Work brings some people intrinsic joy. These people feel in control of their work, feel good about themselves while working, find their work to be in harmony with their other activities. Pscyhologists describe these folks as having harmonious passion. But there's another kind of passion: obsessive passion. Those who are obsessively passionate feel an uncontrollable urge to engage in their work, feel more conflict between their passion and other areas in their life, and their work forms a large part of their often unstable and negative self-concept.

In my last post, I summarized Robert J. Vallerand's distinction between obsessive passion and harmonious passion. In the comment thread that followed, I noticed a couple of questions emerge: Is obsessive passion ever helpful? What should you do if you recognize that your passion for work is not harmonious, but obsessive? I'll address both of those in this post.

Some commentators argued that obsessive passion could be useful in the beginning stages of a new endeavor, such as when starting a new company. I disagree. Obsessive passion is rarely beneficial. It's not just that those with high levels of obsessive passion are committed, focused, and dedicated. Those who are obsessively passionate about their work are inflexibly, excessively and compulsively committed, finding it difficult to disengage. As such, they are setting up bad habits from the start, and risking burnout in the longer run. Note that harmonious passion is correlated with flow — the mental state of being completely present and fully immersed in a task. Research shows that it's flow that is conducive to creativity, not obsessive passion. The positive emotions and intrinsic joy that is associated with harmonious passion is what propels one to greatness, not the negative emotions, compulsions, and unstable ego that is associated with obsessive passion.

All of us have at least a little bit of obsessive and harmonious passion for our work. The key for work productivity and for buffering against work burnout is to increase your harmonious passion while reducing your obsessive passion.

How can we turn down the dial on obsessive passion and turn up the dial on harmonious passion? Unfortunately, there isn't a lot of scientific research on the practical side of passion (a state of affairs I seriously lament). I can think of a few things, however, that might help. I think it's a two-part process: first it's important to recognize that you are demonstrating obsessive passion, and then it's a matter of boosting your harmonious passion.

There are clear warning signs that you are obsessively passionate about your work. Here are some tests:

1. Do you have enough energy? Do you engage in your work with positive enthusiasm? Do you feel enjoyment doing what you do?
2. Do you define yourself by criteria other than work? If your self is a pie, how big of a bite does your work take out of it?
3. Do you have a positive self-image? Obsessive passion is correlated with a negative image of the self, including automatic subconscious associations between the self and the concept "unpleasant."
4. When you work, is your interior monologue positive — filled with words like "want to," "get to," and "can't wait to"? Or are words like "must," "need," and "have to" rummaging around?
5. Are you able to stop working when you want to? Recent research found that online gamers who were very harmoniously passionate about gaming felt positive emotions while playing, while gamers with obsessive passion felt more negative emotions both when playing and when prevented from playing. Do you feel a compulsion to work all the time, even when you really don't want to?
6. Do you get into a state of flow? Do you feel as though time has receded into the background, or do you feel the weight of pressure on your back? Flow is an enjoyable experience, whereas obsessive engagement feels more urgent.

If you're reading down that list and thinking, "no, no, no," these are signs that you may have obsessive, not harmonious, passion. If you do think your level of obsessive passion might be too high, there are some things you can do about it:

• Schedule real breaks. If you recognize you are obsessively passionate about your work, force yourself to get out of that headspace by scheduling other activities during the course of the day (like lunch with a friend, or a break to hit the gym). Block out time after work or on weekends for family, friends, and activities you enjoy. Having a schedule will keep you honest.
• Don't bring work home. If you can afford to, make it completely impossible to access your work once you leave work. Don't bring home your laptop. Leave those files on your desk. Keep separate email accounts for home and work, and don't check work email when you're at home (put up an out-of-office message if you have to). Obsessive passion is really just a bad habit, and habits can be broken gently.
• Change your thought patterns when you work. Fake the mindset of the harmoniously passionate person until you make it. For instance, convert thoughts of "must" and "need" to "want" and "desire." At first, this may feel awkward, but eventually the obsessively passionate mindset will dissipate, and so will the behaviors associated with it. A recent study suggests that changing your explicit thought patterns may increase self-esteem and harmonious passion.
• Commit to a new hobby. Often, investing too much self in one project is an indication of a negative core self. The more additional things outside of work contribute to a positive sense of self, the less space your work performance will take up in your ego, and the smaller your chances of burnout.

If all of this sounds incompatible with success, consider a case study: A young, very talented musician is trying to decide whether to launch his promising solo career, or to put it off a little while to learn more about the world around him. On the one hand, timing is very important in the music industry. There are many talented artists, and they could get a head start if he decided to postpone his career. On the other hand, talent isn't everything in music. Audiences not only respond to talent, but also to many subtle influences like sensitivity, expression, and wisdom, fed by experiences outside the musical realm.

The musician's name? Yo-Yo Ma. In the end, he chose to defer his career to expand his sense of self. Ma compares those years to an "emotional bank account in which you must draw the rest of your life." To be sure, that path wasn't all clear sailing for Ma; he earned a D+ in his music history course at Harvard. But if those years of undisciplined learning were detrimental to his career, I am hard-pressed to detect it. Yo-Yo Ma is one of the greatest cellists of all time, noted not just for his incredible talent and dedication, but also the breadth of his accomplishments, his compassion, thoughtfulness, knowledge, and positive enthusiasm. In other words, his harmonious passion.

Passion is one of our most important vehicles for performance, creativity, imagination, and ingenuity. By no means do I want to discourage passion. But we rarely realize how other important areas of life feed into our main passion. When one's life isn't in balance, passion can become obsessive and counterproductive. When a person feels good about their self and the work they are doing, and is capable of disengaging, passion becomes a wellspring of long-term success.

We announced the winners of the Management 2.0 Challenge (the first of three legs of the HBR/McKinsey M-Prize for Management Innovation) here last week. Those seven entries offer compelling evidence that the principles, social structures, and social technologies of the web not only offer up winning business models, they are the building blocks of a new management model for making organizations more resilient, inventive, and engaging.

Here are just three lessons from our management innovators about leveraging social technologies to create truly social organizations:

Trust your people with the future of the company

For all of the talk about empowering, involving, and engaging employees, why is it that so many organizations still tap into just a sliver of what individuals have to offer? According to Management 2.0 Challenge winner Jim Lavoie, it's because too many leaders focus on what they can get out of their people rather than entrusting them with the future of the company.

There's an emotional as well as a practical logic at work here. Only that level of trust, freedom, and responsibility can stir people to bring forth their full imagination, initiative, and passion. And no single leader, no matter how brilliant and gifted, can invent the future of his (or her) company alone.

In his story about software company Rite Solutions' innovation engine, a stock market-like forum for new ideas and collaborative platform for channeling development effort around the best, Lavoie suggests that it's not technology but first principles that make every person feel relevant and fully invested in the future of the company. Rite-Solutions makes a practice of those principles: innovation is everybody's job, every day (the stock market is part of new employee orientation and built into the everyday rhythm of work); ideas compete on equal footing whatever the source; and rewards are widely shared (idea generators and collaborators share in any cost savings or revenue produced).

Rite-Solutions' innovation engine demonstrates that leaders are willing to take direction from the crowd. In a twist on that theme, James and Bobby Fishkin argue in their winning hack, The Deliberative Corporation, that it's not enough to listen to the crowd, it's crucial to equip it. The Fishkins have developed a powerfully practical approach — including balanced briefings, moderated discussions, and expert testimony — to taking the bias, politics, and knee-jerk emotions out of decision-making in order to get at "what the people would think if they were thinking."

Maximize peer connections
As important as it is for employees to feel heard and respected by their leaders, it's the relationship between peers that generates the agility, inventiveness, and engagement at the heart of a truly social organization. A number of M-Prize finalists demonstrated the power of organizing around that principle, none more dramatically than Morning Star, a 40-year old food processing company founded on the belief that "the best human organizations are those in which people aren't managed by others, but in which participants coordinate among themselves, managing their own relationships and commitments to others."

That belief comes to life as the "Colleague Letter of Understanding (CLOU)," a sort of contract in which each colleague outlines his or her commitments to fellow colleagues, defines a fundamental purpose, lists activities, tracks performance, and reviews, comments, and builds upon others' work. Embedded in a purpose-built dynamic social network, the CLOU system has a real-time activity feed, personal pages, and global views that provide a live map of the enterprise. Paul Green, Jr., director of the company's Self-Management Institute, takes stock of the advantages of making everyone their own (and their colleagues') manager in his winning M-Prize story: the network of colleague relationships defines the org chart, rather than the other way around, and reveals the "natural" hierarchy of authority based on expertise and achievement; the drive for performance actually strengthens without traditional oversight; and everything happens more quickly and with less conflict.

If Morning Star seems like an extreme (or just extremely progressive) case, consider the story of fellow winner Frédéric Leconte, who developed a global, peer-driven training initiative at eyeglass lens manufacturer Essilor, designed to promote locally-grown insight and connect peers across 102 sites in 40 countries. Some 800 volunteer trainers and coaches have taken charge of the learning and personal growth agenda and help to share an ever-evolving curriculum based on new discoveries and practices from the shop floor.

Capitalize on the Obvious

Sometimes the simplest lever can crack open the biggest opportunity for change. That's what Kim Spinder learned when, as an employee for the Dutch ministry, she invented a hack to eliminate government red tape and replace bureaucracy with free-form, cross-agency collaboration. Her simple web-based booking system was designed to allow any Dutch government worker from any agency in any location to work at any other government office.

As Spinder describes in her winning M-Prize story, the "Open Government Places" initiative (which now includes some 53 agencies and 554 workplaces), does more than just share space, it is redefining the idea of the "office" and reinvigorating participants' work-style (with an emphasis on open communication and flexibility); it is breaking down organizational boundaries to foreground individual expertise and experience (and make people and services accessible via a social network); and it is generating spontaneous connection and collaboration among co-workers who were previously invisible to each other. All without a budget or permission.

Instead, says Spinder, she and her team just "capitalized on the obvious": the need for change, the resources waiting to be tapped, and the basic human desire to contribute to positive change. She offers up classic Winston Churchill wisdom as inspiration for aspiring management innovators: "Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." Or, as he also said, "If you're going through hell, keep going."

Vous l’avez peut être remarqué en vous baladant sur youtube, mais une publicité pas comme les autres est en ce moment en ligne. Il s’agit de la première bannière Masthead utilisant la technologie Doubleclick Studio et le HTML5, réalisée par l’agence Biborg et Alpha Layer.

Elle a été la gagnante du concours HTML5 organisé par DoubleClick qui a offert au gagnant  la homepage de YouTube pendant une journée.

Comme vous le savez peut être il est strictement interdit de faire de la montgolfière sur Paris pour des raisons de sécurité. Dommage, car l’architecture y est comme nul part ailleurs.

Cette bannière originale vous propose donc de monter dans une montgolfière, d’en choisir la couleur et de sur voler le tout Paris via une carte similaire à Google maps. Pour ceux qui sont sur Google Chrome, l’expérience est en 3D.

Des destinations vous sont proposées comme celle du Mot Saint Michel, ou encore celle du château de Versailles. Vous pouvez naviguer grâce à votre souris et à une manette télécommandée de la montgolfière.

L’interactivité avec le consommateur ou le client, peut aujourd’hui, aussi se consommer à travers des expériences utilisateurs dans les bannières. Il y aurait beaucoup d’idées créatives à exploiter sur ce nouveau support. En bref, une belle campagne qui n’a rien à vendre pour le moment, mais qui a le métite de faire connaître les agences qui l’ont réalisé.

Pour testez par vous même, c’est par ici : http://www.vue-du-ciel-en-html5.com/demo/

• L’intimité digitale des cadres – une question de pouvoir?

  ” Pierre Bourdieu recita, Jacques Rancière escucha…
  Plus on sait moins on partage. Une enquête de l’ifop récente qui a été reprise par de nombreux blogueurs, dont Reyt montre la résistance des cadres aux réseaux sociaux, quand bien même en sont-ils de plus en plus des utilisateurs. “

  tags: informationsharing intimacy privacy power

  • De manière apparemment paradoxale, ceux dont on attendrait qu’ils soient ouverts aux technologies de la connaissance sont les plus hostiles, notamment à celles qui facilitent son partage, et semblent y résister le plus.
  • La révolution que l’on attend des médias sociaux, n’est pas cette société de la connaissance promise dans les années 2000, mais une guerre de tranchée où ceux qui sont supposés savoir, ne serait-ce que par un niveau d’éducation et de formation plus élevé, dissimulent le savoir et l’information, en le protégeant sans doute par des signes d’autorité.
  • L’économie de l’information alimente à la fois un capital de connaissance, et un capital relationnel.
  • Ce que les praticiens savent déjà, plus le niveau d’éducation est élevé, ou plus les clients pensent être éduqués, et plus la relation est difficile.
  • Une réflexion sur la nature et le sens de l’information échangée est donc essentielle, avant même de s’intéresser aux propriétés des réseaux. Sa valeur dépend de son usage : grooming ou renseignement.

• Is Business-centric Social Networking a Revolution — or a Ruse?

  “Programs like Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn have become a popular way for families and groups of friends (or groups of strangers) to share information and organize their lives. Now corporations are hoping they can tap into those capabilities as a way to improve employee productivity, collaboration and communication on the job — and a long line of software vendors, such as Cisco, SAP, Oracle, Microsoft, IBM and Salesforce.com, along with upstarts like Yammer, are hoping to position themselves as the platform to integrate social networking and business processes.

