Change Your Culture by Changing Your Stories
“So how do you begin changing something so complex? Start by changing the stories that people tell.”
If you want to create a culture of communication, leave your BlackBerry at your desk when you go to important meetings. If your actions deviate from the norm, you can be sure people will tell stories about them.
Top Dogs Say Social Networks Have a Bite
“If attendees at KMWorld 09 needed any further convincing that working in interconnected environments where people operate in social networks is an important issue, hereâ€™s some brand new research out today from the Society for New Communications Research suggesting that C-level execs are increasingly taking this new set of conditions seriously!”
Professional decision-making is becoming more social â€“ enter the era of Social Media Peer Groups (SMPG)
Professional networks are emerging as decision-support tools
Reliance on web-based professional networks and online communities has increased significantly over the past 3 years
Matrix: The Four Social Support Strategies
“The challenge is that these teams are unable to scale, even a support team of ten full time folks at Comcast will have a hard time responding to all customers in all social channels. As a result, expect companies to resort to scalable ways to respond to customers, such as:
The Four Social Support Strategies”
1) Do Nothing: Use Legacy Support Channels
2) Employee Based Support: Employees Respond to Customers
3) Peer Based Support: Customer to Customer
4) Automated Social Support: Computer Generated Tweets
The Rise Of Networks, The End Of Process
“For decades, business planners have made a distinction between repetitive, lock-step processes, where very little variability is involved (think pharmacy), and more free-form, unstructured processes where a higher degree of variability is expected (think emergency room). Taking the abstraction of a process out of the world of chemistry, manufacturing, and logistics, and treating the people involved as so many chemicals, gears, or trucks seemed like a good idea in the past, but is not going to be workable, going forward.”
We will have to devise a new, richer way to think about people’s interactions — via social networks — and our connection to mechanical processes and devices.
We will still get some value out of thinking through business models structurally, and choreographing steps in production or the delivery of service. But the sophistication of machines and customers means that more and more of the steps will have a wider range of alternatives,
But the major shift here is conceptual. Processes, like the IV checklist, will still be with us, but they will have a lowercase ‘p’, and be understood as being secondary to higher business priorities, like the humane treatment of the medical patient, or the rights of travelers, or the need to superachieve customer satisfaction with consumer electronics.
Managing Employee Innovation Communities
“Tapping a diversity of perspectives has been empirically proven to increase the quality of ideas. Indeed, this is one of the benefits of setting innovation communities. By investing some time in establishing a community management plan, organizations will see a nice return on their innovation efforts.\n\nThere are three distinct phases to innovation community management:\n\n 1. Pre-Launch\n 2. Early Community\n 3. Mature Community”
Providing direction is a key component
of surfacing ideas that will make a difference. The focus areas can start out limited to a set of key opportunities and issues that need addressing. Organizations can also use their top strategic initiatives as their innovation target areas.
In the initial days and weeks after launch, there should be a program to engage employees on their contributions. This includes commenting and rating the contributions of employees. Comments can discuss the specifics of an idea, or be more general (e.g. “Thanks for sharing”). Feedback on contributions – ideas, comments, blog posts – are also important for establishing an employee’s online reputation
A best practice seen with some of Spigit’s clients is to establish recurring ideation events after the initial launch. These events can really be characterized as campaigns. They refresh employees’ innovative juices by focusing on issues that workers are experiencing today.
Set goals for ideas generated, conversations held, and ideas that turn into new projects
Good preso on Bank 2.0
The Wrong Definition of Sales 2.0
“I believe that Sales 2.0 is the addition of new processes and tools layered on top of traditional sales principles that when combined can enable more effective selling. Sales 2.0 is like combining the art and science of sales together for a synergistic effect â€” one component is not nearly as explosive without the other.”
Enterprise 2.0 illustrated
‘The Purpose of a Business is to Create a Customer’
“Packed full of common sense and combined with a strong sense of businessâ€™s responsibility to society, two of my favorite Drucker bumper sticker quotes are â€˜Knowledge has to be improved, challenged, and increased constantly, or it vanishesâ€˜ and â€˜There is an enormous number of managers who have retired on the jobâ€˜, which somehow seem to fit together very well.”
