Customer Experience Management

The Human Enterprise: Progress or Perish

This is a CMSWire cross-post. Perhapsthe most welcome business innovation in the 21st century is therealization that the 1990’s CEO pablum, “People are our greatest asset”is actually true. This means that business must rebalance itsstructures and processes to support and enable people rather than tocontrol and contain them while they service the processes andinfrastructure. A flipped business if you will. A humanized rather than mechanized ideal of the perfectly efficient organization. Ithas finally been proved — what everyone already knew was true —employees who give a darn [sic] do better work, which makes their luckyemployers more successful. So we are thrilled that work willfinally evolve away from what has often been a negative experience, andstart becoming place where people thrive — along with the economy andsociety at large. It all sounds great. But it is an earth-shiftingchange that leaves many management teams uncertain and uncomfortableand many employees frustrated. A human-centric business questions someof the fundamental tenets of traditional enterprise design andoperation, and it will take some time to sort it out. Being human iscomplex and being a business is complicated and so growing together issure to be a precarious but altogether magnificent undertaking. As yet however, many of us are still in a hard place. Drivers of DisengagementThereare three ways that work becomes a soul-crushing, disengaging job thatleads to “it’s fine like that,” what-kind-of-shortcuts-can-i-take, andthe-least-I-can-get-away-with effort. 1. Work that asks people to do stupid stuffThiscan be menial work, in which the person doing the work has no stake orimpact on the outcome. Think fast food, factory work, mail delivery orother work that is heavily routinized and automated. A craft isdifferent, because it involves mastery — these jobs do not. This alsohappens when the policies or processes of work are flawed in ways thatare obvious to employees, but aren’t likely to change as a result. 2. Work that prevents people from doing good stuffManyknowledge workers suffer in this camp, though often craftsmen(builders, etc.) and service providers (nurses, consultants) do too. [Myhousekeeper quit her company for this reason and started her own, so myhouse is cleaner.] They have ideas, aspirations, curiosity, commitmentto quality, but their management is so focused on maintaining the statusquo that it is nearly impossible for these people to do any of the goodwork that they want to do. [This status-quo fetish is a frequent andsometimes unintended consequence of command and control hierarchies. Theantidote is leadership.] 3. Work that takes undeveloped souls and keeps them in the darkHirepeople to do something, and never invite or enable them to developtheir skills or to do more than they were hired for, and what you willget is glassy eyed mushrooms. These people disengage because they don’tknow anything better. There can be many causes of stagnation, but simplyaccepting it is a losing strategy. So how do we go fromunintentionally soul-crushing to the labor’s Valhalla we seek?(Intentional soul-crushing is another matter altogether.) Dan Pinkshowed us that intrinsic motivation is vastly superior to externalmotivation (do this, get that) to drive effort and outcomes for all butthe most mechanical of tasks. Pink’s model shows that people are engaged(intrinsically motivated) when their work has three elements: Mastery – the ability to demonstrate and constantly improve one’s craft Autonomy – the ability to solve problems and make decisions on their own Purpose – the idea that their work matters as part of a greater whole. (Click here If you haven’t seen his classic TED talk). Pinkfocuses on the individual, however, and what we need to understand hereis how to make that work for organizations. There are those that claimthe drivers of employee engagementare “Relationship with immediate supervisor, Belief in seniorleadership, Pride in working for the company.” But normal people willrecognize those as markers (KPIs), rather than drivers of engagement. Drivers of Engagement (The human enterprise) 1. PurposeIfI don’t believe that my company is valuable, then my work is notvaluable, and therefore I don’t value it, so I don’t invest in it — I amnot engaged. Duh. Purpose, however, is not limited to green andeleemosynary causes (thanks for tolerating my nerdy words, it meanscharitable). A corporate purpose is an understanding of the change youwant to make in the world — whether it is to make people happier,richer, more entertained, more constructive in their work, etc. Purpose must be deeply authentic, and not just a carefully crafted-by-committee Mission Statement. I talked more about why it matters here. In order to scale beyond small business size, purpose must be accompanied by narrative— that expresses that purpose to your customers, your market and youremployees. This gives everyone the ability to connect with, tell andbuild his or her own part of the story. 2. Transparency and ImpactYoumay find yourself with a purpose, and you may mean it, and you may findyourself with a marketing plan that expresses it and a roadmap thatbuilds it (congrats to you) (if you’re saying to yourself, this is notmy beautiful purpose, this is not my beautiful roadmap, then read on).But to make it work, to make it great, you need a team of people whohave full, mutual awareness of what they are doing and what theleadership is worried about. If people can’t see the drivers oftheir work (why) , and the impact of their work (how’d I do?), theycan’t be engaged. If R&D doesn’t know what marketing is pushing andmarketing doesn’t know about the latest innovation, and the plan tore-architect the customer support program, and the team in Europe’s newexperiment and the recent customer loss or win and the six majordecisions that the executive team is working through, then they areprobably not very engaged. When people don’t know what is goingon, they can not consciously affect its outcome. They are not engaged.Transparency is not just about soaking in each other’s intellectual andemotional effluence (though that has its advantages too), it’s aboutknowing what’s going on around you so that you can constantly align,connect, consider and matter. The flip side of transparency is“impact.” With the right kind of transparency, i can see what is goingon, and understand the impact that my best work makes. I can see who andhow I help. That matters. 3. Mutual DependenceWhenwe work together as a team, we help unpack each other’s intellectualboxes, we refine one another’s ideas and discover new ones. We improveeach other. We build a continually improving, communal memory,experience and insight (to riff on a William Gibson quote). Members ofsuch a team take ownership of their responsibilities seriously, butinvite and relish in the fact that they can rely on their colleagues tohelp them work through sticking points and make their best work better. Acollaborative environment helps sustain energy, focus, and purpose. Butto get here, you must be aligned, you must have a mutual respect thatleads to mutual compassion and curiosity that makes it fun to airchallenges, problems and failure and a joy to bash and hash it outtogether. If you do not have a “culture” of mutual dependence atwork, technology will not change that fact. Generally this is aboutaligning around common goals, and offering one another respect as aconduit to trust, which enables you to do what teams do best — amplifystrengths and minimize weaknesses. If you’ve ever been a part of thatteam, you know. 4. LeadershipSome socialmedia-ites believe that in the future, organizations will be purelyemergent and collaborative, with no leadership required. I am not ofthat school — though certainly the nature of leadership will change. Leadershipmatters, and there are two things that great leaders do 1) communicatewithout ceasing (leading to that transparency and inclusion thing) and2) listen without ceasing by asking lots of questions. Dear leader, ifyou aren’t both sharing your vision and listening to your workforce,then there is at least an organization’s worth of people who think youare a fool. This perpetual telling and listening looks like a subtle anddynamic balance between confidence and humility. There is a thirdthing, and that is that you must be authentic. The human nose candetect the scent of patronizing palaver in micro-parts per million.