  But will it work? And is it worth it?”

  tags: socialnetworking business interactions organization silos businessprocess communities

  • “Clearly, social media has revolutionized how human beings interact,” says Kendall Whitehouse, director of new media at Wharton. “It’s logical to ask how it can transform internal business processes.
  • Wharton management professor Nancy Rothbard says the introduction of social networking into office culture could have “profound” implications for the way businesses are structured. “The benefit of social networking is that it creates communities, but it creates a very different kind of community than offline communities,”
  • The piece of this that can be really amazing is that it creates community action, awareness and knowledge about issues and events that may be relevant, and creates a sense of intimacy, which can lead to trust and closeness.”
  • It is unclear, however, if that idealized scenario can be fully achieved in a real-life workplace,
  • IBM executives talked about how the company was working to integrate social tools into its own operations with the addition of collaboration software for viewing documents, forums to post ideas and mobile applications.
  • Cisco CEO John Chambers said the company has been using social networking internally to “flatten the organization.” In this model, social networks are used to build product and project management teams.
  • Chambers said in October that Cisco’s move to use a social networking hierarchy to run the business was among the most significant challenges facing the company. “The thing that’s about to change for organization structures is that executives will serve on social networking groups … based on function,” noted Chambers. In this model, executives are viewed more as general managers and can be called on to fill multiple functions based on their expertise.
  • I started to see [that] the people adding value in the company were not the senior VPs and the VPs, but this powerful network of individual contributors [providing business ideas].”
  • For one thing, employees could easily become overwhelmed by too much communication. For another, there are significant variances in the way people post on social networking sites — or whether they post at al
  • There are uses for social networking as a collaboration tool when working together in teams,” she says. “However, merely having social networking on all the time can divert employee attention.”
  • “It’s not clear that corporate social networking will be any different than what was offered before,” Hill notes. “The employee asks, ‘Why would I trust your team with my information?’ The tools are better, but information is still in a silo.”
  • “To succeed in a big way, social networking will have to interface with standard enterprise software.”

• A Facebook for Patients: IBM’s Medical Social Network Gets an Upgrade | Fast Company

  “IBM has a long-standing commitment to health care and global health. This week the company revamped its “patient portal.” Dubbed the IBM Patient Empowerment System, it now acts like a social network for participating patients. “

  tags: IBM health2.0 health patients socialnetworks

  • Especially intriguing here is the interactive nature of the Patient Empowerment System–if a person has an urgent question about the interaction of two drugs, the system will cross check his or her medical records and background and warn yes or no to taking a particular medicine
  • It also allows patients to log in, update their profiles with prescription information, symptom complaints, blood pressure readings, and to find other patients struggling with similar illnesses or diseases. A patient can send a message to other patients and ask questions about certain medications or offer advice from personal experience
  • PatientsLikeMe is an independent online social network that connects patients based on disease affliction and the focus is on sharing the experience

  • “Today, patients want to be more involved in managing their clinical data, and are eager to discover relevant and useful medical information for their benefi

• How to Best Use Collaboration IT

  “Limiting collaboration software to small teams and short time periods works best, a scholar of “knowledge workers” says.”

  tags: collaboration software measurement

  • The fact is that most organizations aren’t really serious enough yet about collaboration to measure it much. They tend to be a lot more interested in traffic to their website than traffic on their collaboration tools site
  • Historically, companies were quite interested in increasing the amount of collaboration. Now they are interested in targeting and limiting collaboration because people are getting overwhelmed
  • Deloitte has found that giving people a bunch of tools and saying “Go innovate and share ideas” doesn’t work very well. Limiting the duration of a program is critical, and so is limiting the set of people that it makes sense to collaborate with.
  • People did get excited about these more bottom-up social tools in that they promised a “people’s revolution” in collaboration. I think many companies are uncomfortable with unstructured tools. But they are quite comfortable with Microsoft [software] and can say “We’ve got blogs, social tagging, discussion databases.”
  • The whole idea of collaboration and social media—but in the context of a work process—is one that is going to take off. In other words, you might build a social-networking tool around a specific work process [with tools that] keep track of where you are and your tasks.

• Why SharePoint 2010 may not be the Answer to the Social Intranet

  tags: sharepoint intranet intranet2.0 socialintranet

• Community Management Fundamentals

  tags: communities communitymanagement communitymanager onlinecommunities

• Définition et usages de l’intranet 2.0

  ” mais a-t-on déjà pris le temps d’en définir les contours ? Bon en fait il existe déjà de nombreuses définitions et c’est plutôt moi qui suis à la traine sur ce sujet… Je vous propose donc de rattraper ce retard et de faire le point avec vous sur ce meta-concept. « Meta-concept » ? Oui tout à fait, car il n’existe pas réellement de définition précise, uniquement des interprétations de l’évolution de l’outil informatique en entreprise. Vaste sujet qui mérite quelques explications.”

  tags: intranet2.0 intranet socialintranet information knowledge communities collaboration application data

  • • Les portails d’entreprise qui sont centrés sur le contenu et la connaissance, mais manquent de participation ;
    • Les plateformes de discussions qui sont déconnectées des processus et applications métiers ;
    • Les outils de collaboration qui sont pauvres en contenus.
  • Information. Pour être qualifiée de « 2.0″, l’information doit pouvoir circuler de bas en haut et de façon transversale.
  • Connaissance. Une gestion de la connaissance efficace passe par des bonnes pratiques de capitalisation (grâce aux wikis) et de structuration (grâce aux tags
  • Cette connaissance doit également pouvoir être facilement diffusée de façon formelle ou informelle
  • Communautés. Pas de 2.0 sans réseau social d’entreprise. Les collaborateurs doivent donc bénéficier d’un profil riche sur le RSE (
  • Ils doivent également pouvoir rejoindre des groupes (publics, privés ou cachés) ainsi que contribuer à des thématiques (en utilisant un système de thèmes hiérarchisés).
  • Collaboration. Impossible de parler de « 2.0″ sans aborder la collaboration. Nous parlons bien ici de collaboration active autour d’outils de gestion de projet,
  • Applications et données. Les intranets intègrent une couche applicative depuis bien longtemps, l’évolution logique va donc être d’assouplir ces applications ainsi que leur exploitation / évolution / découverte à l’aide de Marketplace ou App Store,
  • 

• Impact des médias sociaux dans l’entreprise : un problème bien différent de la simple publicité

  “Quand on pense médias sociaux ou réseaux sociaux, ce qui vient en tête en premier est l’opportunité pour l’entreprise de pouvoir être plus visible auprès de potentiels consommateurs. Mais derrière cette opportunité réelle se cache des enjeux bien plus importants pour l’entreprise, et s’ils ne sont pas résolus en amont des opérations sur ce canal coûtent très cher, aussi bien en terme de projets qui n’ont pas les performances attendues qu’en terme de notoriété et d’image de marque de l’entreprise. L’arbre qui cache la forêt en clair.”

  tags: socialmedia performance operations informationbroadcasting competences strategy

  • La performance globale de l’entreprise ne subit pas une croissance exponentielle grâce aux opérations sur les médias sociaux et la réponse à ce constat pour les grandes entreprises réside dans le fait que l’entreprise n’est pas prête à faire levier sur ce nouveau canal d’échange d’informations
  • Une des problématiques majeures des entreprises sur les médias sociaux n’est pas de capter des fans ou d’avoir une bonne visibilité sur les différents supports qui composent les médias sociaux. C’est de pouvoir diffuser les informations de la manière attendue par les utilisateurs de ce canal de communication : personnalisée, avec une fréquence forte, avec des contenus toujours nouveaux et originaux
  • les marques doivent être en position d’écouter les revendications des clients ou prospects et de les intégrer dans leurs réflexions pour les produits ou services à venir, et le plus vite possible.
  • les circuits de remontée d’informations de ce type ne sont pas adaptés. Elles qui ont l’habitude de faire appel aux consommateurs sur des cycles longs pour créer leurs nouveaux produits et services, elles sont mises sous pression très régulièrement et pointées du doigt lorsqu’elles font des erreurs.
  • Collaborateurs qui n’ont généralement pas eu l’occasion de développer des compétences en adéquation avec les nouveaux modes de communication web mais qui doivent gérer des projets nouveaux avec des outils nouveaux sans avoir obtenus de formation spécifique ni d’outils de gestion adaptés.
  • il dépasse le simple cadre de la communication externe pour intégrer les niveaux de création de produits, les procédures de gestion de projets internes et externes, la gestion des ressources humaines

• Creating Collaboration Takes More Than Technology

  “Wikis, Web conferencing, and the like won’t help people work together if the corporate culture is internally competitive and hierarchical, writes Evan Rosen “

  tags: enterprise2.0 socialbusiness collaboration culture processes businessprocess value

  • <!–STORY–>

    Why should any organization adopt collaboration? There’s only one reason—value creation.

  • The tools alone have failed to make the company collaborative. Worse yet, the tools may have created no real value, and the decision-makers who had pinned such high hopes on these tools are surprised.
  • Are the tools the problem? More likely, the problem is the organization. When tools fail to create value, it’s usually because decision-makers adopt tools before the company’s culture and processes are collaboration-ready.
  • If the culture is hierarchical and internally competitive, it will take more than tools to shift the culture. Just because a competitor uses collaborative tools doesn’t mean the time is right for your organization to do likewise. If the competitor is apparently deriving value from tools, maybe it’s because the competitor’s culture is more collaborative and the tools are extending and enhancing the culture

  • Focus on Culture Before Tools

    To create value, tools must fit the culture. If your organization’s culture is command and control, the culture must shift to let collaboration happen

  • The most effective culture shift happens when senior leaders set the stage, so that people at all levels, functions, business units, and regions want to collaborate rather than internally compete

  • • Fit Tools into Business Processes

    Too often, organizations use collaboration tools just for meetings or project status updates. Getting maximum value from tools requires integrating these technologies into the way the business operates, namely specific functional processes.

• Social Software for Business Performance

  “Social software has unique capabilities to address current operating challenges and improve operating metrics. To capture this value, however, companies will need to more systematically assess the operating metrics that have the greatest potential to move the needle and then strategically deploy social software to ensure near-term performance impact with modest investment.”

  tags: enterprise2.0 socialsoftware adoption performance businessperformance strategy deloitte report exception

  • Profound changes are underway. The current technologies support standard business processes but fail to support the dynamic informal communications needed for resolving exceptions
  • Focusing on adoption is a dead-end strategy. Adoption metrics have not historically addressed what matters most to employees, managers or executives. As long as adoption is the primary measure of success, resistance, at all levels, will likely block successful social software deployment.
  • Companies must be strategic. Social software, applied against the problem of exception handling, can directly and measurably impact operating metrics and improve business performance.
  • Companies must be decisive. Too often, companies implement social software without clear business objectives or a strategy for moving the needle on organizational performance.

• Google’s Disruption Of Enterprise Email Market And Their “Social Challenges”

  “Ever since Gmail captured the imagination of consumers, Google has been trying to push Google Apps to enterprise customers. In spite of some news about problems in their implementation for big customers, it has been gaining traction steadily. The biggest attraction towards Google Apps Email over other systems is the cost. Even though other players like Microsoft and IBM have a cloud strategy, Google’s pricing makes Google Apps very attractive for many enterprises. “

  tags: google ibm email cloud cloudcomputing cisco socialbusiness

  • Cisco pulled the plug two days back. They will no longer be investing resources on this service and they will help the current customers move out to another email system of their choice after their contract gets over
  • The product has been well received, but we’ve since learned that customers have come to view their email as a mature and commoditized tool versus a long-term differentiated element of their collaboration strategy. We’ve also heard that customers are eager to embrace emerging collaboration tools such as social software and video.
  • Even though Microsoft has woken up to this reality and has started pushing cloud based Exchange service, I have a feeling that Google will ultimately win the race because of the expected success of Android in the enterprise market.
  • However, Google is having a weak spot in their Google Apps strategy. As pointed out by Cisco’s Ms. Chrapathy, social is fast reducing the role of email in any business. Salesforce.com recently highlighted how DeMatteo Monness, a financial services company, moved their conversation away from email to their Chatter service. We are increasingly seeing enterprises embracing social in their workflow and the emergence of services like Tibbr, Chatter, etc. only goes on to highlight how social is transforming the enterprise landscape for better.
  • Unfortunately, Google has absolutely no clue on how to execute their social strategy and it is going to hurt them badly sooner than later. With IBM firming up their Social Business vision, the threat to Google’s enterprise strategy is just round the corner

• Social Intranet – The Intersection Diagram

  “Often in SharePoint 2010 implementations we see Portals, Team sites and Social sites being treated as separate conceptual entities. Although they have their own merits and add specific value individualy, it is in “the intersection” where we find the ideal balance of flexibility, context and business alignment for open collaboration. Furthermore, in the intersection, the user experience allow us to easily flow between the different spheres and levels of formality.”

  tags: intranet socialintranet intranet2.0 sharepoint alignment collaboration portals opencollaboration

  • 

• L’entreprise est sur la voie de la rédemption

  “La cause est donc entendue : l’entreprise – et notamment la grande entreprise – est devenue un mal. Mal absolu selon quelques-uns, mal nécessaire selon les autres. Il lui fallait réagir.”

  tags: sustainability Sustainabledevelopment management strategy socialresponsability humanresources valuecreation cocreation sharedvalue

  • Sur le chemin de la rédemption, la première étape a été celle du management compassionnel.
  • Plus généralement, l’argent versé par l’entreprise à une noble cause vient nécessairement en déduction des sommes affectables à d’autres projets plus rentables. Même si ces initiatives sont précieuses, elles ne peuvent donc pas, pour la plupart, prendre une très grande ampleur.
  • Le deuxième temps de la rédemption est bien engagé. Il concerne la mesure de la performance.
  • Ainsi, parmi les entreprises du CAC 40, deux seulement évaluaient en 2008 leurs dirigeants sur des critères non exclusivement financiers, mais aussi sociaux. Elles sont aujourd’hui déjà dix 
  • Enfin, de nombreuses études récentes ont confirmé, par exemple, que les investissements réalisés par les entreprises en faveur du bien-être des collaborateurs – programmes de nutrition, salles de sport, etc. – offraient un payback plus élevé que bon nombre de programmes industriels.
  • Heureusement, le troisième temps de la rédemption est annoncé, avec l’émergence du concept de “valeur partagée”.
  • Ces exemples s’écartent radicalement de la conception habituelle de la responsabilité sociale d’entreprise. En effet, il ne s’agit ici en rien de générosité, mais d’investissements judicieux. En effet, les problèmes de la société – pauvreté, chômage, pollution, épuisement des ressources naturelles, etc. – constituent pour l’entreprise autant de menaces pour son activité et ses profits de demain.
  • L’entreprise peut choisir de se focaliser sur des objectifs principalement financiers et de court terme, en répondant strictement aux besoins immédiats de ses clients actuels. Ou bien, elle peut chercher à traiter, plus largement, les besoins des communautés essentielles à son activité et viser à créer une valeur partagée. Selon Michael Porter, “la valeur partagée est la clé de la prochaine vague d’innovation et de croissance”.