The 200 page report systematically examines trends across 14 industries, to further explore by industry why return on assets (ROA) for U.S. public companies has declined by 75 percent since 1965. John Hagel has fleshed out on his blog a summary of the key perspectives emerging from their industry analysis under the following headings:
* Deterioration in performance is widespread
* Advances in labor productivity fail to improve return on assets
* Innovation, at least as traditionally defined, does not appear to offer a solution
* Traditional measures of competitive intensity understate the challenge
* Worker passion is at very low levels across all industries
Twentieth-century institutions built and protected knowledge stocksâ€”proprietary resources that no one else could access.
The more the business environment changes, however, the faster the value of what you know at any point in time diminishes
Management by objective works – if you know the objectives. Ninety percent of the time you donâ€™tâ€˜.
Silos of â€˜knowledge stocksâ€™ are often being transferred into newer more powerful â€˜collaboration silosâ€™ – modern technologies used in an old fashioned way.
Druckerâ€™s â€˜Management by Objectives
â€˜ – participative goal setting, choosing the course of actions and decision making – works well for larger scale collaboration and is arguably more valid today than it was when he wrote about it in 1954
5 Impressive Real-Life Google Wave Use Cases
“Should you happen to be one of those people, weâ€™ve got a number of different resources that you can use to get up to speed with Google Wave. This time around, however, we wanted to look at how people are actually using it now. From process modelling and customer service, to project collaboration, annotation, and gaming, the examples listed here highlight the power of the newborn medium, and in part, showcase what we can expect as the platform matures.”
40 Great Resources for Developing a Community Management Strategy
“A practical guide for Community Management strategies, best practices, and resources.”
Looking to the Past for Enterprise 2.0 Adoption Principles
“These days there are incessant debates about the adoption of Enterprise 2.0 platforms, tools and practices.
Weâ€™ve been here before â€¦ we just did not have the infrastructure or the tools, nor the awareness or skill levels of large numbers of people.
As information technology first began its relentless march into the daily lives of people in the areas of work (mainframes, early integrated systems, desktops computers in the workplace) and general information-seeking (early days of websites and the Web), thinkers and organizational development conultants began paying attention to the intersection of technology and sociology. Many of the grandfathers and grandmothers of the field of organizational development will find the material on socio-technical systems familiar, and perhaps refreshing in the context of networked workplaces.”
CommunautÃ©s 2.0 en entreprise: trois niveaux personnalisÃ©s!
“On a cru au dÃ©part au grand paradigme de la transformation globale et uniforme de lâ€™entreprise traditionnelle en entreprise 2.0. La pratique est en train de prouver le contraireâ€¦ En effet, plus je travaille avec mes clients au dÃ©ploiement de stratÃ©gies Web 2.0 et de certains de ses outils Ã lâ€™intÃ©rieur de leurs entreprises, plus je mâ€™aperÃ§ois que ce dÃ©ploiement doit se faire de faÃ§on graduelle, par projets pilotes.”
Comme nous venons de le voir, le premier niveau de communautÃ© touche lâ€™entreprise dans son ensemble. Des communautÃ©s que je nomme dâ€™intÃ©rÃªt et qui sont ouvertes Ã tous les employÃ©s: profil personnel et professionnel Ã partager avec tous afin de faciliter la communication et la conversation, faciliter aussi lâ€™identification des expertises et faciliter lâ€™innovation participative.
Ã€ ce niveau, les communautÃ©s se spÃ©cialisent et deviennent des communautÃ©s de pratique, si chÃ¨res aux spÃ©cialistes des ressources humaines qui ne jurent que par la gestion du savoir. En effet, câ€™est Ã ce niveau que les communautÃ©s gÃ©nÃ¨rent des contenus dâ€™expertise ou de mÃ©moire dâ€™entrepriseâ„¢ Ã partager entre employÃ©s dâ€™une mÃªme spÃ©cialitÃ© en vue dâ€™un transfert gÃ©nÃ©rationnel.
Ce niveau est par essence, beaucoup plus Â«granulaireÂ», met en scÃ¨ne des communautÃ©s de projets et offre des outils de collaboration opÃ©rationnels. Ce sont en particulier des wikis ou blogues de projet et dans bien des cas, ces derniers sont munis de systÃ¨me de sÃ©curitÃ© et de confidentialitÃ© plus ou moins Ã©laborÃ©s et seulement les membres des Ã©quipes y sont autorisÃ©s,
Will Enterprise 2.0 Drive Management Innovation ?
