An internal social network replaces nothing but improves the existing

August 5, 2011 By Leave a Comment

Summary : A social network ? Yes but to replace what ? How many times did we hear this question at the time this kind of tools was entering the corporate workspace. Considering social networks as something that will replace existing tools often lead some misuses, for things it was not designed for. As a matter of fact, enterprise social networks were more designed to make up for lacks than for improvement. Marketing approaches did not help either since saying “xxxx is dead, let’s throw everything away” was so easy. An interesting approach is to separate the social aspect from the network tool in our thoughts. The network is a tool that completes the existing, social is a conceptual and functional approach that improves the existing and creates synergies between all the tools, the resources that use them and the resources they handle.

This is a periodical question that comes like season. What ? The obsession, of wondering what part of the information system will be made obsolete and replaced by an internal social network.

Let’s sum up. We had “will ESNs replace the intranet ?”, “Will ESNs kill the email ?”. “Will ESNs replace the corporate directory ?”. “Will ECM be replaced by conversation ?”. “Will ESNs replace collaboration tools ?”. And what was the final conclusion ? “Yes…but no. ESNs are a part of a wider system that needs us to rethink the way we interact with others, with information, the notion of collaboration”. Since it appeared that adding a tool did not solve anything without having a more global approach, the the discussion moved to….replacing another tool. And so on…

As a matter of fact :

• ESNs to replace the intranet ? Except for those who have a simplistic vision of intranets or a SMB without very specific needs, ESNs only conver a part of the needs.

• ESNs to replace email ? Without a deep thinking on the way information is consumed, acted on, on the way exchanges are organized on a global scale, on the way we analyze, process and prioritize it, thinking that a social network will replace email and solve the information overload is nothing but illusory. [Read more...]

Filed Under: Management & HR, Software & Tools, Web & Usages Tagged With: , , , , , , ,

Intangible objects and abstraction at work : the need for a case centric environment

July 15, 2011 By 1 Comment

Summary : If we try to understand what work is actually in the knowledge economy, it appears that it’s mainly about handling, gathering and organizing intangible objects to deliver a tangible result. Many tools are provided to give these objects a material existence on our screens to make their manipulation easier. At the end, a dual conclusion emerges : not only the skills that are necessary to this kind of work are seldom acquired or even taught but tools, as they exist today, make the situation getting even worse by splitting the matter between tools and dividing employees’ attention. Employees spend more attention connecting pieces of information together than solving problems. The shift from a tool centric to a case centric environment is necessary.

We all know that everything that has to do with work models transformation, collaborative practices, new value creation creations is a matter of anything but technology. Solution is to be found in HR, management, sense making rather than in lines of code. But, by endlessly repeating that technology comes second (or even third), we may miss some essential points.

The nature of work is evolving and requires new skills. In other words, it’s getting more and more about gathering resources together, put them in context and leverage them than than about delivering preset processes with predefined resources. To do so, employees need to handle “objects”. This is a vague word chosen in purpose : it refers to more or less entities like pieces of knowledge, information, data from a customer case or elements of context of a given case, people who own other relevant objects. In fact, rather than “while working”.

All these operations, this conceptual gathering of abstract entities is sometimes done by a single person but, most of times, in a collaborative or participative way.

An objective analysis of the situation as it can be observed in any organization any day makes us learn two lessons :

[Read more...]

Filed Under: Management & HR, Software & Tools Tagged With: , , , , , , , ,

Toward a filtered or reduced reality ?

July 1, 2011 By 1 Comment

Summary : contrary to our visual environment that can be significantly improved by contextual information, our work environment is characterized by a profusion of information that makes it hardly usable. The issue is not related to a global information overflow but rather to lack of relevance, at a given moment for a given person that looks like an overflow but is not : users have to fight against flows of irrelevant information that grab their time and attention and, once done, try to find the relevant information. Some solutions can be considered to fix the problem : tools making it easier to filter an unified information flow, “analytics” allow to push relevant information according to user’s history and context and, last, the role of curators that can be at as helpful as community managers to help employees to find their way in an information maze.