• Video: Gartner urges business to integrate social media and CRM

  “The integration of social media and CRM technology will give businesses an unprecedented ability to build deep relationships with their customers within a few years, according to analyst Gartner.”

  tags: gartner socialmedia crm socialcrm customerexperience relationship customer

  • But many businesses are missing out because they view social networking as another sales and support channel, rather than a way of understanding their customers,
  • Over the past decade CRM has been about management of the customer. With social media, its about relationships.
  • There is a lot of effort going into improving customer experience. It’s key to get consistency across different channels so their experience does not vary,”
  • “Logically, how do you approach getting a single view of the customer voice? You can either do that by ripping out all your systems and trying to buy a system that does it all. Or by using a virtual system that can bring all the silos together.
  • “The Nirvana is to have a centralised approach, but that is not yet possible, so you need a hybrid approach.”

• Intertwingled Work and Adaptive Case Management

  ” I’ll will try to summarize one theme John develops that seems directly relevant to Intertwingled Work.”

  tags: adaptivecasemanagement work processes collaboration casemanagement judgment knowledgework unpredictability emergence

  • 1) Adaptive Case Management is a data rather than process centric way of looking at how people deal with situations centered around a particular problem, issue, or case. It’s intended to support people who need to make decisions that depend on complex and unpredictable circumstances associated with the case that require judgment and knowledge work rather than application of a deterministic process.
  • 2) Observable work can be thought of as an object of Adaptive Case Management, focusing discovery, analysis, requests for advice or assistance and recording of outcomes on the work itself.
  • Because the process is emergent, you have to model the process using something that people can read, add to, and manipulate readily while they are doing other thing
  • Jordan describes the difference between Social and Business Process reengineering as the difference between orchestrating a unique response to the circumstances of a case, versus a futile attempt to capture a response as a rigid business process.
  • the key was her ability to figure out What, How and Why. Then she could explain the new process (loosely described as a set of interleaved intelligence communities) and how people could use the technology to do their jobs better.”

• Reward is the spur to corporate culture change

  “If a company wants to change its culture to one where positive risk management is at its very core, then analysing and making improvements to the various strands from which the culture of a company is made up can provide a valuable way to effect this change.

  Five key questions on using reward as the driver for change

  One of the key tools in changing the culture of a company and focusing its employees on risk management and accountable behaviour is to target its remuneration structure – and the underlying performance-management system that may impact on remuneration.”

  tags: rewards alignment change culture remuneration strategy riskmanagement

  • Remuneration committees should have a clear understanding of the strategic direction of the company and should consider what financial and non-financial targets are appropriate for the company’s most senior executives, in line with the desired culture.
  • Reward will only be a useful tool in shaping behaviour if employees are aware of the factors that influence it. Employers can raise awareness through the intranet, in emails to employees, in discussions between employees and their managers and in bonus scheme documentation.

• Les outils sociaux en entreprise ne font pas seuls la compétitivité

  ”

  En 2010, plus de 65 % des entreprises avaient déjà mis en place des logiciels qui facilitent la communication et la solidification des liens sociaux. Pour autant, cela ne veut pas dire qu’ils sont acceptés par les utilisateurs, rapporte Deloitte dans une étude sur l’utilité des logiciels sociaux en entreprise. “

  tags: socialnetworking management middlemanagement productivity innovation deloitte

  • Qui précise qu’il faut du coup mettre en place des objectifs clairs dans la pratique et axer la stratégie sur les gains de productivité. Les entreprises doivent en effet bâtir une véritable stratégie d’utilisation et de traitement des données collectées.
  • 64 % des entreprises qui ont adopté ce type de logiciels connaissent des réticences de la part du management.
  • De plus, l’étude souligne que beaucoup  les entreprises qui ne veulent pas mettre en place ce type de solutions, alors même que l’investissement est souvent peu important, y perdront beaucoup. Elles risquent en effet de prendre du retard en termes d’innovation.
  • Les logiciels utilisés doivent permettre d’améliorer la productivité à court terme et de transformer les modèles d’organisation et de production sur le long term
  • Du côté de Dell, en un an, 55 % des employés ont utilisé le logiciel social. Il en ressort déjà 4100 idées, 225 000 votes et 18 500 commentaires.

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

Related posts:

1. Liens de la semaine (weekly)
2. Liens de la semaine (weekly)
3. Liens de la semaine (weekly)
4. Liens de la semaine (weekly)
5. Liens de la semaine (weekly)

• TIBCO launches tibbr: enough to make Enterprise 2.0 viable?

  “Later this morning I am in San Francisco for the official launch of tibbr, TIBCO’s foray into the world of social networking for the enterprise. In typical TIBCO fashion this is something of a low key launch. If tibbr is deployed correctly, it could represent the way I have envisaged Enterprise 2.0.”

  tags: enterprise2.0 enterprisesocialsoftware enterprisesocialnetworks TIBCO tibbr email

  • It intelligently marries people, process and context, delivering information the way people want to consume. What do I mean?
  • You’ll find TIBCO in large enterprises where there is a need to integrate real time data across disparate applications and systems
  • It has tabs for events and people but more importantly it includes bi-directional feeds in and out of major applications like Salesforce.com, Oracle Expense Management and SAP CRM.  That means business processes can trigger events which are surfaced inside tibbr for action.
  • whether this means that users could use tibbr as an email replacement: “That’s possible,” he said. If correct then TIBCO is on to something because from what I saw, it is no longer necessary to jump from one application to another
  • In the hour TIBCO spent with me, I felt myself being drawn into what tibbr can offer and seeing use cases without having to worry whether the technology can deliver. Unlike other systems, I wasn’t left thinking that this is a solution looking for a problem.

• Un-Manage Your Employees

  “If you want to grow and delegate successfully, there’s no way you can function without them. Right?

  Wrong. When you hire people who do nothing but manage, you implicitly say to the rest of your employees, “Don’t worry about the coordination or structure of your work—all these concerns now belong to the manager.” When people don’t have to think about the totality of their work environment, because that’s now the manager’s job, they’re less engaged, less motivated and less efficient.”

  tags: management unmanagement reporting casestudies 37signals trust autonomy freedom humanresources

  • 1. Each employee gets a credit card and is told to use it wisely. No expense reports, no justifications, no haggling. They simply forward the receipts to a shared inbox in case of an audi
  • 2. We don’t count vacation or sick days. People who are working on things they care about are unlikely to game the system or take advantage of free-ranging liberties. We’ve found that we actually need to remind people to take vacation, not keep a tally of who takes too much.
  • We also let our teams manage each other. Every week, one employee gets to be manager and set the rough agenda, review others’ work, write a company status update, and generally be the go-to person for their colleague
  • Gone is the complaining about what management is forcing them to do, because rotating management gives them a clear perspective of both sides of the fence.
  • You might be thinking, “This is crazy—it would never work at my company.” And you may be right. But I think there’s a greater chance that it would work.

• What Social Media and Enterprise 2.0 Can Bring to HR Processes

  “We covered “The Business Value of Social Media and Enterprise 2.0” with an emphasis on HR process because of the audience. I want to share with you a bit of my thoughts from that session. I first set some context with the classic 2006 McKinsey report on IT spending most of their budgets on transactions but the real business value is in the interactions between people and this area has been underinvested”

  tags: enterprise2.0 humanresources HRprocesses processes socialmedia interactions transactions businessvalue recruitment engagement employeesengagement

  • A key is the alignment of these new tools with business process and tasks. We are also seeing more integration of capabilities within a single tool set.
  • I find these tools work best when aligned with business process and are not simply introduced as capabilities such as phones or email.
  • Recruitment: They are able to more effectively post vacancies with increased participation from internal candidates and volunteers.

  • Learning and development: A third of training courses for employees and volunteers are done online through social media.  There is a significant improvement in the percentage of finished courses versus started only.

  • Compensation and benefits: Now updated forms are shared more effectively. There is a single storage accessible from all location
  • HR Process:  They are now more effectively enabling and disabling users on the computer network.
  • Employee Engagement: There is increased interaction among locations, including and especially photos and videos. There is greater relationship building among patients and families.

• Game Theory for Enterprise 2.0 Adoption

  “In John Hopson’s article Behavioral Game Design he shares the basic ways people react to different patterns of rewards. He ends the article with this: “Each contingency is an arrangement of time, activity, and reward, and there are an infinite number of ways these elements can be combined to produce the pattern of activity you want from your players.””

  tags: gamification rewards games gaming enterprise2.0 profile adoption

  • Add a “date field” for the updated date. Display “recently updated profiles” list on the profiles dashboard.
  • Add a “date field for the last viewed date. Display “recently viewed profiles” list on the profiles dashboard
  • Add a “int field” to store the count of profile views. Display “most viewed profiles” list on the profiles dashboard.
  • Display a limited “profile recently viewed by” list in member’s profile. The limit works with time, while the list surfaces activity.  This encourages connection
  • Display “recent activity stream with dates” in member’s profile.  This encourages activity across the platform
  • Add two “int fields” to store the profile point counts. Members should be awarded virtual cash for increasing the value of the Enterprise 2.0 Platform. 

• The Enterprise 2.0 Strategy of Gamification

  “Gamification is the use of game play mechanics for non-game applications, in order to encourage people to adopt the applications. It also strives to encourage users to engage in desired behaviors in connection with the applications. “

  tags: software gamification enterprise2.0 maslow gaming

  • Gamification in Enterprise 2.0 is about Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, a theory in psychology, proposed by Abraham Maslow in his 1943 paper A Theory of Human Motivation
  • 

• Poking at the Soft Underbelly of Social Media

  “Firstly, we released a white paper by noted futurist and change agent Geoffrey Moore on Systems of Engagement and the Future of Enterprise IT. The report posed some challenging questions about the world of Systems of Record. It reflected on the ground that we have all been tilling for the ast 20 years and its connection (or some would speculate, lack thereof) to the new world of Systems of Engagement, aka Social Business aka Enterprise 2.0 (so as not to offend any of the legions of consultants who are currently battling over the right term).

  Secondly, I spent a good deal of time with a reporter from a major business publication who was interested in the rumors that a major bank (speculation was Bank of America or J.P. Morgan or Citigroup) was the next Wikileaks target. One of the issues we discussed was what this meant for the future of social media. Other than, of course, the obvious conclusion that one should be very suspect of anyone in your organization lip synching to Lady Gaga, who has the largest Twitter following in the world — 7,829,385 followers.”

  tags: socialmedia records systemsofrecord wikileaks governance information informationgovernance content contentmanagement legal policies

  • But all this social information and content is something that needs management and governance. I hate to even say this, for fear it may put me in the not cool part of the social crowd. Probably the adult version of the crowd I hung around in when I was an all-state bass clarinetist in high school.
  • But sooner or later, we are going to have to getting serious about how we want to manage social content. Because the tension to keep it all (to improve the knowledge base of the organization) vs. the tension to get rid of it all as quickly as possible (to keep the lawyers at bay) is going to escalate quickly. This content is valuable to the business. This content is most likely not a record in the ARMA sense (although some might be). But it is electronically stored information in the FRCP (Federal Rules of Civil Procedure) sense. And for organizations that do “social” well, there will be a hell of a lot of it.
  • Firstly, even though the Wikileaks cable fiasco really had nothing to do with social technologies and had everything to do with the usual caution that the weakest link in our security systems are our people, it will inevitably give ammunition to those ill disposed toward social technologies in the first place
  • Secondly, the courts are increasingly including outside-the-firewall social information in discovery requests. Per The Modern Archivist…”Courts have also found that social media and e-discovery are made for each other.
  • Thirdly, many organizations have policies relative to the old era of systems of record that would seem difficult if not impossible to extend into the era of social technologies. But they are doing so anyway.
  • Social technologies have the ability to transform organizations and make them smarter and more responsive. They can help organizations more quickly come up with answers to difficult questions. They create exponentially more and more varied and more informal information than our kludgy old email systems. The systems become smarter over time as the knowledge base builds. The business imperative of responsiveness and dexterity encourages us to retain this information.
  • This is all terrific until something occurs that unleashes the lawyers and the e-discovery requests. And then what? The approach of the courts hasn’t been that social content is new and different and needs to be treated differently because of the unique benefits it brings to the business and society
  • Let’s start thinking systematically about how we should manage and govern and retain all of this ephemeral content. Let’s start thinking about how our old system of records definitions need to change. Let’s start thinking about a different paradigm for managing information other than just extending the old paper definitions further and further into the world of electronic information. Let’s understand that there are risks in just winging it. Let’s get on with implementing social technologies, but responsibly.

