2.0 has to be aware of business orientation

0
1490

In the “let’s make 2.0 a performance oriented tool instead of a nice concept”, some more ideas.

What are enteprise 2.0 specialists biggest challenges ? Overriding fear and have the tools adopted in order to demonstrate their added value.

Because by dint of hearig about agility, informal, off project spontaneous connexions between individuals, decision makers realize than, even if the concept seduces them and if they think it will lead to gains, it’s something that has nothing to do with the organization they’ve known for ages. Hence the conclusion : it’s the reverse so it’s the opposite…so it’s risky…so I’m affraid. In the following paragraphs we’ll see it’s rather about complémentarity and that there’s no reason to be afraid.

What structures the enterprise ?

Hierarchy. It’s the representation of the way decisions are made, so it’s vital. At a given moment, there must be someone who’ll decide without appeal…and assume. An enterprise without hierarchical organization chart is not viable because it can’t make decision, or it doesn’t know which decision it has to enforce. Any decision taken without respect of hierarchical rules constitues a potential danger. But enterprise 2.0’s purpose is not to kill hierarchy. A first received unfounded idea.

If hierarchy is the way we decide, looking at an organizational chart shows it has nothing to do with the way we work. The way we work is determined by process and workflows and lead us to the concept of BPM. Whatever is produced (we have to keep in mind that enterprise organization purpose is production) without respecting these rules is dangerous in terms of costs, respect of specifications, insurance etc… Enterprise 2.0 purpose is not to impact formal process. Another received unfounded idea.

Now, let’s have a look at the differents steps of a process. In the context of increasing dematerialization of products and services that’s ours, most of the times, in individual or a group receives an information which he has to enrich, transform, or sometimes they’re asked to create a new information, on condition that he finds the necessary basis. Once it’s done he transmits the informaion to another person who as to accomplish another task. How does it really work in the day to day job ?

If the concerned person knows how to do….he does. But, due the the increasing complexity of problematics and tasks, he asks. He asks his subordinates to do a part of the job, he asks a colleague fort advice, and the more specific the request is, the more he’ll try to know if it has been done before inside the organization, or if someone in the compagny who has the skills to help him understand, to help him to go faster. That’s where the “enterprise 2.0 effect” impacts things. By “industrializing” and providing people with tools to do what they used to do as a rush job. It also allows to accumulate  all these informations, in order not to reinvent the wheel every two days in different parts of the organization.

So “enterprise 2.0” doesn’t implicate what is the very  foundation of the organization but helps where it reaches its limits or is inaccurate. For the same reasons 2.0 is inaccurate for structuring.

I’d also like to add that enterprise 2.0 also works in “off projects” modes, which allow to favor innovation (since in a “projet mode” the purpose is not to explore new ways but to deliver in previously defined ways).

So the point is to get the 2.0 approach into day to day job. It may start with very little things, without changing big things in the organization. Lastmonth someone told me “we set up a 2.0 platform for a project team, there’s a lot of very valuable things insid, informations we were unable to get so far, but it’s useless”. “Ah ? Why ? “. “It doesn’t help us to make any improvement, it’s like the platform has its own life in its own bubble”. “Do you have weekly meetings about the project ?”. “Yes of course”. “Why don’t you take ten minutes every week to have a look at these contents and decide whether some need a specific plan of action, if an idea had to be followed ?”. “Humm…we didn’t thought about that”.

That’s the proof, if needed, that enterprise 2.0 is only a part of a global projets and that it’s not a standalone concept : it has to be connected to what already exists. As I often say, it’s no use trying to turn enterprise into 2.0, what has to be done is to connect both 1.0 and 2.0 sides in the one and only reality that matters : the enterprise whithout consideration of version.

And as I read it there :   “what corporations are saying right now: give me 2.0 that works with my business”. That’s clear…