Read More

Information does matter

In recent years there have been manyhorror stories about the mismanagement of information, whether itpertains to personal, private or public data in the form of lostlaptops, discs, files and briefcases etc. How should information bemanaged? Could anything have been done to avoid the loss or minimise therisk of human error? Is there an easy answer? The HM Government released a whitepaper entitled“Information Matters: Building Governments Capability in ManagingKnowledge and Information” this highlights an extension of‘Transformational Government into data, information and knowledgemanagement where there is a need for best practice policy supported bytechnology’. Ithas been said before that this is the century or age of information.More information is being created every day, this in turn means thatmore information is being stored every day too. Businesses, Services,Governments and other Organisations all need this ‘lifeblood’ ofinformation to be accessible, useable, safe and accountable. Thegovernment is committed to addressing specific aspects of informationmanagement and information security (BS10012 and BS27001). This is allvery well, but having just information management on its own is notenough. Good information management needs to be aligned with goodknowledge management. Well, what use is information if it is not usedcorrectly? If you go to an ATM to withdraw money, you expect that thebank has used the information about you correctly, to ensure that youget your money from the correct account when you need it. But what ifthis information was not managed properly and you were abroad andneeding to access your funds and were unable to? This is a simplescenario but think about how information is used when you renew your cartax online, at passport control or to ensure you have the correct taxcode etc. It is not just about having the information but using iteffectively. Recently Knowledge Management and Information Managementhave been formally recognised as functions of government, in the sameway that finance, IT and communications are. With more and moreinformation being created, how long should you keep certain pieces ofinformation before it loses its usefulness or becomes dangerous? Whodecides what parameters are set for this? How does this impact on dataprotection laws? These are just a few of the many important questionsraised. Each organisation will have differing requirements on thismatter. There are guidelines online for organisations which help them tomeet the necessary regulations required by law, but you still need tomanage this effectively. So what do Governments and Businessesneed to do in order to deploy an effective information management andknowledge management strategy? The government, here in the UK, has setout guidelines highlighted in their Information Matters whitepaper and have organised a committee to help manage this. Many businesseshave done the same, but some are not seeing the bigger picture yet.People are talking about big data and the age of information but whatare they doing about it? Many of their current systems andprocess have been in place for many years and a lot of the informationis paper based. Technology is moving forward at an exponential rate,particularly with smart phones and tablet devices. Many businessprocesses nowadays are handled electronically with little or no actualpaperwork involved, but how is this information tracked and handled?Electronic document and records management software (EDRMS) appears tobe the answer. Many vendors will offer this at a departmental level orin some cases at enterprise level. Having an EDRMS system in place willensure that your business or government department meets the necessarylegislations and ensure that you have an effective informationmanagement strategy. However, there is a relatively new approach called Enterprise Information Management(EIM). In effect what EIM does is brings structure to the unstructured by unleashing the power of information to the organisation. With the growth of information coupled with the myriad of differentformats,only one organisation is standing up to be the leader in thisfield,with the goal of becoming recognised as the #1 EIM vendor. This organisation is already demonstrating leadership, according toanalystsGartner and Forrester, and is well on its way to being leaderin allfive pillars of EIM, namely Enterprise Content Management (ECM), Business Process Management (BPM), Customer Experience Management(CEM),Information Exchange and Discovery. If I were a CIO of a majororganisation or government department, I know full well what I would bedoing. I would contact my local OpenText office and ask for guidance. By acting now, I would hope to avoid any mishapsor issues around information management, compliance and legislationwithin my organisation.