• Pour une gouvernance de l’information

  tags: ibm informationoverload governance quality storage infrastructure lifecycle data datalyfecycle privacy security datagovernance

• Critical thinking in the organization

  “Critical thinking calls for a persistent effort to examine any belief or supposed form of knowledge in the light of the evidence that supports it and the further conclusions to which it tends. It also generally requires ability to recognize problems, to find workable means for meeting those problems, to gather and marshal pertinent information, to recognize unstated assumptions and values, to comprehend and use language with accuracy, clarity, and discrimination, to interpret data, to appraise evidence and evaluate arguments, to recognize the existence (or non-existence) of logical relationships between propositions, to draw warranted conclusions and generalizations, to put to test the conclusions and generalizations at which one arrives, to reconstruct one’s patterns of beliefs on the basis of wider experience, and to render accurate judgments about specific things and qualities in everyday life.”

  tags: criticalthinking problemsolving personalknowledgemanagement seek sense share sharing

  • 
  • but asking employees to engage in real critical thinking, and accepting the resulting actions, will not work unless there is a two-way flow of power and authority.

• Ecouter n’est plus suffisant, il faut réagir… entre « community management » et social CRM

  “La tendance est en effet de moins en moins à se contenter d’écouter. Les prestations de veille se complètent progressivement en intégrant des offres/fonctionnalités réactives ou de community management. Un métier encore jeune, en pleine explosion mais bien plus compliqué qu’il n’y paraît, et pas toujours bien compris. “

  tags: communitymanagement socialcrm watch ROI RONI risk employees curation storytelling e-reputation

  • Si on est à même d’identifier les plus grands fans et détracteurs (avec le sujet épineux de l’évaluation de l’influence ou de l’audience de ceux-ci) online, il y a matière à les traiter de manière spécifique tout au long de l’année
  • La création ou curation de contenus et le storytelling seront aussi des expertises clefs pour nourrir ces échanges… Certaines marques lancent même leur « social media room » comme Gatorade ou H&M
  • définit le SRM avec la formule suivante : SRM = CRM (Client) + PRM (Prospect) + Stratégie d’influence
  • Le serpent de mer de l’analyse du ROI est encore loin d’être réglé car même si cela fait sens de savoir ce qu’on dit de vous, le monitoring de l’e-reputation est d’abord un coût à court terme.
  • Un point à ne pas oublier en matière d’e-reputation est enfin la prise en compte du risque salarié. Les entreprises américaines sont déjà en avance en matière de formation et sensibilisation (via des social media guidelines par exemple) de leurs propres employés.
  • Avez-vous assez confiance dans vos collaborateurs, leurs langages, leurs comportements, leurs expertises ? « Les entreprises vont devoir rapidement redéfinir les limites des contextes où l’on peut/veut intervenir : il est désormais indispensable de savoir quel rôle on joue dans quel contexte, quelle figure on endosse dans quel milieu (figure privée, figure du consommateur, figure du citoyen, figure du salarié, figure du patron d’entreprise, etc.)
  • Et où trouver le juste milieu entre « personal branding »  qui profite aussi à l’employeur et autopromo incontrôlée au profit pure de l’employé. « Ces nouvelles questions risquent de révolutionner tout simplement le Droit
  • Enfin, une autre approche du social CRM est de réfléchir à concevoir sa propre communauté mais c’est une démarche à long terme et non sans péril en dehors du fait que toutes les marques ne sont pas forcément adaptées à cette approche.

• Department of Defense: access to Internet-based capabilities is critical, despite risks

  “In 2011, Internet-based capabilities, including social networking, are no longer a “nice to have” at the Department of Defense. According to official documents, policies statements, and the example set by the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, these capabilities can and do contribute to the missions of the Pentagon. Yes, loose tweets may sink fleets, as a read of the U.S. Navy social media handbook reminds sailors, but the opportunities appear to balance the risks.”

  tags: socialmedia governance policies casestudies departmentofdefense risk

  • As a result of these findings, it was determined that access to Internet-based capabilities is a critical functionality that must be preserved, despite some associated risks. Therefore, rather than restricting access to these capabilities, the NIPRNET must be configured and guidance integrated regarding the proper use of Internet-based capabilities into OPSEC education, training and awareness activities to allow safe use of them by all components.
  • the Pentagon will not ban social media. Instead, the DoD appears to be shifting to a posture where the use of social media, both in external and internal platforms, will be integrated into the work of all service members, aka “components.
  • To whit, the U.S. Army’s social media handbook, released to the public yesterday, is embedded below. The handbook earned quick approval from Jeremiah Owyang, one of the world’s top social media consultants, who called it excellent.

• Comment fédérer les salariés d’une entreprise autour de sa marque employeur?

  “Comment fédérer les salariés de son entreprise autour de sa marque employeur? autrement dit, comment faire en sorte qu’un maximum de salariés soient des ambassadeurs de la marque en question ?”

  tags: hr employerbrand socialnetworks engagement

  • En parallèle, il ne faut pas oublier que la marque employeur ne s’arrête pas aux réseaux sociaux. Tous les médias ou moyens de communication sont utilisés par les salariés pour parler de leur entreprise.
  • Lorsque les objectifs sont clairs, que les leviers sont identifiés, il est important de faire en sorte que le discours associé ne soit pas compris de travers ou totalement dénigré. C’est pour cette raison, que la première étape est de travailler sur la politique des Ressources Humaines de l’entreprise

  • Tout cela pour en arriver où? au point essentiel, qu’il est primordial que la politique RH doit être clairement définie, communiquée, comprise et acquise par tous pour être sûr qu’un maximum de salariés deviennent les meilleurs ambassadeurs de la marque employeur de l’entreprise.

  • Comme évoqué plus haut, chaque RH doit connaitre parfaitement la politque RH. Il doit savoir dire en quoi cette politique RH sert l’intérêt de l’entreprise, des managers et des salariés et surtout il doit être capable de la transmettre à tous. Pour ce faire, il faut donc que les RH deviennent les premiers ambassadeurs de la marque employeur en interne.

• Le virage 2.0, sous contrôle, de Renault

  “Transformer une entreprise industrielle centenaire de 130 000 collaborateurs requiert de la méthode et du temps. Il existait déjà des initiatives 2.0 (blogs, wikis…) chez Renault, mais c’est en 2009 que le constructeur automobile a commencé à formaliser une démarche 2.0 globale qui se concrétise par la mise en place d’un réseau social d’entreprise, basé sur Sharepoint.

  Pour initier son programme de transformation, Renault s’est appuyé sur des communautés pilote. Elles ont expérimenté de nouvelles façons de travailler et ont servi à valider les scénarios d’usage qui avaient été imaginés.”

  tags: renault casestudies communities governance ROI communitymanagement changemanagement

  • « Contrairement à d’autres entreprises qui ont multiplié les communautés, Renault a adopté une approche qualitative avec une structuration et un fort accompagnement »,
  • « Le challenge pour l’entreprise consiste à susciter des initiatives, à ne pas freiner celles qui sont en cours, tout en évitant une forme d’anarchie avec des réseaux sociaux enchevêtrés »,
  • Des règles de gouvernance, de conduite du changement et de communication communes ont été établies. Elles sont le résultat de la synthèse de deux tendances antagonistes : le laisser-faire demandé par une partie des équipes terrain et le besoin de contrôler et d’accompagner le mouvement par l’équipe en charge de la transformation.
  • Pour chacune des communautés, le constructeur a mis en place des indicateurs techniques et d’usage, ces derniers étant spécifiques à chaque communauté. Mais la finalité business, clairement affirmée, a été définie par le numéro 2 de Renault, Patrick Pélata, sponsor du projet. Les objectifs consistent à vendre plus et mieux, à réduire les stocks, à simplifier l’organisation, et à structurer les filières d’expertise.

• WTF, l’édition 2010 balaye les chiffres clefs des media sociaux

  “Vous vous souvenez sans doute de la présentation que Marta Kagan avait rédigé il y a 2 ans, une nouvelle édition est en ligne et met en perspective les chiffres clefs des médias et réseaux sociaux, à lire!”

  tags: socialmedia statistics usage use

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

Articles sur le même sujet

• No related posts.

• The Social Organization – IBM – The Business Value of Social Software CIO Forum

  tags: IBM socialsoftware value businessvalue ROI metrics measurement

• Enterprise microblogging should be pay-per-use

  “Social has its own Pareto rule: 90-9-1 versus the old-fashioned 80-20. It means that 1% of people creates content, 9% curates it, and the remaining 90% is consuming it. That’s not a very homogeneous group, is it? Yet, when it comes to paying the bill, all of them are considered equal.”

  tags: socialsoftware pricing pareto use microblogging

  • Normally, you only pay for what you use. We all have stuff in the house we purchased once because we thought we needed it, and hardly or even never touched it since. Heck, maybe some of that is still even gift-wrapped or unpacked. But none of us have ever payed for something we then knew wouldn’t need.
  • You might also reverse the model (slightly going crazy now, apologising up front): users who contribute most will be free from charge, users who contribute least will be charged more – that will get out a really valuable knowledge pool, won’t it? Or will it just increase the volume and drag down the value?

• Enterprise 2.0: A Transition From Destination Site To Platform Services

  “Detail: In general, the first wave of Enterprise 2.0 was arguably tool-based (e.g., stand-alone blogs, wikis). The second wave of Enterprise 2.0 focused on enabling an enterprise-wide destination (e.g., a “Corporate Facebook”) which acted as a community and connectivity hub for employees. More accurately, we might describe this type of platform as a social network site (Reference Architecture For Social Network Sites). The third wave of Enterprise 2.0 is moving in two directions virtually in parallel to each other.”

  tags: enterprise2.0 applications platform services socialnetworks businessapplications integration processcentricity workflow sociallayer

  • The initial direction is to support social applications hosted on the social network site itself. The most common examples I’ve seen so far are innovation/ideation solutions but organizations will likely want to construct their own community-like applications on top of their social network site as well.
  • This horizontal trend is the second direction within this third wave of Enterprise 2.0 implementations. Social networking services will enable organizations to take social data within the social network site and surface that information contextually within another system (e.g., productivity suites, collaboration tools, enterprise portals, business processes, and mobile applications).
  • The recent discussions within the Enterprise 2.0 community have indicated that E2.0 should have greater process-centricity (e.g., integration with CRM, ERP, supply chain, etc). This type of pragmatic approach is more doable as vendors in this space prioritize API’s to integrate “social” into the flow of work and adding a social layer as many have argued.

• Gartner Research on Building Case-Based Solutions

  “Hear Gartner Research Vice President Jim Sinur discuss how case processing addresses today’s business drivers. Discover the greatest opportunity for case management and the technologies you can use to develop case-based solutions faster.”

  tags: casemanagement adaptivecasemanagement process bpm unstructuredprocesses compositeprocesses knowledgeworkers dynamicprocesses economics agility dynamism casedbasedprocessing

• Eight Tips for Using Game Mechanics to Design Fun and Functional Software Applications

  “Amy talks about how five principles of game mechanics (collecting, points, feedback, exchanges and customization) can be combined with three trends of social media (accessibility, recombination, syndication) to design fun yet functional software applications.”

  tags: software applications games gaming

  • Here are the five game design principles Amy talks about –

    - Collecting: Players love to collect artifacts and complete sets.
    - Points: Players love to be rewarded with points from the game itself or from other users. Points can be used for leveling up, for creating leaderboards, or for redemption for gifts.
    - Feedback: Players love to get feedback from the game itself or from other users. Feedback can be about how they are doing against others, or even against themselves over time.
    - Exchanges: Players love to engage in exchanges with other players. Exchanges can take the form of explicit trading or implicit gifting.
    - Customization: Players love to customize their character or profile, and also their interface or dashboard.

  • Here are the three social media trends Amy talks about –

    - Accessible: Social applications are becoming more accessible because of simpler user interfaces, but also across devices, often enabled by open APIs.
    - Recombinant: The data from social applications can be combined into different types of activity streams.
    - Syndicated: The data from social applications can be exported and showcased elsewhere using RSS feeds and widgets.