Many people are thinking about what augmented reality can improve in our day to day lives. That’s true that the visual representation of our real environment is still an land that is bein explored and that lots of thing are still to be invented or discovered in this field. But what about another visual and informational environment that is the one that’s on our computer’s screens (as well as our tablets and mobile phones).

Since the quantity of information that’s being generated increases every day, that, in addition to being stocked where it’s not in anyone’s way (and where no one goes to find it), it’s now coming into flows, soon into activity streams. If all this information is not useful for everyone, a part of it is vital for someone and we’re facing what looks like information overload.

Let’s be clear : the matter is not that there’s too much information. Proof is users spend their time searching for some and complain about the irrelevance of what they get compared to what they need. Talking about overload here does not apply to a global phenomenon but an individual one and means that the purpose is not to reduce the volume of existing or received information but do in order to what’s received is useful. [Read more...]

Filed Under: Knowledge & Information management, Software & Tools

Information should go from tool to tool. End users shouldn’t.

June 4, 2011 By Leave a Comment

Summary : Even if there are lots of discussions on new ways of working and the tools that will make it possible, very little attention is paid to the matter that’s being worked and the reason why it’s worked. Employees, who need to gather knowledge, information and people from many tools, still don’t have any melting pot to do their work. As a matter of fact and contrary to the usual way of looking at it, tools and people need to articulate and follow each other around the matter employees are working on rather than scattering the matter between tools. The problematic people are working on is unchanging while the rest varies. What matters is to organize the mobility of objects in the context of work rather than the mobility of employees around tools.

When discussing the way people work (or should work), we use to focus on the organization of work (usages and management), tools (collaborative, participative etc…) but seldom pay any attention to the objects people work on. Thinking that work is all and only about adopting new tools and practices may be too simplistic if no one cares about what needs to be handled, gathers, put together, transformed in the context of work. These things may be of so many different kind that I’ll use the very generic word of “object” to call them. This word also seems very relevant in the context of a concept that is more and more talked about and is really key to understand what employees need to get their work done : “social objects”.

To get their work done, people need to find, enrich, improve, modify, put together, alone or in a collaborative may, “objects” as various as a “case”, a person, a file, a feedback, a procedure etc…in fact nearly any form of information available in the organization, This is one more evidence of the changing nature of work that is more and more about putting knowledge and people together and in context.

The biggest issue in change programs is not always to make people work this way. In fact they’re already doing so,  juggling with many tools and the information they contain, trying to be the middleware between all these things. The problem is that they’re given new tools that are supposed to fill some shortcomings but no attention is paid to how to pu all these new tools and info together. So the amount of useful and usable information can endlessly increase while users are still unable to make the most of it. And the reason is quite simple to get : users are equipped to handle objects in the context of the tool that “owns” them and not in the context of their work. [Read more...]

Filed Under: Economy & New Models, Knowledge & Information management, Recommended Bookmarks, Software & Tools Tagged With: , , , , , ,

Enterprise social network : a famous stranger

May 17, 2011 By Leave a Comment

Summary : enterprise social networks are the future of corporate IT, a tool overwhelmingly supported by employees because it will save them from email and favor the adoption of more efficient work practices. Sure ? Outside of  a circle of initiated (that is growing everyday), except for people who are in charge of such programs in their organization, the words “social network” and “enterprise” seldom come together in many employees’ mind. And, when it happens, it’s more about Facebook and brand management than work efficiency. The reason ? Few people have tried to understand what it’s all about, personal usages are hard to transcribe in a work context to articulate a clear value proposition and the ubiquitous image of Facebook is a real burden.

I had recently the opportunity of talking with a small group of people who had one thing in common : their title started with either “chief” or “director”. Suddenly, one said the magic word : “social network”. All but one had an opinion, a question, something to share about this topic. Nothing surprising since social network has become a very trendy topics in organizations over the years.