Read More

Why being first on social media matters

It might shock you that I’m not a traditional sports fan and didn’twatch the Super Bowl. I really didn’t need to because most of theinteresting points outside of the score we’re captured on Twitter. Ifyou’re like me and don’t follow sports, but also don’t follow Twitteryou may not be aware that there was a power outage at the Superdome thisyear (that should hopefully come off as a sarcastic joke to most ofyou). This presented a unique opportunity for advertisers tocapitalize on a lull in the action and engage with their audience onTwitter who were already making the blackout the biggest trending topicof the night (yes bigger than Beyonce and Destiny’s Child). Two big brands we’re able to come up with a quick comment related to the blackout. Oreo was one of those brands and already had a commercial appear earlier that night. Tide was another, but didn’t have a commercial during the Super Bowl and instead had a Super Bowl inspired one. Below are the two tweets and the associated images included with them: See the following article for more details on other brands and companies who also joined the blackout tweet brigade: Super Bowl blackout generates plenty of online buzz, gives brands a boost Dissectingthe numbers of these two tweets a little bit gives you some insightinto the value these single tweets created. With 1,359 re-tweets and 363favourites Tide ensured that at least a minimum of 1,359 people viewedits tweet during the blackout and shared it with their follows for anunknown level of reach. Oreo’s tweet trumped this number with currently16,060 re-tweets and 6,156 favourites. The value in both of thesetweets is probably not measurable in advertising dollars per say.However, if you look beyond Twitter the coverage that accompanied bothof these tweets in the mainstream media obviously fed the popularityeven more and gave it a significant bump. So what was it about these two tweets that propelled them further than their counter parts? Lookingat each of them they both make direct reference to the blackout, andthey both use images to engage their audience. Tide has an arguablybetter and more related message, but is 3 minutes behind Oreo in postingits contribution. Walgreens was technically one of the first tweets outa full 4 minutes ahead of Oreo’s and enjoyed more exposure than Tide’stweet because of this. So what does this all mean and why wasn’t everyone under the sun doing it? Ifyou can get an innovative and relevant post out with some associatedcontent odds are you’re going to get some decent coverage and return.Unfortunately, most large organizations don’t have the flexibility theywould like or should have on social media and have established archaicapproval methods for social media content which stifles this progressivetype of engagement. The lesson is not to be one of them!

Read More

How safe is your company’s social media?

A guest post written by our own Matthew Mullerworth. Thisweek we saw a cyber-attack on US Fast-food giant, Burger King. For overan hour their Twitter profile resembled a McDonald’s advert. Duringthat time, it posted comments about why it had been bought by theirrivals, along with numerous racial and obscene tweets. This goes to showthat no organisation is immune to a cyber-attack. Criminals, andterrorists alike, target businesses with the goal of disruption, thebigger the better. With cyber-attacks they often aim for the softunderbelly of an inexperienced person within that organisation. This canbe in the form of a simple email purporting to be from a colleagueasking the recipient to click on a link or open an attachment. This iswhat experts are calling “spear-phishing”. Chances are that this simpleaction can result in a virus that attacks the computer in question andsubsequently infects the rest of the company. This gives the criminalsaccess to do their thing and cause disruption. All companies havesensitive information, some more than others. These could includegovernmental departments, emergency services, pharmaceutical companiesand law firms. Many have taken steps and have done all they can toprevent this from happening. All organisations should have InformationSecurity teams who monitor, legislate and educate staff to be aware ofany potential dangers. In the UK, ISO27001 is the standard that most adhere to. Alsomore recently, Content Management and Information Managementtechnologies are being used to offer an improved level of access andsecurity to the data held within an organisation. Information Security is one topic being discussed at OpenText EIM Days this year. In the UK it is being held at Twickenham RFU Stadium on 16-17 April 2013. OpenText has a wealth of experience in this area globally, working with many governments and businesses alike. Please contact your local office to learn more and experience true information security for yourselves. Matthew is a key member of our UK Account Development Team. He is a keen marketer and amateur blogger/photographer.Heis currently supporting the OpenText UK Public Sector Sales Team to bethought-leaders in the EIM space through strategic & specific ideasand campaigns.