• The Big Idea: Creating Shared Value

  “A growing number of companies known for their hard-nosed approach to business—such as GE, Google, IBM, Intel, Johnson & Johnson, Nestlé, Unilever, and Wal-Mart—have already embarked on important efforts to create shared value by reconceiving the intersection between society and corporate performance. Yet our recognition of the transformative power of shared value is still in its genesis. Realizing it will require leaders and managers to develop new skills and knowledge—such as a far deeper appreciation of societal needs, a greater understanding of the true bases of company productivity, and the ability to collaborate across profit/nonprofit boundaries. And government must learn how to regulate in ways that enable shared value rather than work against it.”

  tags: socialbusiness socialresponsability sharedvalue capitalism value products market nonprofits profit competitiveadvantage socialentrepreneur clusters

  • A growing number of companies known for their hard-nosed approach to business—such as GE, Google, IBM, Intel, Johnson & Johnson, Nestlé, Unilever, and Wal-Mart—have already embarked on important efforts to create shared value by reconceiving the intersection between society and corporate performance. Yet our recognition of the transformative power of shared value is still in its genesis. Realizing it will require leaders and managers to develop new skills and knowledge—such as a far deeper appreciation of societal needs, a greater understanding of the true bases of company productivity, and the ability to collaborate across profit/nonprofit boundaries. And government must learn how to regulate in ways that enable shared value rather than work against it.
  • The concept of shared value resets the boundaries of capitalism. By better connecting companies’ success with societal improvement, it opens up many ways to serve new needs, gain efficiency, create differentiation, and expand markets.
  • Intel and IBM are both devising ways to help utilities harness digital intelligence in order to economize on power usage. Wells Fargo has developed a line of products and tools that help customers budget, manage credit, and pay down debt. Sales of GE’s Ecomagination products reached $18 billion in 2009—the size of a Fortune 150 company. GE now predicts that revenues of Ecomagination products will grow at twice the rate of total company revenues over the next five years
  • For a company, the starting point for creating this kind of shared value is to identify all the societal needs, benefits, and harms that are or could be embodied in the firm’s products.
  • Today there is a growing consensus that major improvements in environmental performance can often be achieved with better technology at nominal incremental cost and can even yield net cost savings through enhanced resource utilization, process efficiency, and quality.

  • Energy use and logistics.

    The use of energy throughout the value chain is being reexamined, whether it be in processes, transportation, buildings, supply chains, distribution channels, or support services

  • Resource use.

    Heightened environmental awareness and advances in technology are catalyzing new approaches in areas such as utilization of water, raw materials, and packaging, as well as expanding recycling and reus

  • Today some companies are beginning to understand that marginalized suppliers cannot remain productive or sustain, much less improve, their quality.

  • Distribution.

    Companies are beginning to reexamine distribution practices from a shared value perspective. As iTunes, Kindle, and Google Scholar (which offers texts of scholarly literature online) demonstrate, profitable new distribution models can also dramatically reduce paper and plastic usage

  • Today leading companies have learned that because of lost workdays and diminished employee productivity, poor health costs them more than health benefits do

  • Location.

    Business thinking has embraced the myth that location no longer matters, because logistics are inexpensive, information flows rapidly, and markets are globa

  • No company is self-contained. The success of every company is affected by the supporting companies and infrastructure around it. Productivity and innovation are strongly influenced by “clusters,” or geographic concentrations of firms, related businesses, suppliers, service providers, and logistical infrastructure in a particular field—such as IT in Silicon Valley, cut flowers in Kenya, and diamond cutting in Surat, India.
  • Shared value holds the key to unlocking the next wave of business innovation and growth. It will also reconnect company success and community success in ways that have been lost in an age of narrow management approaches, short-term thinking, and deepening divides among society’s institutions.

  •  

     Read the Executive Summary

    The concept of shared value can be defined as policies and operating practices that enhance the competitiveness of a company while simultaneously advancing the economic and social conditions in the communities in which it operates. Shared value creation focuses on identifying and expanding the connections between societal and economic progress.

  • Not all societal problems can be solved through shared value solutions. But shared value offers corporations the opportunity to utilize their skills, resources, and management capability to lead social progress in ways that even the best-intentioned governmental and social sector organizations can rarely match. In the process, businesses can earn the respect of society again.
  • There are numerous ways in which addressing societal concerns can yield productivity benefits to a firm. Consider, for example, what happens when a firm invests in a wellness program. Society benefits because employees and their families become healthier, and the firm minimizes employee absences and lost productivity. The graphic below depicts some areas where the connections are strongest.
  • 
  • Creating shared value (CSV) should supersede corporate social responsibility (CSR) in guiding the investments of companies in their communities. CSR programs focus mostly on reputation and have only a limited connection to the business, making them hard to justify and maintain over the long run. In contrast, CSV is integral to a company’s profitability and competitive position. It leverages the unique resources and expertise of the company to create economic value by creating social value
  • 

• Social Media Isn’t Solution to Bad Customer Service

  “Using social media tools may be a good way to nip some bad PR in the bud when there are consumer revolts over service problems. And it can’t hurt to have a high level executive show that the company is listening to consumer complaints.”

  tags: socialmedia customerservice socialcrm quality

  • Yet there doesn’t seem to be much of a connection between having customer service reps actively engaged on Twitter, for example, and better customer service results.  
  • The bottom line is that harnessing every trendy social media tool on the web won’t make much of a difference as long as most customers still have to deal with inneffective call centers and email forms. 

• Votre entreprise est-elle prête pour Wikileaks ?

  “Le partage des données confidentielles sur votre entreprises navigue désormais sans que vous puissiez mettre la main sur celui qui a distribué les infos, sans que vous puissiez agir contre…c’est un nouvel état de fait sur lequel vous n’avez pas la main.

  Il n’y a pas 1 source ou tout est concentré, vos données sont partout sur la toile (et si ce n’est pas encore le cas, vous devez désormais agir comme tel) et tout le monde (chacun de vos employés, partenaires qui auraient accès aux données) peut partager et diffuser.

  Ne pensez pas que cela soit anecdotique, “the bank of america” a déjà perdu 3% de sa valeur sur la simple rumeur que des informations seraient divulguées sur cette dernière.”

  tags: wikileaks transparency communication e-reputation

  •  1.  Identifiez vos zones de risque : ce qui s’est passé à Vegas ne restera pas à Vegas… 

    Regardez tout d’abord quelles sont les pratiques dans votre entreprise, le type de données numérique (email en particulier) qui circulent et comment sont décrits les salariés, les concurrents, les consommateurs. 

  • 2. Pensez d’abord excuses et réformes plutôt que “persécution”

    La réaction majoritaire que nous avons vu de la part des politiques ou des militaires aux sorties de WIkileaks ont principalement été de dire qu’ils allaient poursuivre Assange en justice (ce qu’ils font d’ailleurs).

    Mais ce type de réponse ne peut pas fonctionner et on attend d’une entreprise qu’elle soit responsable.

  • 3. Suivez l’opinion de vos salariés -Vous êtes aussi faible que le plus faible de vos maillons

    Historiquement la sécurité a toujours été centrée sur les risques provenant de l’extérieur mais désormais les entreprise sont totalement poreuses.

    Personnes ne va voler de documents, ils vont “simplement” les rendre publiques.

  • La ventilation des budgets (90% de la com va à la publicité et au point de vente) devrait être complètement revue pour prioriser sur des démarches beaucoup plus éthiques (puisqu’il ne servira plus à rien de faire des jolies pub si la réalité vous rattrape), de la veille, de la gestion de crise…

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

Articles sur le même sujet

• No related posts.

• The future of work – Enterprise 2.0, get real!

  “With Enterprise 2.0, we are trying to solve some of the problems of today’s business organisations. However, we must not forget that our business environment is rapidly evolving and therefore, we might be solving the problems of the past instead of those of the future.”

  tags: enterprise2.0 culture adoption problemsolving economiesofscale flows informationflows organization

  • In the 20th century business model, the success of a company was largely based upon its ability to achieve economies of scale: the company’s own economies of scale. This called for large organisations with tight managerial control, formal rules and roles and a need-to-know culture. This also gave us the well-known deficiencies that we see in many traditional organisations: rigidity, lack of communication, non-transparency, politics, lack of innovation, not really a stimulating place to work
  • Current Enterprise 2.0 thinking essentially views E2.0 as a remedy for removing these deficiencies: it will ease the flow of information and provide transparency; it will allow scaling collaboration at an enterprise level; it will stimulate innovation and provide a more ‘human’ working environment.
  • In business, it is no different. If you want an organisation that can maximize economies of scale, then you need an organisation of some specific form, not just any form. E2.0 will not change this since it destroys some of the fundamental elements of the required form.
  • Increasingly, and especially in knowledge-intensive businesses, economies of scale will be found outside the company, on the Internet, in the cloud, on specialised platforms. T
  • However, the challenges now move to the edge, to the contact points with the other companies, to the inter-company interactions.
  • They will become nomads in this ecosystem of businesses, continuously adjusting their trajectory to new destinations.
  • This is not only a matter of shipping data between companies, this is about finding, building and maintaining relationships, contractual agreements and trust in an increasingly complex environment where little is predefined and most elements of the relationships are defined as the relationship itself develops.

• Here We Are. Now What?: The Employee Engagement Equation

  “Even though many organizations demonstrated clearly by their recent decisions (i.e., downsizing) that they see people as costs, I still buy into the saying that “people are an organization’s most important asset.” Why? Look at the research emerging in the past twenty years or so around the Employee Engagement Equation:

  ~ the more engaged your workforce = the more productive and profitable your company “

  tags: humanresources engagement employeesengagement commitment financialoutcomes outcomes

  • C = Customer: Can you connect the dots between employee engagement and customer engagement?

    O = Opportunity: Can you identify the opportunity that employee engagement presents to the organization?

    S = Strategy: Can you link employee engagement to the strategy of the business?

    T = Timing: Can you convey the urgency?

  • When people are committed, they are proud of their organization and when they are engaged, they see their work as contributing to the organization’s mission, which they strongly believe is important.

• workshop on Social media for HR executives

  tags: humanresources socialmedia

• Collaboration

  “They wanted agile and responsive ways of interacting across our worldwide business operations. Our workforce asked for tools to do their jobs better and strengthen client relationships. Their imperative: faster access to each other, quicker answers and better ways to connect with clients across 120 countries.

  Our vision for Collaboration 2.0 was to create a suite of tools that would be so easily adopted that it would answer all these demands. Collaboration 2.0 outperformed our expectations. The trickle-down effects are improved team productivity, reduced travel and phone charges via a new world of virtual collaboration and strengthened client relationshi”

  tags: enterprise2.0 collaboration casestudies accenture collaboration2.0 socialmedia ROI costsavings

  • 
  • With Accenture People (our internal Facebook-like tool) as a foundation, we quickly ramped up adoption of our new tools by linking them to employees’ profiles.
  • Links between Accenture and client companies that also use the same tools are rapidly growing, with obvious benefits for all.

  • Increasing usage and adoption

    • 100,000-plus people use profile pages an average of three times a month to find experts and connect with colleagues.
    • About 100,000 Accenture employees have customized their profiles (options include pictures, bios, hobbies, etc.).
    • 4,634 updates per month made to employee profiles.
    • 10,706 blogs created annually, increasing at a rate of more than 200 percent annually.
    • 3,336 microblog posts made per month.
    • 1,579 specialized groups created to date.
    • 7,886 items added to Accenture Media Exchange.
    • 110,850 desktop audio calls made per month.
    • 764 entries posted to our internal encyclopedia.
    • 14.9 million IM sessions/conversations occur per month.
    • 139,269 desktop sharing sessions occur per month.
    • 3,900 telepresence hours used per month.
    • 15.17 million audio/video/desktop conferencing minutes per month.

• Reaping cost savings

  • More than 20 million minutes of company-standard monthly VoIP audio/video usage, resulting in avoided mobile and landline long distance/international voice costs.
  • More than 5,000 annual video conferencing meetings resulting in avoided travel costs.
  • Telepresence usage has slashed travel costs and the savings are exceeding our annual targets, thus far returning more than two times our monthly operating cost.

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

Articles sur le même sujet

• No related posts.

Résumé : que nous réserve l’entreprise 2.0 en 2011 ? Difficile en fait de faire des prédictions tant tout dépend du sort qu’elle voudra bien se réserver à elle-même. Après maintenant 5 ans de tergiversations et d’expérimentations on a assez de maturité sur les méthodologies, les limites, les axes de progrès pour pouvoir se dire sereinement que le changement est en marche. Maintenant il y a loin des discours aux actes et tout dépendra de la capacité de l’entreprise 2.0 à sortir d’une forme de déni d’entreprise. Accepter de parler franchement de valeur, mettre les mains dans les sujets complexes et sensibles de la mécanique productive, sortir de la vision idéaliste et angélique d’une entreprise rêvée menée par la passion, l’ouverture et les bons sentiments seront des sujets clé en 2011. L’enjeu : avancer ou perdre toute crédibilité.

Avant d’essayer de s’imaginer à quoi va ressembler le monde de l’entreprise 2.0 en 2011, commençons par dresser un état des lieux de ce qui s’est passé depuis 2006 et de la situation actuelle.