And then…crash ! The star of the conversation quickly became facebook and the focus came on information leaks, lower productivity etc., to the surprise of the person who launched the conversation and thought it was obvious that everybody around the table knew this kind of thing. Obviously they didn’t. Surprisingly I was expecting this kind of reaction.

Enterprise social networks are a paradoxical topic. Of course, you, who read this blog, are well informed about that. Of course, you, who are in charge of deploying such a thing in your organization, know what an ESN is. Now, ask the question around you, to your friends, family etc.. I’m sure you’ll get lots of ideas, opinions or concerns about “enterprise and social networks”. But nothing “enterprise social networks”.

We have to admit that, outside of a circle of initiated people, social networks are seen as an entertaining tool, sometimes as a tool for marketing and communication. This article from French newspaper speaks for itself. It says that CHROs get social networks better and better. And what do they say to illustrate their thoughts ? Recruitment, employer brand, image and general public social networks. And yet HR should have many things to say on the potential (and risks) of internal social networks….

ESNs are far from having “killed their father” (Facebook…even if many ESN solutions were already existing when FB became mainstream and open to all).

Ok, anyone who talks with “real people” out of the echo chamber already knows that. But knowing the causes to deal with the issue more efficiently can be worth.

[Read more...]

Filed Under: Enterprise 2.0 & Social Business, Management & HR, Software & Tools, Web & Usages Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , ,

Yers and corporate IT : the expected divorce is far from happening

May 13, 2011 By 1 Comment

Summary : gen Y-related myths seem to collapse the one after the other. After having been seen as sworn enemies of IT dept’s inflexibility because of their behaviors and the usages that come with, it seems that they’ve given in and happily accept what they’re given. Their opinion on IT departments is even quite positive. The reasons of this gap are worth being understood. Maybe that, for this generation, the struggle is more about the content of work than on tools.

Many things have been said on the famous generation Y. Most of all that this generation, used to simple and efficient tools won’t accept a work environment that looks rather like Jurassic Park and will lead the fight against IT depts found guilty of opposition to change and refusal to listen to the actual concerns of end users.

Members of this generations are now well established in organization and being to have management positions. The time for a first assessment has come. Are Yers the revolutionists we were told they were or, like in many other fields, did they become more consensual than expected (and sometimes feared) and put up with their IT environment without complaining ?

Forrester recently issued a study called “What Gen Y really thinks about your IT department” which conclusions speak for themselves.

• Yers are getting older and reaching senior positions. Now they can start changing things from the inside instead of complaining.

• They feel that their personal equipment is better that what they’re given at work but are not more likely to bring their own at work than the elder generations.

• They’re quite satisfied with the tools they’re provided with at work…and are even more satisfied than the elders.

• They see IT departments as partners rather than enemies :

 

 

So, what can we say about those numbers that won’t, in fact, surprise many people and only confirms the gap between how Yes have been oversold and what can be seen on the field ? Many possible answers, one not precluding the others.

• They adjusted to the workplace and fitted in the corporate mould while getting older, having more responsibilities to assume and discovering the constraints of real business.

• Yers are not tech-savvy, sometimes even less than Xers. They’re more involved with the content of work, the way people, work and collaboration models  and usages than with tools. Conclusion : the tools they’re given fit well with their current context and what they’re asked, with how organization actually work and collaborate. If Yers had a fight to lead, it would rather be about management, organization and the content of work instead of tools. Maybe the limit of the consumerization if IT is the one of corporate usages.

• IT depts are not as corny as it’s commonly said and are adjusting to today’s world.

Your opinion ?

 

 

Filed Under: Intranets and digital workplace, Management & HR, Software & Tools Tagged With: , ,

Sometimes you don’t have an intranet problem but a search problem

April 15, 2011 By 2 Comments

Summary : there’s a common belief according to which the raise of user generated content will improve information sharing in the workplace. It’s obviously a part of the solution but not the whole one. In many cases, organizations are not able to find anything on their existing intranet and the expected multiplication of content will even make things worse. A shared information that can’t be found is not better that no shared information at all. Thinking the social layer of the intranet also means thinking about search that is a strategic tool to browse and is also key to bring content and people closer in a relevant and contextual way.