Read More

Collaboration Isn’t Working: What We Have Here is a Chasm

This is a cmswire cross-post. What we have ourselves here is a chasm. Collaboration isn’t breaking out all over. Dear Colleagues: Canyou feel it? It’s the subtle loosening of gravity’s pull as we pause atthe peak of the hype apex before we thunder down into the trough ofdisillusionment (with apologies to Gartner). Social collaboration isn’tworking very well, but must we go gently into that good night? Some of the reasons we’re hitting the near edge of this “chasm” we’ve known and predicted from the beginning. Thisis a paradigm shift as fundamental as any the modern workforce orcapitalism has ever seen. More significant than the PC, the internet andthe IT department combined. More significant than globalization. It’sabout retreating from command and control practices designed to make theENGINE of capitalism (and government and war) purr, to a collaborativeone which activates the full capabilities of the participants andnetworks them in a way that amplifies and accelerates action. It’sabout changing from a daily grind of covering our individual andcollective heinies to one where we are joined in the intellectual,emotional and emergent pursuit of “better.” Of mission and service. Ok— so that’s pretty hard, we have established but few ground rules, andit looks like we’ll wander another 10 or 20 years or so in the deserttill it’s really as true as we’d like to to be, but it does seeminevitable, and so it is. But we could speed it along with more rigorousresearch and learning. We need to stop trying to ferret out bits ofgood news and start ferreting out learning. In other words, weneed to take our own advice about facing both good and bad news withequanimity and an authentic learning orientation. But there’sanother angle to this and its really, really bothering me. Adoption. Allthe 68,000 vendors in the space (including my employer, OpenText) havesettled on streams and digital workspaces as the definition of socialcollaboration technology — with some allowance for variance in quality,focus and features. And now we’re all lecturing on about adoption. There are several things that are bothering me about that. First.The language we’re hearing about adoption is eerily similar to thelanguage we heard about every other enterprise IT paradigm that socialcollaboration is supposedly saving us from. “People don’t get it, weneed change management and training and… ” And maybe that’s alltrue. But I know that I have scoffed at those foolish 1990’s KM peoplewho stuck to their guns and soldiered on in spite of the fact that whatthey were doing clearly wasn’t working — though the value propositionwas real, vital and clear. I have said the same thing about other ITsystems of yore. Can we now smugly believe that we are somehowmore enlightened than others because we “get it”? If we’re so awesome,why isn’t this working? Why doesn’t everyone “get it” and why are wehaving such a hard time with adoption? I know, I know, humanbehavior, culture and all that. But we adopted cell phones as fast asthey could make em. Just sayin’. Some of the change management stuff isreal, true and urgent, and some of it is just denial. We do not want tobelieve that maybe we aren’t right. But we aren’t. Second.So we’ve been pushing this techno philosophy pretty hard for three orfive years, and as a Gartner analyst recently observed in a meeting,it’s no longer a new industry. And what have we learned? We have abunch of people like me, many better than me, lecturing on what shouldbe and could be, but where’s the “what is”? I want a more rigorous bodyof learning out of the last five years. We deserve it and we need it tocontinue to be leaders in the reinvention of work. I know that there isan Amazon’s worth of books and papers out there, but it’s not enough. Yet. Wehave some clear wins. The majority of fortune 1000 businesses are usingsome form of social media to communicate internally as well asexternally. Pockets of success are found within many companies and a feworganizations are entirely transformed. Perhaps more new organizationsare being formed after the new model rather than the old. In theface of a mountain of evidence that something isn’t working as well aswe hoped, is “try harder” a good strategy? Are we asking the hardquestions of ourselves that could help us tell the difference? Like —whydo people like email so darn much in spite of the fact that its killingthem and makes their life more difficult in both the long and the shortterm. Are we wrong to ignore it? To insist that “email is dead, usethis instead”? Why do teams fail to act the way we think theywill? Are we oversimplifying the notion of team? What aboutorganizations? Where is the deeper insight on the relationship betweenteams and organizations? Why isn’t a sophisticated vocabulary breakingout? Why do we not yet have 100 words for different kinds ofcollaboration and teams, as expert in it as we think Eskimos are aboutsnow? What is the difference between an intranet, a community and ateam? I don’t want a tweetchat full of clever answers, I want clarity — and so do you. So— yes, the paradigm shift will take a generation to turn over. But wehave not yet come close to our full measure of duty as techno-innovatorsto drive it. I would like to toss out some themes where I think we haveimportant questions to ask, things to learn. Maybe these are on theright track, maybe not, maybe its the wrong question entirely. But weneed to start asking questions and stop searching — exclusively — forcrumbs of corroborating evidence and data, and start looking at theentire body of information. In other words, we need to step backfrom building business cases — though they are still important and valid— and put more emphasis on building our knowledge. Editor’s Note: Deb will be speaking on this topic at Social Media Week NYC on Feb 21 at 2pm Themes and VariationsThese are some of the themes where I want to see harder questions asked. What are your questions? 1. The organizationFirst— the organization, the intranet and collaborative teams are NOT thesame thing. The relationship among and between these things needsserious scrutiny. We’re beginning to see serious and rigorousstudy of public social networks in use for marketing, crisis management, etc., but that’s a bit easier — it’s all happening out in public, so wecan see it and analyze it, thanks to the Twitter API. It’s a bit harderto go into private enterprise systems and have a look (with someobvious and disturbing exceptions). 2. Connecting the dotsSecond— streams are nice. I adore Twitter. I adore our internal corporatetools that are similar to it. And here we’ve seen great adoption. We’veturned our org into a giant chat room: an extension of Instant messengeror chat for all. There’s benefit in that. Ambient awareness has huge benefits and is one of the key elements in making remote work work. But that’s not a“wirearchy,”it does not make work visible in an actionable way, it does not cementteam bonds, it connects only a modest set of dots, it is, in short,inadequate to change how we work, though it’s a nice addition. We needto build the semantic, statistical, psycho-social and otherwise toolsthat goose the gods of serendipity. 3. CollaborationSeveral years ago, I came up with a definition of collaboration that focused on three key ideas: creation, connection and compounding. I also observed that great teams shared four basic traits — they had ashared sense of mission, they respected one another, they trusted oneanother and they were committed to achieving excellence. We’ve since learned that very effective teamshave great communications — and very importantly — members are more orless equal in the amount they contribute. No divas, no wallflowers. Butwe’re only seeing whispers of real actionable insight into how tocontrive (or “cast”) these magically great teams. Leadership, yes,balance and matching of people — yeah, we sorta kinda know we have to dothat, but few of us know how. How is most collaboration achieved?What is the type, volume and velocity of information that needs to beexchanged? Is this the same of variable by team? By task? By… what? Howcan teams connect to the whole and vice versa?

