by Olivier Amprimo

This is a Headshift blog post by Olivier Amprimo, written on October 6, 2007 in Corporate Legal and Professional Services , and tagged as , , , . It has (9) comments, the latest of which was on October 10, 2007. You can find more posts like this here.

Behind "Enterprise 2.0" Performance: Exploitation or Exploration?

The more I visit clients the more I am amazed by the lack of culture some have on the basics of web 2.0, not to mention its positive impacts on productivity, performance and bottom line results.

As an example, I regularly have to explain to CIOs what is a blog, what is wiki, what's the major differences between those tools, what is RSS, social bookmarking and social networking. I find people complaining about being compelled to block 2 hours a day reading newsletters to keep up-to-date to their industry trends, because they have never used a newsreader.

All these folks are not average employees. They are decision makers. They spend their days making sure processes work fluidly, coordinate people to make them work more efficiently, decide how things need to be improved to make the whole organisation more efficient and profitable.

So what we can learn from that situation? I think there are two things:
1 - Social computing for the organisation, call it Enterprise 2.0 if you want to be trendy, is a reality that needs to be evangelised, despite massive information available on the wild wild web. In that perspective, Atlassian has it right while empowering Stewart Mader who does an amazing job explaining "how to grow a wiki".
2 - That corporations needs to rethink their understanding of performance and the world they evolve in, and impact their organisation from there.

If we live in a knowledge economy, as Michael Porter and hundreds others claim for about 30 years, we have to change our mind on how things are being managed. They key resource is brain juice, not muscle sweat. The key focus should be people and information flow. So the first thing we have to consider is that communication and HR are not two elements one has to put on the backburner. Trick is that it is a lasting tradition in many organisations. For instance, IT people still put communication processes on the backburner and favour operational processes. They don't understand that knowledge work cannot be limited to processes, that it is multi-faceted communication flows around processed tasks that make things work. Meetings, e-mails, phone, IM, blogs, wikis, information aggregators and filtering devices wrap defined task oriented programmes up. The former help employees use the later, more efficiently.

If we live in a knowledge economy, we have to value people in the know. It is counterproductive to have people in command who are not aware of what happens in their domain. Position is always a sign of authority, not always a sign of relevance and legitimacy. It is not serious to have to explain an IT director what is a blog or a wiki these days because those products are here for years, some fully enterprise compliant, and are booming. This also means senior management has to pay a little more attention to how they favour innovation. Innovation is not necessarily about having big plans that improve operational processes (exploitation). Simply because they tend to be time consuming, financially costly, operationally disturbing and employee frightening. Innovation is about having open-mind and an appetite for exploration. That is the lesson we have to learn from Google and should already know by heart because of the massive managerial literature on the so-called "Japanese model" back in the 80's.

If we live in a knowledge economy, we have to accept that employees are the ones who know how local things need and can be improved. Top down approaches have to give some space to Bottom up ones. We have to let them voice, converse and listen to them, as a minimum. Blogs, wikis or tools such as Feedback 2.0, correctly backed by a precise policy, are made for that. It is their real value in a corporate world. Vertical Social Networks are complementary as they target customers and have proven efficient too. Employees are the one who know which tools are relevant for doing their job more efficiently and we don't have to impose and restrict them (to) a set of tools. By doing so, IT people have created artificial scarcity. This is Malthusianism. They have reinforced the "web as a platform" by facilitating the emergence of web 2.0; simply because people are fed-up being tight in a Flintstone information age. As a result, IT's complaints about Facebook's success and prohibiting it is the cat chasing its own tail. Instead, it might be clever to take advantage of employees who enjoy web 2.0 at home, for years now.

If we live in a knowledge economy, innovation is a key driving force of performance and competitiveness. And everybody knows that the innovation pace has dramatically fastened over the last year because the game is open at global scale. China, India, Brazil and Russia are fierce challengers of Europe, North America and Japan. They definitely are not the only ones. And everybody knows that IT innovation is a major asset in the overall corporate innovation game. At the same time, Microsoft, IBM and likes currently are wondering what to do with social computing. They take a lot of time to market relevant and powerful solutions. Most of the time they revamp old appliances, brand them as 2.0 and full stop. They only satisfy people who are not in the know. They create dissatisfaction among employees. They favour both brainwash and brain drain so that you don't get the best employees. They cost time, resource and money. Overall, they jeopardize corporate performance. So it might be time to consider open-up your information ecosystem to real innovation by adopting products marketed by start-ups or crafted by value-added consultancies. When it comes to the bottom line, the risk vanishes.