“What is today called Enterprise 2.0 can also be seen as the emergent stage of the intersection of significant advances in information technology, management science applied to business process and the analysis and control of operational activities. These forces and factors are converging in todayâ€™s workplaces, wherein a continuous flow of information is the rule rather than the exception. Thus, as Hamel asserts, itâ€™s useful if not essential to cast a critical eye on the assumptions about static sets of tasks and knowledge arranged in specific (and relatively static) constellations on an organization”
The 2.0 label is said to denote a more interactive, less static environment. Whether we like it or not, we are passing from an era in which things were assumed to be controllable, able to be deconstructed and then assembled into a clear, linear, always replicable and thus static form to an era characterized by a continuous flow of information.
I believe that we need to revisit the fundamental principles of work design AND the basic rules used to configure hierarchical organizations in which the primary assumption is that knowledge is put to use in a vertical chain of decision-making
The architectural challenge is to design and implement both work processes and the ways humans interact (with both the work and each other) intelligently whilst allowing for change(s) as needed
Clearly we need both objectives, metrics and well-defined processes AND enough slack and support to help people learn, adapt and work around ineffective or obsolete policies, practices and processes.
Networks will not replace or supplement hierarchies; rather the two will be encompassed within a broader conception that embraces both.â€
Social Software 2.0: Enterprise Process Ubiquity
“In talking with people about the Enterprise 2.0 industry, I like to insert yet another versioning number scheme:
* Social Software 1.0
* Social Software 2.0”
Social Software 1.0 is the â€œTools Eraâ€. Put these collaboration and information sharing tools in place, then let the benefits flow. And the benefits do flow
Hereâ€™s how I define Social Software 2.0:
The integration of collaboration, increased findability, social networking and crowdsourcing into core enterprise activities requiring defined workflows, specific user sign-offs, results measurement and role-based access.
In Social Software 1.0, thatâ€™s a standalone wiki. Iâ€™m a fan of the notion that collaboration needs to occur in-the-flow of work. And having a separate wiki for collaborating on a customer quotation analysis makes it tougher to get usage.
In Social Software 2.0, thatâ€™s a collaborative space integrated into a sales force automation application. The customer quotation analysis occurs right where all the â€œactionâ€ occurs in the effort to win new business.
What is Social CRM and why it is important
“Social CRM is the business strategy of engaging customers through Social Media for building trust and brand loyalty.”
Research has shown strong evidence that Social Media Engagement correlates to Financial Performance
Engagement is more than just setting up a blog or Facebook profile and letting viewers post comments,
Resistance to change: The real Enterprise 2.0 barrier
“Large organizations continue to embrace Enterprise 2.0 as a viable addition to the corporate business process toolbox. As evidence, look no farther than the rapid growth of The 2.0 Adoption Council, which was founded this past June and currently boasts more than 100 member organizations, each of which has more than 10,000 employees.
Despite clear interest from the enterprise, discussion persists around obstacles to large-scale adoption of Enterprise 2.0 approaches, tools, and methods.”
The fundamental challenge to rapid diffusion of Enterprise 2.0 in large companies and the government is fear of change. As with all business activities, the human element remains a basic driver of success and failure. Enterprise 2.0 practitioners, consultants, early adopters, and observers should recognize the reality of these obstacles and plan accordingly.
Entreprise 2.0 : Les promesses du management moderne enfin tenues ?
“Peter Drucker est le premier Ã dÃ©finir le Knowledge Worker en 1929. Lâ€™excellent David Weinberger (un des terroristes du Cluetrain Manifesto) peut bien dire quâ€™il sâ€™agit lÃ dâ€™une dÃ©finition pompeuse, elle nâ€™en reste pas moins prodigieusement visionnaire. Toute sa thÃ©orie sur les organisations du XXÃ¨me siÃ¨cle est articulÃ©e autour de ce travailleur de la connaissance.”
Cette notion de management participatif est aussi au coeur de la reflexion de Peter Drucker :
Most discussions of decision making assume that only senior executives make decisions or that only senior executivesâ€™ decisions matter. This is a dangerous mistake.