Read More

What is Enterprise Social good for?

What exactly is Enterprise Socialgood for? What can Tempo-Social do for my business? We have all heardthese type of questions before. Today, it’s difficult to imagineany organization without email. I believe the state of affairs for the“Social Enterprise” is analogues to the early days of email, a timewhere some questioned email’s business value. In much the same way,Social will come to be seen as essential to the Enterprise. So, what exactly is Enterprise Social good for? Let me count the ways; Executive Outreach – CEO/Executive blogs, posts and status updates Employee Connectivity – Learn about, follow, and interact with other individuals throughout the organization Open Communication – Break down the walls and silos of information. Encourage discussion Situational Awareness- What’s going on with the rest of the company – know an individual’sor team status, who is working on what, where they are, what’s on theirmind Knowledge Sharing -Share interesting and relevant information/articles with your colleges Information Discovery – Ability to tune in to areas of interest “diving signal from noise”. Fine tune and customize the activity stream/s Serendipitous Learning – Discover relevant or interesting information by chance Personal Notes – Private documents and TODOs (accessible from your home page) – this is the flipside of a profile Internal Team Collaboration – A space to work and share content with individuals working on a common project External Team Collaboration- A Sandbox or locked down community accessible to externals, work withexternals on a project whilst not exposing them to the rest of theorganization Distributed Workforce – Common workspacesand asynchronous communication help when working with employeesdistributed over many geographies and time zones. The workforce isbecoming increasingly global, hours becoming more flexible and workingfrom home increasingly common Participation – Encouragepeople to contribute and share (reward those who contribute) typicallyby building an “economy” around followers, karma points, credits, etc Individual Empowerment – Give voice to all employees. Anyone should be able to post an idea in an ideation app, or interact with executives Wisdom of Crowds- Allow the community to self-classify, organize content, and vote. Thecrowd can be surprisingly clever. It’s been shown that a “diversecollection of independently deciding individuals is likely to makecertain types of decisions and predictions better than even experts” Agree, disagree ? What have I missed? Discussion and Feedback welcome.

Read More

Could the Junk Drawer 1.0 become the Junk Drawer 2.0?

Ah, the infamous junk drawer. We all have them in our homes. They are that designated place, often a kitchen drawer, where we store the items that we use frequently that really don’t have a proper home, or they do but never make it back there. In the drawer, there is a huge quantity of “stuff” that we need, not all of it put there by us. Typically the junk drawer creation is a group effort, with many contributors in the home. There are a lot of items in there that I have several of, like 4 sets of spare keys, 6 nail files, chopsticks, 15 pens, all different colors of course. I often need dig to the back of the drawer to find what I need, and by the time I get to it I realize that I don’t need it anymore as I now need to move onto a different task in the house. My last trip to the junk drawer gave me a sense of déjà vu as I realized that is a similar experience that I have when I am trying to locate information in the office. As I launch my PC and try to search for a piece of content that I need to work I open my intranet and realize that there is a ton of content here, created and added by several different people. The content is often contributed by a large number of authors, and often there can be duplicated work, appearing in a variety of formats and layouts. Even with the best search tools, there is no easy way to find the information that you need without looking through many different layers that often exist inside the intranet. Often before I locate the content I am looking for, I am pulled into another direction, probably an urgent email that needs to be dealt with. According to IDC, “The typical enterprise with 1,000 knowledge workers wastes $6 million to $12 million per year searching for non-existent information.” Of course my junk drawer at home is small in size and can be easily cleaned out and reorganized to be effective again. The same cannot be said about the intranet or file shares that many of us are using. As the amount of content grows, so does the size of the junk drawer. So how can we battle this plague of the ever expanding junk drawer? Content is not going to stop growing. According to Yankee Group, “80% of data in an enterprise is unstructured Information. This type of information is growing at 200% per year.” Many companies are tackling this issue by moving away from the static intranet scenarios and adopting a better, more effective way to work by deploying more collaborative tools that augment their content with social features. Allowing them to share more effectively with co-workers, add value to the existing content and search more easily for both content and the people they need to be able to get their work done. But are team spaces, social collaboration tools and community spaces exempt from the plague of the junk drawer. I don’t believe so. It is just as important to ensure that these environments are also designed with purpose and driven by good design. I am seeing this first hand as OpenText has adopted the use of our Tempo Social application internally. Our new environment has quickly spawned well over 300 communities in a short time frame. We are learning firsthand the importance of keeping the signal to noise ratio just right to encourage adoption. We are thinking through things such as the lifecycle management required for communities. We are learning how to better understand when a community is needed versus a forum or a project space. We recently hosted a webinar session campaigns.opentext.com/forms/2013-Q3-GL-CS-OS-OTLive-January172013 on the topic that resulted in some great conversations, in case you are interested. We have also published our use case for using Tempo Social.www.opentext.com/2/global/customers-home/successstories I would love to hear from others on what their recipe is in avoiding the “social sprawl” that can result in the junk drawer 2.0. Feedback and comments appreciated!