En 2006 Andrew McAfee constate que l’utilisation des technologie de type “médias sociaux” (on ne parle pas encore de réseaux sociaux à l’époque) permet de supporter de nouveaux modes de fonctionnement en entreprise. Ni plus ni moins. C’est ce qu’il nomme la mise en capacité de l’organisation par la technologie (ou tech-enabled organization). Ce mode de fonctionnement étant rendu souhaitable, voire nécessaire, par la transformation des modes de travail induite par l’évolution de notre économie et des modèles de création de valeur, on a essayé d’implanter ces fameux outils dans l’entreprise. Souvent en vain. On s’est alors rendu compte (pour ceux qui en doutaient) que l’outil n’était qu’un facilitateur (on oublie souvent le “tech enabled” de McAfee pour faire dire à son concept plus de choses que l’auteur ne voulait) et qu’il fallait prendre en compte les dimensions organisationnelles, humaines, managériales voire culturelles pour réussir le changement.

Au fur et à mesure des réflexions sur ces dimensions, il est devenu évident qu’il fallait s’attaquer en profondeur à la structure du travail et de l’organisation (voir mes “prédictions” 2009 et 2010), à la fois pour rendre les choses possibles et pour s’assurer du bénéfice de l’opération en termes de création de valeur. Ce qui a amené un certain consensus courant 2010 vers la nécessité de s’attaquer, entre autres, aux business process à la fois pour des raisons d’alignement et d’impact sur la valeur. Une issue somme toutes logique pour quiconque s’intéresse aux mécanismes de fonctionnement et de création de valeur d’une entreprise mais à des années lumières de la doctrine dominante toute entière (ou presque) focalisée sur la mise en place de logiques communautaires hors des flux de travail. L’idée n’étant pas de favoriser l’un ou l’autre mais d’articuler les deux pour que ces nouvelles logiques embrassent la totalité des besoins et permettent d’articuler les synergies nouvelles entre des échanges “destructurés” et transversales et des logiques d’exécution, elles, structurées et verticalisées.

Pendant ce temps, les outils ont fait des progrès phénomènaux en termes de richesse, de capacités d’intégration avec le SI existant etc etc…

Récapitulons :

• Prise de conscience qu’il faut s’attaquer aux rouages, à la mécanique de l’organisation

• Prise de conscience qu’il faut articuler les dynamiques “hors flux” et “dans le flux” de travail (in the flow et above the flow pour les érudits).

• Prise de conscience qu’il faut aller au delà des simples dynamiques communautaires.

• Développement, par ailleurs, d’un grand savoir faire sur la mise en place de ces dynamiques communautaires. Soyons honnêtes : on a les best practices, des monceaux de méthodologie, des cas à foison et des outils pour supporter le tout. On sait faire fonctionner des communautés et ce qui donne le sentiment contraire, fait penser que la réussite dans ce domaine est rare, c’est qu’on veut transformer en communautés ce qui n’en n’est pas (d’où l’intérêt d’aller voir au delà…).

• On a des outils qui tiennent la route.

Donc tout va bien, et l’entreprise 2.0 ne posera aucun problème en 2011. Tout va bien, on est lancés sur une autoroute toute droite et le succès est au bout du voyage. Sauf qu’on prend un malin plaisir à refuser de desserrer le frein à main.

N’avez vous pas remarqué que finalement peu de choses nouvelles vraiment intéressantes ont été dites ou écrites ces derniers mois (j’ai dit “peu”…pas “pas”) ? Qu’on pourrait republier nos billets d’il y a un an sans que personne ne s’en rende compte ? Deux reponses à cela : soit nous étions quelques visionnaires vraiment en avance…soit rien n’a changé. Et je penche plutôt pour la seconde solution.

La raison ? Le microcosme 2.0 se complait dans une forme d’angélisme fondé sur une sorte de “flower power management” qui aurait été de bon teint dans les années 70. Tout doit n’être qu’engagement volontaire, passion, démonstration, engouement. Le process c’est le vieux monde et c’est sale. La valeur et l’argent aussi. Le ROI n’en parlons pas. Il y a un point de basculement a passer, des choses à acter, une direction à prendre mais au delà du consensus mou il y a une gêne évidente. On rechigne a abandonner le territoire de l’entreprise confraternelle idéalisée pour mettre le bleu de chauffe et aller réparer la chaudière et la tuyauterie dans la salle des machines.

Tout est là pour avancer. Ensuite c’est affaire de décision, de courage de porter le débat sur d’autres terrains plus sensibles car on touche au cœur de la mécanique de l’entreprise et non plus à des activités sociales de surface.

Ce qui m’amène à voir quelques tendances fortes pour 2011 :

1°) Futile : Beaucoup de temps et d’énergie seront gaspillés à discuter les mérites respectifs de l’entreprise 2.0 et du social business. Ca évitera de parler d’autre chose et laissera les entreprises dans un doute encore plus profond qu’aujourd’hui. Ici la raison s’arrête là où le marketing commence. Pendant qu’on discute du nom de la solution (dont l’entreprise n’a que faire), les problèmes et les objectifs restent (et ça ça préoccupe l’entreprise).

2°) Stratégique : soit l‘entreprise 2.0 reste dans le déni de réalité soit elle met les mains dans le cambouis. Dans le second cas on sera encore là pour parler du sujet dans un an ou deux, avec des résultats tangibles et mesurables, dans le premier les entreprises se seront lassées avant. Ca ne signifiera pas la fin des processus de transormation en cours car les problématiques de création de valeur seront chaque jour plus présentes, mais la composante “2.0 et sociale” (entendons par là la composante outil liée à une conception plus ouverte des rapports et échanges dans l’entreprise) aura été totalement décrédibilisée.

Accepter de se dire qu’une entreprise est d’abord là pour créer de la valeur et qu’il va bien falloir la montrer et la mesurer.

Garder en mémoire le principe de réalité que nous rappelle Chris Yeh :” If you can’t sell more, buy less, or fire somebody, you’re not getting real ROI.”

Avoir le courage de parler des sujets qui font peur : redéfinir le travail, la manière dont on évalue la contribution de chacun à la création de valeur, dont on rémunère les gens en fonction, trouver des indicateurs financiers et comptables pertinents pour rendre les modes de fonctionnement nouveaux acceptables.

Assumer le fait que soit on parle d’un projet stratégique d’entreprise qui doit s’imposer à tous, ce qui implique d’assumer ses choix et avoir le courage d’en tirer toutes les conséquences, soit on est dans le nice to have cosmétique et se demander si l’énergie et l’argent dépensés en valent la peine.

Sans réponse et engagement clair sur ces sujets il ne sera possible d’aller nulle part. Remarquez que, entreprise 2.0 ou non, l’entreprise devra se poser rapidement la question mais si le “monde du 2.0″ refuse cette opportunité d’ouvrir le débat …il se passera plus tard et sans lui.

Tout cela demande deux choses de la part de ceux qui élaborent la pensée et de ceux qui la mettent en œuvre : volonté et courage. Sinon on peut continuer à éviter les choses qui fachent mais qu’on ne vienne pas pleurer dans un an en maudissant ces décideurs qui ne comprennent pas. Et attendons à entendre des choses du genre “pour faire les malins avec des médias sociaux et avoir des discussions sympas y’a du monde, pour régler des vrais problèmes business y’a plus personne”. Et ça sera mérité.

Bref, ces questions seront sur l’agenda 2011. On les traitera ou non. On assumera les conclusions ou non.

3°) Technologique : l’entreprise 2.0 n’est pas une affaire d’outils…mais pourrait bien vite le devenir. On ne transformera pas l’essai tant que les “outils sociaux” constitueront une bulle à part, seront indépendants du reste des outils de l’entreprise. Devoir dire à un utilisateur : “rendez vous sur tel outil” c’est déjà perdre la partie. Trop de produits enferment encore l’utilisateur dans leur propre sphere, dans leur ergonomie, parfois dans l’intégrisme de leur vision. Dans le cadre de vrais projets d’entreprise structurants, les éditeurs vont devoir faire quelques efforts (pour ceux qui n’ont pas encore pris cette voie) :intégration avec toute type d’outil du SI traditionnel et possibilité d’utiliser (et enrichir)les fonctionnalités de l’application en tant que services hors de l’application, au sein d’une couche sociale commune à l’ensemble du SI.

4°) Essentiel: si on fait les bons choix on sera alors en mesure de travailler sur les vrais mécanismes de transformation du potentiel social en valeur pour l’entreprise. Je disais que peu de choses nouvelles avaient été écrites ces derniers temps, mais parmi elles j’en retiens une qui apporte vraiment quelque chose : cet excellent billet d’Emmanuele Quintarelli sur l’Adaptive Case Management et les Business process. Si on ne se perd pas en route l’avenir sera à construire autour de telles réflexions.

Et pour se quitter on regarde tous ensemble la définition de l’entreprise telle que trouvée dans wikipédia. Car avant d’être sociale ou 2.0 l’entreprise est une entreprise…et il semble que trop l’oublient.

Une entreprise est une structure économique et sociale qui regroupe des moyens humains, matériels, immatériels (service) et financiers, qui sont combinés de manière organisée pour fournir des biens ou des services à des clients dans un environnement concurrentiel (le marché) ou non concurrentiel (le monopole) avec un objectif de rentabilité.

Articles sur le même sujet

• Quand le 2.0 se dissout dans l’entreprise (6)
• Entreprise 2.0 : qu’est ce qui nous attend en 2010 ? (0)
• Pour en finir avec la valeur des outils et projets 2.0 (1)
• L’entreprise bien au delà du 2.0 (3)
• Entreprise 2.0 : qui trop lit son dictionnaire en oublie son relevé bancaire (1)

I am convinced that social business technology can be a major part of a company’s efforts to increase employee engagement.

The connections seem very clear to me.

4 Key Engagement Principles

Terrence Seamon, a Training & Organization Development consultant, posted a video to David Zinger’s Employee Engagement Network illustrating some of the key points in Dick Axelrod’s book Terms of Engagement. He included a list four engagement principles. 

Here are those 4 principles and ways I think you could use social business technology to achieve them.

1. Widen circle of involvement – Closed systems fail. You have to consistently reintroduce energy to keep the system working and producing. It’s why our bodies need us to eat. And our companies are no different. If your employees are supposed to solve problems – and do that both quickly and accurately -- they need inputs from as many people as possible. From more than just the people they can see from their desk. But you need a system that keeps a broad spectrum of employees informed and up-to-date about what projects are underway and what problems need solving. Giving each employee a dashboard page on a socially-enabled intranet and including on that dashboard an activity stream or micro-blogging application like Yammer or Present.ly can help. It gives people a view into what’s happening, and it also increases the likelihood that relevant information will flow to people who need it without their having to search for it.
2. Connect people to each other – I told a story on the Allyis blog about Steven, one of our employees, who was in desperate need of a Microsoft Silverlight expert to help him solve a client problem. His only option at the time was to send a global email to the company asking for help and then to hope someone answered his electronic message in a bottle. He should not have had to do that. If our SharePoint intranet at that time had a profile system in place that allowed all employees to tag themselves according to their areas of skill, then Steven could simply have searched on “Silverlight” and found everyone in the company who was a potential resource to him. Better yet, if Steven was filling out his profile and added the tag “Silverlight” to his skills area, the system could push to him the names and contact info other Silverlight experts and offer him the opportunity to add them to his “friends” network.
3. Create communities for action – Marcia Blenko of Bain & Company has reported that environments where work can get done efficiently and decisions can be made quickly are more engaging environments. But for work and decisions to happen quickly there has to be good communication. And for there to be good communication there has to be trust. And before you can have trust, you have to have relationships. So helping your employees build relationships with each other leads to them making better and faster decisions on behalf of the company. You know that’s true in the conference room, it’s also true of employees’ online interactions with each other. Using social tools to allow employees to build both communities of practice and communities of shared interest. That can lead to relationships. Relationships can increase the likelihood of trust. That trust can support more honest and frequent communication. And so decisions may happen faster and be better and that’s engaging.
4. Promote fairness – At my company we hold an annual employee awards ceremony to acknowledge employee contributions. Employees nominate each other and an awards committee made up of managers and team leads debates the merits of each nominee and picks the winners in several categories. We make every effort to make it fair and yet a couple of employees this year posted to our management feedback forum that they think the process is unfair – some of the same people are nominated from one year to the next, some people are nominated in more than one category, some project teams are not represented at all. Our feedback forum is on our SharePoint Intranet and its public. So the debate occurring around this topic is also public. Giving employees a forum in which they can ask questions directly of senior management is empowering to them and promotes fairness. Having the conversation about employees’ ideas in the open without restriction for who can participate is more fair and a socially-enabled enterprise software platform gives us that opportunity. As a manager, I won’t agree with everyone. But I want the ability to acknowledge everyones’ ideas and to validate them even if I don’t agree. And beyond that, I want the rest of the employee community to see me acknowledge and validate. That demonstrates that this is an environment of fairness in a way that wouldn’t be possible through email. Finally, carrying out these conversations on a platform like SharePoint means the content is preserved and visible to people who join the team in the future. They can read through it to learn about our decisions and will see that employee input is welcomed. It wouldn’t be nearly as possible to show them that if this conversation had gone on in emails between me and the two employees who brought up the issue.

Employee Engagement Is a Bottom Line Issue

Most often when I hear talk of social business technology, the primary goal is stated to be improved collaboration.  Employee engagement, if it’s mentioned at all, is cast as a by-product. But I think engagement can and should be considered a first level goal of this technology. The fact is that employee engagement is “a bottom-line issue”.  So says Richard Eppel, President of Strategic Momentum, in this short video by the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM). Surveys have shown, Eppel points out, “that organizations that have a focus on engagement and empowering employees have about 26% higher productivity per employee and about 13% more shareholder value gets returned for the company than companies that don’t focus on that.”