La rÃ©putation dans le monde connectÃ© est lâ€™Ã©valuation quantifiÃ©e de la contribution de lâ€™individu par ses pairs.
As our business grows, it becomes increasingly necessary to delegate responsibility and to encourage men and women to exercise their initiative. This requires considerable tolerance. Those men and women, to whom we delegate authority and responsibility, if they are good people, are going to want to do their jobs in their own way
Simple, clear purpose and principles give rise to complex and intelligent behavior. Complex rules and regulations give rise to simple and stupid behavior.
Why You Can’t Use Personal Technology at the Office
“At the office, you’ve got a sluggish computer running aging software, and the email system routinely badgers you to delete messages after you blow through the storage limits set by your IT department. Searching your company’s internal Web site feels like being teleported back to the pre-Google era of irrelevant search results.
At home, though, you zip into the 21st century. You’ve got a slick, late-model computer and an email account with seemingly inexhaustible storage space. And while Web search engines don’t always figure out exactly what you’re looking for, they’re practically clairvoyant compared with your company intranet.
This is the double life many people lead: yesterday’s technology for work, today’s technology for everything else. The past decade has brought awesome innovations to the marketplaceâ€”Internet search, the iPhone, Twitter and so onâ€”but consumers, not companies, embrace them first and with the most gusto.”
Companies now have an array of technologies at their disposal to give employees greater freedom without breaking the bank or laying out a welcome mat for hackers
Some forward-thinking companies are already giving employees more freedom to pick mobile phones, computers and applications for workâ€”in some cases, they’re even giving workers allowances to spend on outfitting themselves. The result, they’ve found, is more-productive
When they get fed up with work technologies, employees often become digital rogues, finding sneaky ways to use better tools that aren’t sanctioned by the IT department.
Now consumers buy more PCs than businesses doâ€”and the consumer market spurs the most interesting innovations
Some companies have decided the best solution is to start giving workers what they want. Until a couple of years ago, Kraft Foods Inc., the consumer-goods giant, had a rigid approach to workplace technology
o, the IT department stopped blocking access to consumer Web sites, and the company started a stipend program for smart phones: Workers get an allowance every 18 months to buy a phone of their choosing. (Over 60% picked iPhones.) Kraft has also started a pilot program to let some of its employees pick their own computer. One catch: Employees who choose Macs are expected to solve technical problems by consulting an online discussion group at Kraft, rather than going through the help desk, which deals mainly with Windows users.
“The win for Kraft is employees are more productive if they use devices they’re familiar with,” says David Diedrich, vice president of information-systems technology, security and workplace services at Kraft.
I donâ€™t want to share, thatâ€™s counter to meeting my objectivesâ€¦and reward!!
“Even if we do all the right things like facilitate, understand human behaviour, create and nurture conditions for participation, have an enterprise-wide conceptâ€¦I donâ€™t think itâ€™s enough.
We need a complementary top-down shift to a new culture of working, as I said in my last post, a move from a competitive to collaborative organisation. “
If Iâ€™m rewarded just for my achieving my personal output, I donâ€™t have an incentive to share as what I know gives me the edge, itâ€™s not about the organisation, itâ€™s all about me.
So yes itâ€™s natural to share, as itâ€™s a need, actually itâ€™s survivalâ€¦but this needs to be seriously recognised and harnessed as a strategy, and a smart strategy where it cooperates and is cohesive with other strategies. ie you canâ€™t have a strategy about sharing is important, if you have another strategy that essentially says hoarding is important
Often a cascading objectives model (one in which, you get your objectives from your boss, and she gets them from her boss, etc..), leads to solioâ€™d thinking. Opportunities that arise that cut across siloâ€™s (and requiring collaboration) are simply never seen. Itâ€™s not that people want to be malicious, they simply donâ€™t see the opportunity.
Identifying teams for Enterprise 2.0 pilot groups
“There has been alot of talk about creating enterprise 2.0 pilot test groups before a full fledged implementation across an organisation. However, I havenâ€™t read much about how one can go about identifying teams that will succeed in the pilot test groups. So what are the requirements of an Enterprise 2.0 pilot test groups? “
Must be tech savvy enough to know how to use the Enterprise 2.0 platform.