Read More

“Social Business” is only half of Enterprise 2.0

This is a CMSWire cross-post. Sothere are these two things going on. The first you’ve definitely heardof – its the great reawakening of the white-collar and consumer world astheir value and participation and voice are released from the anonymityof the command and control corporate model thanks to nifty new socialtechnologies. The second is about the exponentially increasingcomplexity of the world. Everything that touches anything sets offanother thing and so on. Social is accelerating complexity and viceversa. The very best of us and even our technology are daunted by thechallenge of understanding issues and taking action in such anenvironment. This is why the future has become ever more unpredictable,and planning ever-more – optimistic. [There’s a third – and that’s thatall this reawakening stuff has nudged us to look hard at some thingsthat had been left unexamined for too long, like leadership,collaboration, and certain exploitative forms of capitalism, but that’s adifferent discussion] These two forces are putting intense pressures on business. In his classic work, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Kuhn describes a period of “crisis” that precedes a scientificrevolution. The crisis is a period where a field of math or sciencebecomes dramatically more complicated, while yielding diminishing,incremental returns. If John Seely-Brown and John Hagel are right, and the average Return on Assets has dropped by 75% since 1965, then we may be seeing an analogous crisis in business that leaves usripe for business revolution (they call it the Big Shift). Calling it“social” business is missing half of the point. Business isn’t going“social” because it wants to hold hands and sing Kumbaya. Businessis changing to a new model – Enterprise 2.0 – both because people aredemanding it AND because a centralized command and control model thatuses process and efficiencies of scale to achieve superhuman feats haslimits to what it can do. But a new model of applying networks ofsensors and capabilities (people) onto complex problems, to achieveuniquely human feats, can solve problems that hierarchies cannot. [note- i’m officially, if temporarily, moving back to Enterprise 2.0., untilsuch time as someone finally coins a term that is less misleading than“Social”.] 1. Some problems are too hard to solve the old fashioned way.Asa math student (computer science was in the math department back then) Ilearned that we can classify problems by how hard they are to solve. Wemeasure how much effort a solution takes based on the level ofefficiency of the clever little algorithms we use to solve them. Ingeneral, these solutions use logic to make hard problems into simplerones. There is a class of problem, however, that cannot be solvedefficiently because though we understand the problem, we can’t find aclever way to make it look simpler. The technical term for these isNP-Complete. They are very hard. There is another class of veryhard problem – one we see in economics, society and business. These areknown as“wicked” problems. Wicked problems have so many factors twistedup together that you can’t really hope to untangle them. Thinkeconomics, or the weather. Or product strategy or organizational design. There is no particular right or wrong answers, but there are better andworse outcomes. Our instincts tell us, based on 400 years of Newtonianrationalism, that if only we work hard enough, with enough intelligenceand discipline, we will see the component parts and the relationshipsbetween everything and the formula and methodology will be revealed.Everything can be understood by examining its component parts. Nothingis beyond examination or building with swiss-clockworks perfection. Ournotion of business and process design (among many other things) dependon this idea, but it is – if not exactly wrong – limited. Thereason strategy is hard, the reason R&D is hard, the reasonmarketing, support, sales, innovation, operations and design are hard isbecause they are multifaceted challenges that involve manyunpredictable, often external forces that change at an acceleratingpace. When you wade into the morass, you are making it even morecomplex.There is no definitive right or wrong answer, there is onlybetter and worse. These types of problems are often referred to as“wicked”. Wicked problems defy systematic, top-down solutions. OurCommand and Control organizations have done many things well, but we arenow entering an era dominated by the kind of problem they don’t dowell. 2. But that doesn’t mean we can’t solve them.We’velearned some things about solving very hard problems. In the late1980’s we learned that Genetic Algorithms can solve NP-Complete problemsvery fast. A subset of these problems were in the field of graphtheory. The kinds of problems that deal with optimizing pathways. Thatcould be shipping routes, airline routes, or even communicationsrouting. As an undergraduate I read about Genetic Algorithms inScientific American. [I carried a photocopy around in my backpack for myentire senior year, showing it to every professor and other people, whomostly thought I’d started speaking in tongues] What was at that timemind-blowingly cool about these is that you could get a solution to a“very hard” problem, super fast, without knowing anything about theproblem itself. No clever algorithm required. I’ll say it again, becauseits hard to believe. You can optimize these systems and solutionswithout finding a trick or invention that depend on some new insight orunderstanding of the problem. You can solve extremely hard problems withno knowledge. 