it yourself), as opposed to buy-in approval, strategies, time, more time, and some more time…only to not get approved.”

    tags: enterprise2.0, adoption, pilots, experimentation, proofofconcept

  • “Il y a un grand débat au sein des entreprises pour savoir si elles doivent ou non interconnecter leurs solutions de gestion de contenu avec des réseaux sociaux grand public. Ce qui nous conforte dans notre volonté de proposer ce type de fonctionnalité, c’est que les individus sont devenus matures par rapport à cette problématique. Aujourd’hui, les entreprises sont conscientes que cette interconnexion est recherchée par leurs collaborateurs, en particulier ceux de la génération Y. “

    tags: ECM, socialnetworks, opentext, integration

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

Will Adam Smith drive businesses in the future ? I’m doubtful…

We often say that implementing enterprise 2.0 is useless if it’s done in an 1.0. Said like this, even if “we” understand what it means, it’s still hard to get for many people.

That refers to enterprise models named according as two eras of the internet : one named 1.0 and the other 2.0. In practical terms it’s about opposing a top-down and directive model an emerging relying on the existence of an “invisible hand” that, in the same way as Adam’s Smith theory in economics, would make people personal actions and choices contribute to a collective purpose without the need of organizing anything.

Anyway, it’s an opposition between an out-of-breath dirigist model and harrowing one that means for businesses “it’s critical to your survival but you don’t have to do anything…just trust your employees and let them do what they decide to do”. In the same way that the economical word realized that Adam’s Smith’s invisible hand needed some guidance, the same conclusion is imposing upon businesses that can’t rely on serendipity to ensure their sustainability and success.

Here’s a quick comparison of “1.0″, “2.0″ and “2.0 rationalized” adoption principles.

1.02.0Rationalized 2.0
Command and controlLet people doset up goals, build a framework, give guidance and let people do
Adoption is order-drivenAdoption is driven by desireAdoption is driven by sense
Everythings has to be scriptedPeople are free to make decision and actA light script helps people being reassured and then they grow bold and become more autonomous
Only what can be used immediately and provide immediate benefits is allowedAnything may be useful one dayNeed to articulate in the flow and over the flow activities, give each a framework a timeframe
Everything is verticalEverything is horizontal and networkedHorizontal and vertical articulate, verticality is a responsability and decision making model, horizontality is a model for getting things done
Focus on the organic structure (team, departments...)Focus on communitiesOrganic and communities articulate.
What is not expressly authorized is prohibitedPeople should respect the "etiquette". Nothing is mandatory.Everything that's out of a defined framework is subject to validation, the rest is authorized is possible. The "Don't be stupid" rule applies.

Generally speaking it seems obvious that Serendipity and the Invisible hand, even if they can bring many benefits to excessively rigid organizations, aren’t viable business or organizational models alone.