Managers and team members involved have a history of collaborating with other teams/business units
There are reasons and incentives for the teams to collaborate
Management 2.0 : Leadership et collaboratif
“es managers doivent prendre confiance en eux dans ce nouveau challenge et rÃ©pondre notamment Ã deux dÃ©fis, souvent inhabituelle dans les organisations traditionnelles :
* Savoir coordonner sans centralisme
* Savoir animer sans hiÃ©rarchie”
Toute approche entreprise 2.0 doit rÃ©pondre Ã un objectif dâ€™affaires clair
“Le livre blanc ne cache pas les problÃ¨mes du secteur en citant dâ€™entrÃ©e de jeu les chiffres de Gartner oÃ¹ lâ€™on apprend que 70% des implantations de logiciels sociaux Ã lâ€™interne sont des Ã©checs. Trop dâ€™entreprises, selon Socialtext, ont adoptÃ© lâ€™approche entreprise 2.0 seulement pour faire partie de la parade. Dâ€™oÃ¹ la nÃ©cessitÃ© dâ€™Ã©tablir au dÃ©part une stratÃ©gie avec des objectifs dâ€™affaires clairs qui peuvent Ãªtre mesurÃ©s dâ€™autant plus facilement.”
Les dÃ©partements les plus propices Ã amÃ©liorer leurs processus formels avec des outils sociaux sont ceux oÃ¹ les indicateurs de performance sont peu Ã©levÃ©s, oÃ¹ tout le monde procÃ¨de Ã sa faÃ§on sans savoir comment font les meilleurs dâ€™entre eux et oÃ¹ on rÃ©invente la roue au lieu de profiter du travail dÃ©jÃ accompli.
Les dÃ©partements les plus intÃ©ressants pour introduire des processus informels de collaboration en ligne sont ceux oÃ¹ les gens ont beaucoup de difficultÃ©s Ã se coordonner quand le rythme de leurs activitÃ©s devient trop rapide. Les dÃ©tails tombent dans les craques faute dâ€™un partage efficace de lâ€™information.
Les situations les plus appropriÃ©es pour envisager des outils sociaux de collaboration sont celles oÃ¹ les reprÃ©sÃ©sentants de plusieurs dÃ©partements mettent beaucoup trop de temps pour synchroniser leurs responsabilitÃ©s dans le cadre de projets conjoints. Lâ€™impact le plus important de la dÃ©marche est de rÃ©gler les problÃ¨mes beaucoup plus rapidement parce quâ€™ils sont pris en charge quand ils surviennent.
Les bÃ©nÃ©fices les plus importants des outils sociaux de collaboration surviennent lorsquâ€™il est difficile de localiser oÃ¹ se trouve la bonne expertise dans une entreprise. Comme lâ€™ont dÃ©montrÃ© John Hagel et John Seely Brown, souligne le livre blanc, les travailleurs du savoir passent la majoritÃ© de leur temps Ã rechercher la bonne information. Les outils sociaux de collaboration permettent de diffuser de faÃ§on informelle les sujets importants du moment dans une entreprise et par le fait mÃªme de dÃ©couvrir oÃ¹ logent les diffÃ©rentes compÃ©tences internes.
Les entreprises en mesure de profiter de lâ€™introduction dâ€™outils sociaux de collaboration avec leurs partenaires passent la majoritÃ© de leur temps Ã sâ€™Ã©changer avec ces derniers tout au plus des mises Ã jour et des amÃ©liorations tactiques de leur collaboration. Lâ€™introduction dâ€™un nouveau programme avec ses partenaires exige beaucoup trop de temps et les clients sont peu informÃ©s quand il le faut.
Les entreprises habilitÃ©es Ã faire intervenir les outils sociaux de collaboration Ã ce niveau sont celles qui les ont appliquÃ©s avec succÃ¨s Ã lâ€™amÃ©lioration de leurs relations Ã lâ€™intÃ©rieur de leurs dÃ©partements, entre eux et avec leurs partenaires dans leurs processus formels. Elles aspirent Ã profiter de leur avancÃ©e pour apprendre vite et rÃ©pondre aux nouvelles opportunitÃ©s tout aussi rapidement.