3. Bars and Boids – complex adaptive systems solve “impossible” problems Inthe mid 90’s I was actually paid to build simulations of complexsystems (think SimCity for business) for customers like FedEx, AT&Tand certain government agencies. This meant I was messing with “Boids” and the “Bar Problem” and living in Monterey, California – it was a peak experience. The Bar Problemis an eye-opener in terms of how you can solve impossible problems withno insight, knowledge or intelligence. It bucks every intellectualinstinct you probably have, which is what makes it so interesting. Itaddresses the question of whether you can solve “impossible” problems ofthis kind: there’s a bar in Santa Fe (not at all coincidentally thelocation of the Santa Fe institute that pioneered this work). The bar isa great place to be iif 60% of the population – but no more than 60% ofthe population shows up on a given night. Otherwise it is either dullor overcrowded. If no one has any information about what the others aredoing when they make their decision, how do you get the right number ofpeople in the bar? Here’s one way. Create a “population” (a set ofagents). Everyone follows a random rule. Like “if I liked the outcome 5days ago, go to the bar”. Or “if today’s date is a multiple of mybirthday, stay home”. If the rule doesn’t work more than a few days in arow, change to a new rule. And an answer emerges like an old Polaroidphoto. The system finds the answer. If you have any programming skills,this is very easy to simulate (even I have done it, but its a secret – inever want to write code again. It annoys the computer and myselfequally). These kinds of systems are called “complex adaptive systems.” A Complex Adaptive System has a large numbers of components (agents), that interact and adapt or learn. So- we learn that we can solve (some) impossible problems like – supplyand demand, traffic flows, and other insanely hard things – easily. 4. Teams and Crowds – collaboration also solves impossible problemsMorerecently, we’ve shown that teams and crowds can solve impossibleproblems. Andrew McAfee has pointed to some stunning proof of this. Likechess. In the old days (1980), a chess Grand Master could blow away anycomputer at the game. By the mid 90’s, it was the other way around. Butmore recently, we’ve discovered that a competent team (not masters, butdecent players), a process, and a computer assist can consistently blow away the super computer. Or that a random and loosely affiliated group of people can solve theprotein-folding problem – a completely “impossible” problem better than any other known method. Protein-folding is hard because a protein is a long string of aminoacids. In a body, the long string folds up on itself based on thechemical and electrical properties of its thousands of amino acids. Thebiological effect of a protein are determined almost entirely by itsfolded up shape. But its impossible to predict how it will fold, andtherefore, what it will do or how it will play with others. In otherwords, how medicine will or will not affect it. What I’m gettingat here is that when you start to network people, you are building whatwe call a complex adaptive system – that’s what Boids, GeneticAlgorithms and the Bar Problem are about. Complex adaptive systems cansolve “impossible” problems. 5. So – when we’re talking about Social BusinessYou’vebeen promised Collective intelligence – but there’s even more. Agentsare stupid. People are not (mostly). So – Social Business means we canaccess collective intelligence – no one is as smart as everyone. Atleast we’re trying for that. But also, socially connected businesses arecomplex adaptive systems – able to solve impossible problems – not headon – but through action. This idea has been implied in severalplaces, but I want to make sure its crystal clear. People are agents.Organizations are complex adaptive systems. Social technologies andphilosophies amplify the interaction and connectivity of its agents(people).Of course, the pathetically simple agents described above,can’t hold a candle to the magnificence of a human network. But we needto build our ability to think of human networks as a kind of acomplexity calculator. In 2013 we will begin to learn how to wield this“wicked” weapon against complexity. Emergent outcomes – the onespromised by social collaboration, social marketing and social in general- are not just a hope and a prayer, but real. Trusting in them is notfoolish but wise. Our human networks, thoughtfully connected, with somesmart methodologies will help us to apply complexity to complexity andmake progress against now-intractable problems. Enterprise 2.0 isnot about social per se, it is about thinking very differently aboutwhat is hard. About what is impossible. About what IS possible. Aboutyour role in it, and about how a human chorus of intellect can help.Enterprise 2.0 will measure outcomes dispassionately (with equipoise) asa way to ask questions without assigning blame. It will focus onlearning as innovation, and disentangle accountability, blame andoutcomes. It will depend on the connected circulation of insight andinformation of a network, often knowledge-less solutions, and thedeepest respect for what people can and will bring to the table, giventhe chance. Our goal then in this next handful of years is tobetter understand the relationship between organizations, complexadaptive systems, complexity, and impossible problems. We have hints andclues, some research, instinct, experience and trial and error. Its ahard problem, but its not impossible. We need to break open opaque ideaslike “collaboration” and “team” and “serendipity” and get to know themintimately. We need to redefine our ability to sense and createconnections and conclusions from luck to faith to something we actuallydo understand. The best is yet to come.