Given that the conditions that lead to engagement are so directly supported by elements of social business technology and given that improved engagement delivers such a direct benefit to the financial health of a company, shouldn’t companies interested in better engagement be aggressively investigating social technologies? I think they should be.

• RIRI 2010

  Compte rendu des rencontres internationales des responsables intranet

  tags: intranet casestudies socialnetworks

• La génération Y n’existe pas

  “Professeur en gestion des ressources humaines à Rouen business school, Jean Pralong a réalisé une étude sur l’image du travail selon la génération Y. Sa conclusion est étonnante : pour lui, la génération Y n’existe pas. Explications…”

  tags: generationy humanresources generationx

  • L’étude a montré que la génération Y n’existe pas. Les cadres qui ont entre 20 et 45 ans ont la même posture par rapport au travail et à la carrière. Ils partagent l’intérêt de l’opportunisme, l’idée que l’entreprise ne fera pas leur carrière, et qu’ils doivent donc s’en charger, que les collègues sont des gens sympathiques, mais dont il faut se méfier… Ils se distinguent également par des attentes assez fortes envers leurs managers, mais là encore, en se méfiant de cette relation de contrôle et de supervision.

  • Comment les DRH doivent-elles gérer ces générations X et Y qui pour vous ne font qu’une ?

    Elles vont devoir reconstruire un New Deal entre les salariés et leurs managers, en essayant de voir ce qu’elles peuvent mettre dans la corbeille de mariage, et comment tenir leurs promesses. Il y a souvent un grand décalage entre ce qui est promis et la réalité du terrain, et c’est cela qui casse la relation de confiance.

  • D’abord des engagements de long terme et de formation. Les entreprises devraient également donner une deuxième chance aux cadres qui n’auraient pas réussi sur un premier poste, chose que l’on faisait naturellement autrefois. Il serait aussi à mon sens intéressant de redéfinir le rôle des managers et des RRH. Je crois personnellement beaucoup à l’instauration de RH de proximité, avec un rôle un peu différent.

  • En conclusion, comment expliquez-vous l’apparition de cette génération Y qui n’existerait pas… ?

    Il faut tout simplement se poser la question de savoir à qui profite le crime. On peut penser que la génération Y est d’abord un marché pour tous ces consultants qui ont lancé l’idée et qui ont écrit des ouvrages sur le sujet. Pour ma part, je formulerai une seconde hypothèse qui me paraît plus intéressante : je pense en effet que c’est la génération X qui a inventé la génération Y pour appeler au secours et demander de nouvelles règles du jeu en matière de comportement et de management.

• Get Business Intelligence Ready for the Real-Time Web

  “The future of BI 2.0 will not rely on server power, but on the human power of the entire organization to capture everything, convert social media into tangible business objects, and automate real-time business processes. BI 2.0 needs to help enterprises do three things:”

  tags: BI monitoring processes selforganization businessprocess

  • Monitor everything. We need to give workers the ability to better monitor a million things at onc
  • Self-organize. Flickr and YouTube’s content was considered too big to organize, until tagging came along
  • Trigger processes. As we uncover trending topics within the organization, we need to enable it to automatically trigger actual business processes in real-time,
  • Essentially, many new Enterprise 2.0 apps that try to accomplish this, from corporate wikis to social networks, fail because they are external systems (‘mo apps, ‘mo problems). They do not help users monitor everything (rather they are an additional thing to monitor). They are not self-organizing and they fail to trigger real business processes.

• Entreprise 2.0 : le travail collaboratif chez Cisco (1/3)

  “Le travail collaboratif chez Cisco repose sur 3 piliers :

  * Humain: c’est avant tout culturel le collaboratif, il faut donc faire preuve de leadership, modifier le management, évaluer la performance, inciter et récompenser, le top management doit faire preuve d’exemplarité du top et l’entreprise doit faire évoluer le recrutement
  * Processus : cela comprend la gouvernance, le développement des compétences, le financement du projet, la logistiques à mettre en place et la coordination des différents cycles (stratégiques/management/business)
  * Technologique (je ne détaille pas, ils ont tout chez Cisco ce que vous pouvez trouver sur le web)”

  tags: cisco casestudies enterprise2.0 processus process technology collaboration performance

• Procter and Gamble Leaders in SocialCRM

  “P&G is a company with over 300 brands and over 2 billion consumers in over 160 countries. The company views its interactions with customers as “customer experiences”. As you can well imagine, P&G certainly has numerous initiatives which could be characterized as SocialCRM, and these examples focus on brand engagement / sales and marketing- lead social initiatives at P&G. Let’s start with one of P&G’s primary target audience, women of the household and have a look at the online Community for Women.”

  tags: casestudies procter&gamble socialcrm ROI communities engagement customerengagement

  • Putting those measures to results: P&G gained market share and revenue to the tune of 0.8% of the $10.4 billion antiperspirant/deodorant market and $83 million in five months!

• Entreprise 2.0 : gouvernance et management

  “Quand on rencontre des responsables d’entreprises, dans le cadre d’un projet de travail collaboratif, l’idée que « collaboratif = anarchie ou autogestion » revient souvent (même si cette « peur » diminue). Le rôle du top management ne disparaît pas, il va valider les processus collaboratifs de fonctionnement et le périmètre de la collaboration : interne, clients, partenaires… Même si on peut constater une autonomie plus importante : cela veut dire aussi liberté et moyens « de faire ». Mais il est toujours là pour fixer la stratégie et les objectifs de l’entreprise.”

  tags: management management2.0 gouvernance collaboration trust transparency leadership empowerment hierarchy communities communitymanagement

  • La grande différence avec une organisation classique est donc une plus grande écoute des dirigeants et l’empowerment des collaborateurs. De fait, le top management doit être plus focalisé sur le sens et les résultats, que sur un micro-management des équipes.
  • Si la création de communautés est l’une des principales incarnations du travail collaboratif, il n’en demeure pas moins que le management traditionnel continue d’exister : le « modèle du manager 2.0 » n’est pas uniquement celui du community manager.
  • Mais plus que la distribution de tâches à effectuer, il développe la volonté de ses équipes à travailler de manière collaborative et leur donne les moyens de travailler de manière collaborative (savoir et pouvoir). 

  • Cela renvoie tout simplement à quelques notions-clés qui sont :

    • le respect au lieu de la domination
    • La confiance au lieu de la discipline
    • la transparence au lieu de l’opacité
    • le collectif au lieu de l’individuel
    • La valorisation au lieu de l’appropriation
• Les managers vont devoir répondre notamment à deux défis, souvent inhabituels dans les organisations traditionnelles : savoir coordonner sans centralisme et savoir animer sans hiérarchie.
• Comme le disait Peter Drucker : « 90% de ce que nous nommons le management consiste à compliquer le travail des collaborateurs. Dans un nouveau monde de management, je vois l’employé gérer sa charge de travail et demander un soutien à un coach quand il en a besoin ».

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

Articles sur le même sujet

• No related posts.

Résumé : les entreprises sont confrontées à une vraie problématique dans la gestion de leurs communautés en place : faire en sorte que le système fonctionne sans l’imposer. Malheureusement il n’y a pas d’alternative : une communauté ne fonctionne que sur la base du volontariat. Il reste cependant deux options. La première est, à défaut d’imposer, de s’attaquer aux facteurs qui empêchent de participer. La seconde est de se demander si on a bien affaire à une communauté…et adapter ses règles en conséquence.

Une question que se posent de nombreuses entreprises désireuses d’embrasser le phénomène communautaire est de savoir si la participation de leurs salariés aux dites communautés peut être obligatoire. Elles connaissent déjà la réponse : c’est non ! La participation à une communauté repose sur le volontariat, un point c’est tout. Le mieux qu’on puisse faire est de créer les conditions qui donneront envie de participer  et faire comprendre l’importance de la chose aux collaborateurs.

L’entreprise dispose également d’un autre levier. Ca n’est pas parce qu’on ne peut imposer de participer qu’on ne peut lutter contre ce qui impose de ne pas participer. En l’occurence, dans le monde du travail, il est clair qu’il existe une ribambelle de facteurs qui incitent le collaborateur à ne pas participer. Fiche de poste, objectifs, modes d’évaluation pour ne citer qu’eux contiennent des signaux forts disant “fait ton travail et surtout ne te mets pas en danger en allant t’impliquer dans ce truc là”. Alors, avant même de penser à inciter le collaborateur à jouer le jeu, autant commencer par se pencher sur ce qui l’incite plus que fortement à ne pas le jouer. Je citerai également pour mémoire le groupe financier Hypoport qui a fait part de son retout d’expérience à l’enterprise 2.0 summit en rappelant que son PDG disait “wiki time is work time…”.

Et puis souvenons nous que la plupart des communautés que l’entreprise veut voir émerger (je ne parle pas de celles initiées par les collaborateurs) n’en sont pas. Donc elles n’ont pas à en respecter les règles. Lorsque votre communauté adopte le périmètre d’une entité opérationnelle de l’entreprise (équipe, département) et est supposée servir au quotidien pour mieux partager, collaborer, se coordonner, et bien il s’agit d’un espace de travail “socialisé”. Et, dès lors, ses règles sont celles de l’équipe. De dirait on au commercial qui refuse d’utiliser son CRM, au comptable qui refuse d’utiliser le logiciel de comptabilité de l’entreprise ? Au consultant qui ne tient pas à jour ses feuilles de temps ?

La réussite d’un tel groupe, quitte à me répéter, ne dépend pas de la génération de contenus, du bon vouloir des uns et des autres, d’un community manager qui troublerait l’action du manager. Elle dépend d’un mode de fonctionnement adapté aux besoins des collaborateurs, d’outils correspondant à ce mode de fonctionnement et d’une certaine cohérence managériale. Je me souviens d’un directeur qui avait dit “les emails envoyés à tout le service c’est fini, c’est dans notre nouvel espace, les idées qu’on m’envoit par mail ou les liens sur la veille ou les concurrents idem, les best practices c’est dans le wiki, les bouteilles à la mer c’est dans l’outil aussi et c’est de toute manière le seul endroit où je m’adresserai à vous tous et répondrait aux questions qui intéressent tout le monde. Cela me permettra également d’évaluer votre attitude et votre capacité à vous mettre au service des uns les autres de manière transparente et factuelle”. Je peux vous garantir que l’”adoption” a été rapide. Bien sur, dans la terminologie technique de l’outil utilisé, cela risque fort de s’appeler une communauté…mais lui avait bien compris que ça n’était qu’une nouvelle manière de fluidifier le processus commercial au quotidien.

Une communauté reposera toujours sur le volontariat. Mais êtes vous sur que ce que vous mettez en place est une communauté ? Pensez vous qu’il s’agisse d’une composante du travail quotidien, pour exécuter les tâches inhérentes au poste occupé ? Ca n’est pas une communauté, ce qui ne veut pas dire qu’il n’y a pas d’intérêt à changer les outils et modes de travail. Pensez vous qu’il s’agisse d’une contribution volontaire en plus du travail de chacun ? Là cela ressemble davantage à une communauté qu’il s’agit de gérer et manager comme telle.

Articles sur le même sujet

• Quand le 2.0 se dissout dans l’entreprise (6)
• Où l’on se rend compte du fossé entre management 2.0 et entreprise 2.0 (9)
• Le livre blanc sur l’Entreprise 2.0 (1)
• La Serendipité n’exclut pas le contrôle : ou quelques règles pour contrôler le hasard dans les réseaux informels (2)
• L’entreprise bien au delà du 2.0 (3)

Résumé : les communautés sont le grand sujet à la mode dans les entreprises. Pourtant il n’a rien de neuf. La facilité avec lequel les communautés se forment et vivent spontanément sur internet ont amené les entreprises à se dire qu’elles pouvaient répliquer la chose avec leurs salariés et leurs clients…avec des succès relativement mitigés. L’illusion, savamment entretenue, selon laquelle l’outil crée la communauté alors qu’il ne crée que les conditions de son hébergement et les discours marketing selon lesquels tout doit être communautaire en ce début de siècle ont eu raison d’années de travail et de réflexion sur le sujet, amenant l’entreprise dans de nombreuses impasses. Il serait temps d’enfin appeler ces groupes ou espaces d’échanges par un autre nom et les gérer en tant que tels avant que la “folie du 2.0″ n’ait fini par transformer un concept noble en un buzzword décrédibilisé.

Quand on me demande “comment créer et animer des communautés dans et hors de mon entreprise” j’ai toujours envie de répondre une chose :

“Il y a les communautés qui existent et n’ont pas besoin de vous et celles qui n’existent pas et ne valent pas que vous gaspilliez votre énergie à les faire vivre”.

Bon c’est un peu réducteur et en plus c’est en partie faux.

• Une communauté nécessite un centre d’intérêt, un but commun, et la volonté d’intéragir ensemble. A priori il suffit d’identifier les “personnes qui” et leur donner les moyens d’exister et échanger en tant que communauté. Reconnaissons que parfois cela fonctionne (dès que les moyens, outils, permettant à la communauté d’exister et vivre en tant que telle sont disponibles, elle se trouve et se structure spontanément)…parfois non (la communauté existe dans l’esprit mais refuse de le faire dans les faits). C’est en général du à deux facteurs : le manque de confiance vis à vis de l’entreprise (ou voit même ces communautés vivre hors de l’organisation de l’entreprise et refuser de devenir institutionnelles) ou des problématiques managériales (donner à la communauté est-ce travailler ou est-ce du temps perdu voire de l’information volée ?).