Most of today’s intranets, those that are beginning to look really outdated, are often being criticized by users because they don’t help them to access relevant information and resources. Hence the wish to move to a social intranet (or intranet 2.0), thinking that allowing more user generated content will fill the gap by a better sharing of “field” information.

If this value proposition of the next generation of intranets makes sense, the keen interest for “social things” may turn heads away from core issues. Anyone who observed intranets in “transition phase” these last months must have noticed one thing :  increasing information sharing from field people solves part of the problem but intranets don’t make things findable today with the current amount of content, there are few chances things will improve in the future.

Bottom line : before thinking of socializing intranets (or at the same time), it’s essential to think about search engines. Specialists will find I’m laboring the point but the fact is this point is often underestimated.

A good search engine, when used smartly, helps to do many things :

- first, it helps to find contents. Not necessarily because people know the exact title of what they’re looking for but because the engine can understand the meaning of things.

- then, it finds things inside documents. When an intranet is made of thousands of things to .doc or pdfs people needs to download it’s vital. Building the intranet of the future does not mean neglecting documents of the past : they have to be, finally, made findable.

- we can also rely on the engine to link different kind of contents. It can be used to suggest relevant communities, documents and people within any other tool (CRM, BI….). Vital when it comes to linking social and business.

- building an unified search. It’s not acceptable, today, to have as many search engines as there are tools. Is it a user-centric attitude ? Search may be global and users may be able to get, with a single request, “official” content, user generated content, user profiles etc… Legacy existing content should also be indexed (Notes bases, ECM, shared directories etc…) because life was existing before the new intranet.

Thinking the social part of the intranet means thinking the whole intranet. Thinking that tags and tool-specific search engines, as powerful as they can be, will solve all the problems is a mistake. Intranets need a global search strategy that is at least is important as the question of content organization that will never be perfect and is destined for failure as the mass of available data will be skyrocketing in a near future.

 

Filed Under: Intranets and digital workplace, Knowledge & Information management, Software & Tools Tagged With: , , , , ,

Understanding social messaging concept and tools

April 1, 2011 By Leave a Comment

Summary :enterprise social messaging is much more complex to understand that a simple enterprise Twitter. It’s about articulating flows, value creation, usage in a very constrained environment. While there are lots of solutions providing social messaging functionalities, the concept is still hard to get for organizations that still lack keys for understanding. A situation that may change with the recently published study from N:Sight Research.

At first sight, social messaging is a very simple thing. A tool allows people to publish status updates and follow updates depending on the publisher or the topic. In short, that’s enterprise Twitter.

Beyond this shortcut that simplifies the concept, relies a complexity that organizations are still struggling to get. Behind principles that look quite simple relies the need to articulate all these things with business goals, workplace constraints, make it support usage scenarios that make sense. At the end, organizations find themselves having to choose between a large number of solutions with using criteria that are not only functional but may take into account the articulation of functionalities and sense and a business context.

N:Sight recently issued a comprehensive study on social messaging. It consists of a very clear analysis  of business needs, what it means in terms of usage and functionalities and ends with a benchmark of 14 vendors based on these criteria.

This study will help organization to understand what it’s all about, determine their assessment criteria and benchmark a wide range of solutions.

Here’s a management summary. The full study can be purchased here.

 

Management summary social messaging vendor study

Filed Under: Management & HR, Software & Tools, Web & Usages Tagged With: , , , ,

Enterprise social networking : the difference between voluntary participation and optional membership

March 22, 2011 By Leave a Comment

Summary : If participation in social networks can only be voluntary, only voluntary people should access the network. Is this assumption, on which many adoption programs are based on, relevant ? It’s the result of a mix-up between the network and its community part, between membership and participation. It creates a frontier between those who want to try and others, a frontier that limits the spreading of the “social phenomenon” and the related benefits. If, for most workers, the network is not something obvious, it may come to them instead of waiting for people to come to the network. Interest comes from passive exposure and not from concealing to non-members. A real enterprise 2.0 or social intranet implies that everybody is a member, can browse and read, that the network is a part of the IS, that profiles have a pivotal role. What does not prevent participation from relying on people’s goodwill.