Read More

Leveraging QR Codes or NFC

There is a palpable buzz surrounding NFC (Near Field Communication)in the market place today on the same level of what QR codes used to be ayear or so ago. There is however significant confusion over what eachof these technologies can do, their purpose, and how to implement themin a useful and functional way. I may be the first to say it, butI think there is a complimentary link between these technologies. Letme try and summarize what each of these things can or can’t do before Iget to that. QR (Quick Reference) Codes:QR Codes are areimagining of the traditional barcode we’re all used to seeing onproducts, but with a different purpose. You can essentially embed anytext based information you want into one, from a website, to your emailaddress, or just a plain old message. They’re used for anything from augmented reality (although this is changing), to mobile application installation, information sharing, or as noted above redirection to websites. Themain thing to keep in mind is that QR Codes need to be implemented in asomewhat prominent and more importantly stationary way. The mainbarrier to entry for QR Code usage is the ability for a camera on amobile device to focus in on the QR Code itself in order to process it.So the size of the QR code is important and is why there is a standardsize used in most cases for most products you purchase or in mostimplementations. If you want to generate your own and play around with it on your own mobile phone here are some useful resources: QR Code Generator How to scan a QR Code with your:BlackBerry iPhoneAndroid NFC (Near Field Communication) NFC can be used only with smartphones that have the applicable hardware or some kind of attachment, and can be used as a replacement for ID cards, a replacement for your banking or credit card (with some caveats currently), exchanging data between smartphones, or by obtaining data from a NFC Tag (think of a physical QR code). Themain barrier to entry with NFC is that physical contact is required forit to be used. Any demonstration or article that hints otherwise isjust flat out wrong. It can facilitate or assist with things likepairing over Bluetooth or connecting over Wi-Fi to your Smart TV, but itcan’t use short range communication in the same way Bluetooth does. If you’re interested in seeing what is possible check out the following articles/videos:How to use NFC Tags with your BlackBerry SmartphoneSamsung Galaxy S3 NFC Demonstration Why or where I think there is connection Ithink the connection point between these two technologies is wherephysical contact is possible but a QR code may need to be used inconjunction with an NFC tag. An example of this would be that since notevery phone has NFC currently if you intend to use NFC tags in a printarticle, poster, magazine, etc, you should also include a QR code on ornear the NFC tag with the same information to produce the same intendedeffect. When using these technologies, it’s equally important toremember that you need to redirect people to a website that is mobilefriendly. There’s nothing worse than being redirected to a website andgetting the message, “You must have Flash installed to view thiswebsite.” Do you have any questions on how to use thesetechnologies to engage with your customers? Let me know by posting inthe comments!

Read More

So many networks… so little time!

If you’re just jumping on the social media bandwagon now you’rejoining when the curve is on the way up! Even if you’re new to the wholeidea you should at least be aware of Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn andmaybe even Google+. When you’re just starting out the biggestquestion you’re going to have with all of this is where to engage andhow. The answer is unfortunately not a simple ‘go here and do this’, butI’ll try to offer some advice. As I referred to in my post regarding #TheRules of Social, you can make social media work for you by engaging in what interestsyou. The answer for choosing the network to use is somewhat similar; youjust need to identify what resources or content you already have orwill create, and how you want to leverage them. For example ifyour intention is to reach out and get an unfiltered response from yourcustomer base a Twitter account or a Facebook page are both good optionsfor this. They also give you a platform to broadcast your message,blog, or content from as well, but you’ll need to engage and respond toyour audience if you want to reap the benefits. Ifyour company or organization wants to generate, or already has a corporate image you should consider adding a Company page to LinkedIn. In a similar vein to Facebook and Twitter; LinkedIn gives you a platform to broadcast and obtain feedback, but it also allows to you to post openings for jobs. In addition, when people are hired by your company if that person has a LinkedIn account they can specify your company as their current employer which becomes an instant promotion to attract more talent. There is also the option ofintegrating some of these networks together. In some ways this makessense, but in others it can be a hindrance. For example, linking Twitterto Facebook might be useful, but you’ll need to keep your message under140 characters, and if you want to look professional you’ll need to tryand avoid sounding like a teenager texting. R u following wut Im sayin? Linking from Facebook to Twitter could also be beneficial, but nothing is more frustrating to read than a comment tha… See what I mean? Aswell, you have to think about your audience and what type of contentyou have that will appeal to them. Do I think people on my LinkedInprofile will be drawn in by my reviews of CrossFit boxes in the area?Probably not. They are however likely interested in social media so myposts here for the Engage U blog are perfect! Once you have astrategy put together for which network you want to start with and howyou want to use it you can start to explore or experiment with what Irefer to as ‘2nd tier’ networks. I use this term because these networksbuild on or leverage a presence you have in one of the above networks,but add additional value. Examples of these are Quora, Instagram,Pinterest, etc. Quora allows anyone to ask questions or post aresponse. Answers are then voted on by the community to determine whichone offers the best advice. This may be beneficial if you’re looking forraw feedback about your company, product, or brand. Instagramallows you to quickly share images to your Twitter followers which canbe useful for getting specific feedback on something more visual whereasPinterest is more about organizing and sharing visuals and notnecessarily providing contextual feedback beyond how popular a visual isand how much it is shared. Again, there isn’t a magic or cookiecutter approach to these networks. Each has their own specific purpose,and you’ll need to determine if there is value in investing time intothem. The answer might be that there isn’t any value, and you shouldn’tfeel guilty about that. What networks are you consideringimplementing or have you already implemented, and what tools do you useto manage your presence? Do you have questions about where to start?Feel free to sound off in the comments!

Read More