If we live in an economy where innovation is a key factor of performance and competitiveness, we have to accept exploration and reprimand exploitation. We have to unleash the innovation that lies dormant within the firewall. We have to favour pilots, contextual applications, open-source, information and application mashups. The corporate information world needs no more systematic enterprise-wide stuff. Reductionism does not create relevance, it creates scarcity and underperformance. Relevance is created by situational applications, social software, interaction design, user-centricity and some basic features like APIs and personalized pages as Intranets. The corporate world needs no more old routines hidden behind new tools. Stop confusing documents and information. Stop forcing people using only emails and Enterprise Content Management. ECM reduces workflow to permission and conversation to versioning. Emails create confusion in conversations. This replicates ageless routines. Replication does not create performance in a world of innovation.

Enterprise 2.0 (again, social computing for organisations) is only the trendy catchword of a more dramatic change in the corporate world. It is about catching up with a knowledge economy. Organisations won't survive with routines dating back the 20's - 50's. Social computing participates in adapting organisations - their processes, behaviours and mindsets - to this reality. In that shift, (smart) reengineering, knowledge management, communities of practices are worth predecessors of social computing.

9 Comments

user-pic

Amen. This is the truth.

In the face of what's obvious to the 2.0 generation, this message will be learned the hard way - if companies stuck in the past refuse to understand it.

user-pic

Great post Olivier and contains many reasons why I reckon we'll be busy for a while to come!

user-pic

Well I can certainly empathise with the amazement you describe in your opening paragraph! I've lost count of the number of senior communications professionals (both internal and external) in well known organisations that I've had to explain what RSS is to!

But is this a particularly UK problem that we face? I do wonder sometimes whether our love affair with printed media has slowed our adoption of online methods for connecting and distributing information.

I do also wonder whether there is a link between legacy licensing restrictions on the distribution of media content and the resistance to adoption web 2.0 ways of working.

For example - in the past, information would come in by 'cuttings' packs which could only be passed on to a couple of directors. This practice has become embedded whereby only a few 'need-to-know' people would be kept informed. Comms professionals have then developed (without necessarily planning to) manual ways of emailing things between each other (or even passing paper!) which enables them to (just) get by keeping those who need to be informed up-to-date.

The attitude persists that 'we' (i.e. senior management) get by fine as we are - so why look at new innovative ways of doing things?

It goes back to that quaint old British mentality of "if it ain't broke - don't fix it"

user-pic

Alistair,

I can assure that it is not a UK problem. France is very similar when 2.0 has to deal with the working environment.

Olivier

user-pic

Bonjour, Olivier!

What a fantastic article you have put together above! Very representative of what is going on and what we are facing in various other countries, not just the UK and France. In my current job I am getting exposed to a whole bunch of other knowledge workers from various European countries and I am seeing that very same thing! It doesn't happen just as much in the US, Canada and Asia, but in Europe, there is still a long walk ahead of us and I am excited to be able to share your insights with others because you are just spot on! (Will link to your blog post shortly with some additional input)

Thanks for putting together such a great article!

Cheers!

Luis

user-pic

Incisive Olivier.
The base knowledge around E2.0 varies wildly across so many companies that it sometimes seems that only Gen Y can bring about the wholesale cultural shift required. The title of a post last month from Luis Suarez - 'Can you claim to be in social media without having a facebook account?' - says a lot here too. Many who should be more receptive to E2.0 in companies are passing judgement without having tried anything at all. FUD lives on. Even worse - in many cases they are not listening to those employees who are trying it out and may have ideas on how it can help in a specific, controlled manner within the company. This is simply unsustainable as an approach to business.

user-pic

Nice post Olivier.

One of the differences between social software and traditional collaborative tools used in organisations is that many people actually want to use social software - for the reasons you have explained.

Leading business thinkers agree that collaboration is the key capability for organisations to develop in the knowledge economy. Collaboration is voluntary, and can't be managed in a traditional command and control environment. Social software can provide the tools and the environment for collaboration in one hit - but of course people with an interest in preserving their positions in traditional hierarchies will resist its use. Like you, I would put many IT departments in this category, along with some senior decision makers.

I believe our job is to help people overcome their fears so they can realise the benefits of social software. If this means explaining what it is yet again, then so be it. Stripping away layers of excuses ( "I don't understand it", "I don't have time") will get us to the heart of the problem (fear!) eventually.

user-pic

Olivier - nice post.

You have to remember that we only want our people to collaborate when they are supposed to. They must seek permission from us before doing so otherwise bad things will happen. Very bad things. Users cannot be trusted to generate their own content.

*Ahem*

I think we are in a period of flux. It's been on and off since the late 80s. Email! Pause. The internet!!! Pause. And now we have another rush. It will take a while for things to settle.

user-pic

Excellent article! Your experience is one that many of us share, and your way of engaging it is super.

Leave a comment