Most of times, when an assessment is made on an internal social network project, we can hear “xxxx employees decided to join”. As a matter of fact, since participation can’t be mandatory, volunteers are asked to register. So it’s logical that only a part of them can be found on the network. So, for instance, we can have 80 000 employees who can access the intranet and 6,7,8 000 that decided to also access the social network. Is that an impressive victory ? If we consider that it’s only a first step on a global roll-out program it may be, but if we consider that’s the way things should work I don’t believe in such approaches (except for very specific cases.

Of course, participation in a social network can’t be made mandatory. But this assumption deserves further explanation. Social networks are often mixed-up with communities. Participation in communities can’t be mandatory and depend on people’s goodwill. But sometimes work groups are turned into communities and, in this case, the answer is different. But things are different for the network as such, what is nothing but having a profile (they can fill in or not) and be able to connect to others, follow them, get in touch with them, follow the activity of blogs, communities, wikis etc…

The truth is critical mass is key to a successful project.

The network will spontaneously attract those who are born networkers. Some bystanders will also follow them. At then end it’s about 10% of employees. Bystanders will slowly move away (except the few that will “get” the social thing). So the network will live on volunteers, some will give up because the system will bring them back to the party line but, at the end, this small group of people will be the center of gravity of the social platform. Provided they don’t get out of breath.

This way of doing things has nothing to do with transforming work or the organization. Those who want will do things differently…and that’s all. It will only happen among them because they won’t be numerous enough to make the whole organization move with them. That’s another example of the “social bubble” syndrome that can even be painful for participants that work in a way with some people and in another way with the rest of the organization.

We can bet that some will want to join them over time. But it won’t happen if they have to reason to try, to find a personal benefit and feel like keeping the “social way”. What can bring them there ? They may think they’ll be able to find, at a given moment, the answer to a problem or the person that will be able to help. If only 10% are on the network there are many chances the others will think that it’s not worth, that there are few chances what they need will be there.

Confusing mandatory participation with mandatory membership has obviously a negative impact. That’s not because no one can be forced to participate that not everybody could access the network. There are many reasons to that :

[Read more...]

Filed Under: Enterprise 2.0 & Social Business, Management & HR, Software & Tools Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , ,

Toward smarter information systems

March 4, 2011 By Leave a Comment

Summary : When we talk about working on information, we usually distinguish the work that’s been progressively dedicated to machines (mass processing of data according to pre-determined plans) and what remains the field for humans, a sharper and more qualitative approach to scattered and unstructured data. This second point lead organizations to organize accordingly, distinguishing between those who search, prepare and use these data. A dichotomy that has many chances to be questioned in a near futur as machines are getting able not only to explore unstructured data but also to understand questions and give answers.

When we have a look a the main components of any information system, we can see two poles coexisting :

• the “mechanical” one. It’s made of applications that replaced humans over time because they’re more efficient and reliable for some tasks, providing a substantial advantage both in termes of speed and quality, what means in terms of costs. They allow the mechanization of repetitive mass processing that need more calculations and processing power than intelligence and ability to react in front of unpredictable things.

• the “intelligence and knowledge” one. It’s made of applications that don’t replace humans but are supposed to multiply their intrinsic abilities that a machine does not have. Its about communication and collaboration technologies.

If we focus on the second point, it’s obvious that no machine can understand and treat unstructured data with the needed fineness. Should the need be about searching, using and make a decision relying on a huge mass of unstructured information without the existence of an history demonstrating what “a good decision is”.

On this part, the superiority of human versus the machines is about decision making. As for what’s about information search, it’s rather a burden but a necessary burden because even if the machine is powerful enough it’s unable to process a qualitative and contextual search on information.

But how long will that last ? [Read more...]

Filed Under: Knowledge & Information management, Management & HR, Software & Tools Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
« Older Posts
Newer Posts »