• On peut créer des communautés ex-nihilo mais il faut d’abord sensibiliser pour que l’intérêt naisse, ensuite que l’envie de “faire ensemble” émerge, Alors seulement il sera tant d’outiller les choses. Là encore avant de créer et manager la communauté il faut surtout créer les conditions qui permettront sa naissance.

En fait une communauté, à mon avis, ne se crée ni ne se manage. Les conditions de sa réussite oui. Ensuite on peut la modérer, la piloter, la faciliter, mais on ne lui fera jamais faire ce qu’elle ne veut pas faire.

Vous allez me dire que tout cela est évident et vous aurez raison. Les communautés ne sont pas un sujet récent, loin de là. On a toujours su qu’elles étaient difficiles à mettre en place,  qu’il devait y avoir une barrière à l’entrée, qu’il fallait du temps pour que les choses se passent etc…Une tâche ardue mais dont les principes avaient été clairement mis à jour par Etienne Wenger. Les choses étaient donc claires. Il me semble toutefois, que depuis quelques années, la “chose communautaire’ est devenue on ne peu plus confuse et “confusante” pour les entreprises, choses qui m’a été confirmée par des personnes effectuant en ce moment des recherches dans ce domaine.

En un mot : avant on savait où on allait même si c’était compliqué. Aujourd’hui on ne sait même plus où on va. Conséquence : les entreprises se perdent en chemin, s’investissent, sont déçues. Une raison à cela : personne ne sait plus ce qu’est une communauté.Lorsqu’on parle de communauté en entreprise en pense d’abord aux communautés de pratiques. Ensuite ont émergé les communautés d’intérêt. Un point commun, comme dit ci-dessus : on en connait les leviers et on sait historiquement que ce sont des choses difficiles à mettre en place de manière institutionnelles dans l’entreprise.

Aujourd’hui les entreprises ont l’impression que tout peut être transformé en communauté en un clic a tel point qu’on voit désormais le nom de communauté accolé à des groupes humains qui ressemblent à tout sauf à des communautés. Pas étonnant donc que ces groupes que l’on entend gérer comme des communautés fonctionnent si mal, si peu et que le résultat soit soit parfois si devant au regard des efforts obtenus. Mais quelles en sont les raisons ?

Au départ il y a le fameux web 2.0 et sa dimension communautaire. Car, reconnaissons le, le web est vraiment communautaire et pour cause : il propose à la fois les outils permettant aux personnes désireuses de s’investir sur un sujet, de trouver leur pairs puis d’organiser leurs échanges. Ajoutons à cela la masse critique d’utilisateurs du web (comparé au nombre de salariés d’une entreprise) et on comprend pourquoi le web est en quelque sorte devenu le paradis de la communauté.

Les choses se sont compliquées lorsque l’entreprise s’est intéressée au phénomène, que ce soit en interne ou en externe.

En externe parce que les marchands du temple leur ont dit que leurs clients et prospects étaient des communautés, chose qui peut s’avérer vraie mais qui est souvent discutable.. Ensuite on leur a dit qu’elles pouvaient créer des communautés ex-nihilo, en oubliant une donnée fondamentale : le web a herbergé et supporté des communautés mais l’envie communautaire existait la plupart du temps dans l’esprit de leurs membres. Le web n’a donc pas créé de communautés, il les a accueilli. On ne crée pas de communautés, on stimule le sentiment communautaire et c’est une nuance de taille.

En interne ensuite. Peinant à monter des communautés de pratiques (dont on sait que par définition c’est une tâche très difficile), on leur a dit qu’en utilisant les mêmes outils que sur le web elles auraient le même résultat. Là encore c’est une terrible méprise. A la fois pour les raisons liées à la nécessité qu’une envie communautaire pré-existe chez les salariés et ensuite parce que le contexte même de l’entreprise (fiche de poste et évaluation) rend sa concrétisation difficile. L’entreprise a donc été dans une certaine mesure trompée par le discours des éditeurs qui leur promettaient de “créer des communautés en un clic”. Ce que le logiciel permet de créer c’est des espaces communautaires, pas des communautés. Il ne permet en aucun cas de s’affranchirdes conditions, connues de longue date, de succès d’une communauté de pratiques en entreprise mais rend les choses infiniment plus simples une fois qu’elles sont remplies. On peut d’ailleurs trouver paradoxal qu’alors qu’une des conditions de succès d’une communauté soit la barrière à l’entrée on mette ses espoirs dans quelque chose qui permettrait d’abaisser les dites barrières. La vérité est qu’avec l’espoir de créer des communautés simplement en un clic on a voulu créer des communautés d’un genre nouveau : en plus des communautés de pratiques et d”intérêt on voit donc émerger des communautés d’un genre nouveau et qui n’ont pas encore de nom…car en général ne correspondant à rien. Ou en tout cas à rien de communautaire.

Mintzberg nous disait il y a peu que beaucoup des maux des entreprises venait de l’absence de communiy-ship dans l’entreprise. Poussé par le discours des éditeurs qui ont sauté sur l’occasion, l’entreprise a donc voulu s’imaginer en tant que communauté et donner à tout groupe humain le nom de communauté en espérant faire émerger des valeurs et comportement nouveaux. Mais les faits sont là : à part les entreprises ayant le bon ADN, il ne suffit pas d’appeler tout et n’importe quoi communauté pour changer les valeurs et les comportements. Appelons un chat un chat : nombre de groupes affublés du nom de communauté sont des équipes, des groupes de travail…ou des chimères. Donnons leur leur vrai nom et manageons les comme tels, on aura davantage de chance d’en tirer quelque chose.

Et gardons le nom de communautés pour les groupes qui le méritent vraiment et sont manageables en tant que tels.

Au fait ? Le web 2.0 a-t-il tué les communautés ? Non, au contraire, il leur a donné une vitalité supplémentaire. Par contre il a donné une telle illusion de facilité qu’il a entrainé les entreprises sur de nombreuses fausses pistes.

En fait une communauté est quelque chose qui fonctionne plutôt bien…tant que l’entreprise n’essaie pas de s’en occuper. Les vrais experts en communautés qui n’ont pas attendu le web 2.0 pour s’y intéresser doivent parfois se dire que le sujet a été bien dévoyé ces derniers temps…

Articles sur le même sujet

• Les commaunauté naissent elles par accident ou par intérêt ? (0)
• Vous aimez vos clients ? Et bien sur vous les confiez à d’autres (2)
• Quelle est la place des communautés dans la collaboration ? (2)
• Parfois vous avez besoin d’un community manager. Parfois un simple manager suffit. (4)
• Nouvelle démocratie dans les organisations (0)

Cela fait quelques semaines que le teasing tient: qu’est donc que ce “MyCommunityManger.fr“ ? Un nouveau tool qui vous modère vos communautés automatiquement?? Avouons que ca nous a tous traversé l’esprit un instant!

En réalité, ce site est un projet ambitieux, mais dont l’évidence est totale. Portée depuis plusieurs mois par Djivan Minassian, un jeune homme de 22 ans du Sud de la France, cette URL veut devenir la plateforme de référence du community management en France.

Et à constater l’exhaustivité des briques qui composent le site et la communauté qui s’est créée, sur Facebook principalement, autour du projet avant même sa sortie, on peut s’autoriser à penser que c’est possible. “MCM”, c’est concrètement:

- Une équipe de 40 collaborateurs, bloggeurs ou Twittos en règle générale, dont Camille Jourdain, Christophe Ramel ou Michelle Chmielewski qui garantissent des contenus rédactionnels réguliers et exclusifs,

- Des archives, déjà effectives, qui seront regroupées sous formes de dossiers,

- Un forum ouvert à tous, mais modéré de près,

- Une plateforme d’emploi autour des missions des annonceurs/agences et des disponibilités des community managers et experts,

- Toute une section dédiée aux buzz vidéo.

- Et bien d’autres ressources…

Si vous lisez Mashable régulirement, ca devrait vous plaire. Je vous propose d’aller voir et de vous faire une opinion par vous-même en cliquant là.

Note: l’auteur participe au pôle rédactionnel de cette plateforme.

Enterprise 2.0 Santa Clara - Nov 8 to 11

Here are my top ten trends (i.e. best practices, lessons learned and observations) having spent the past three days at the Enterprise 2.0 event in Santa Clara:

1. There is now a wide blend of participants attending the event covering areas including IT, Knowledge Management, Community/Collaboration Managers, learning professional, and HR. The big trend is the rise in the number of participants from the HR function - this is a good thing, see point #2!
2. A consistent message from companies who have more mature solutions on the importance of "focusing on people as the center of the solution" and the cultural changes required to be undertaken.
3. There are still lots of solution/technology players in the E2.0 space. That said the consensus from experienced practitioners is that there are only 10 or less real players. See the latest magic quadrant here.
4. There is still a wide spectrum of E2.0 knowledge and experience across the participants from novice to experts. It was nice to see more intermediate to expert folks at the conference who were trading real-world experiences.
5. Seriously we need to teach some of the speakers (including keynotes) what an effective presentation is. I recommend a "presentation toolkit" be provided to all selected speakers with templates, examples, etc. There is an art to presenting and relaying a message to all of the different learning style in the audience.
6. There was considerable discussion about creating social and collaboration standards so inter-operability can happen inside enterprises. It will be interesting to watch the big players to see how they participant and position themselves in creating industry standards.
7. The companies with most successful solutions have dedicated full-time employees in roles of community manager (or equivalent). This role is imperative to help create, nurture and maintain vibrant collaboration that is driving real business results.
8. Metrics, Telemetry and Analytics need to be better understood and used to drive return on investment. There is no silver bullet here - this requires a combination of metrics/telemetry collection; employee surveys; and collecting user stories on success and failure.
9. Practitioners need to spend more time "eating their own dog food" - what I mean by this is they need to participate in internal and external communities and sites to better understand the value (or lack thereof) of different features and functionality, what behaviors emerge, what different roles are played, and what makes a successful solution.
10. Finally starting to hear more people talk about usability, aesthetics, user centered design, etc. with an eye on how important this is to providing solutions that employees like, understand and use!

I would love to hear your E2.0 opinions, thoughts, and learning - add a comment.

Thanks for listening,

Bert

The best thing about the Intranet Innovation Awards is its ability to uncover great stuff done in hidden corners of the intranet community. This video from Rijkswaterstaat (Dtuch government waterways authority) is a perfect example.

Like many organisations, they’ve gone through a major project to migrate their intranet to a new CMS, and have included many of the features now considered standard, such as personal home pages, enhanced search, blogs, etc.

Unlike most organisations, the intranet team has done a brilliant job of communicating the changes out to the broader staff population. At just 2 minutes in length, this is a captivating little video that explains the changes, and how they will help staff.

Don’t worry if you don’t speak Dutch, the video is captioned in English. Play this video to the rest of your intranet team, and to senior management, to show what great intranet communication looks like. Then create your own video!

(This is just one of the great ideas shared in this year’s annual Intranet Innovations 2010 report, with 15 case studies and over 200 screenshots.)

Thanks to Rijkswaterstaat for creating (and sharing) this video!

Enterprise 2.0 and the Social Graph

The value of Enterprise 2.0 is increased when context is applied to information.  The use of Web Oriented Architecture (WOA) can ease the pain of integration and centralize information management.  This approach will also give you the flexibility of sharing information in the proper context.  We see simple examples on the web with services like Gravatar and DISQUS.  We also see how to connect things with simple markup like FOAF,  XFN, and Microformats for events & profiles.  The future of the internet and intranets is all about mashups, widgets, and web services.

Enterprises are collections of people, and thus inherently social. Employees of any organization benefit from social connections, group affiliations and relationships both within their own business and between other businesses. As a result, social networking capabilities have become increasingly popular in business-to-consumer, business-to-business, and internal enterprise collaboration applications. New technologies and standards such as Web 2.0 and OpenSocial are helping software providers better model relationships between people, allowing end-users to benefit from such relationships in day-to-day business processes within their own enterprise, and across business networks.  Learn more in the white paper  here.

Project SocialSite

Project SocialSite is an open source ( CDDL/GPL2) project building Widgets and Web Services that make it easy for you to add social networking features to your existing web sites, including the ability to run OpenSocial Gadgets and have them backed by the same social graph. Learn more here.

How to Add Social Widgets to Your Wiki

You can see how easy it is to add social widgets to your wiki in this video.

SocialSite Profiles and Activity Streams

SocialSite Architecture

Learn more about SocialSite in this presentation [pdf] here.

Apache Shindig

Apache Shindig is an OpenSocial container and helps you to start hosting OpenSocial apps quickly by providing the code to render gadgets, proxy requests, and handle REST and RPC requests.

Apache Shindig’s goal is to allow new sites to start hosting social apps in under an hour’s worth of work. Learn more here.

OpenSocial

Applications that use the OpenSocial APIs can be embedded within a social network itself, or access a site’s social data from anywhere on the web.  Learn more here.

Fav Five Places

uPortal

uPortal is the leading open source enterprise portal framework built by and for the higher education community.  uPortal continues to evolve through contributions from its global community and is supported by resources, grants, donations, and memberships fees from academic institutions, commercial affiliates, and non-profit foundations. http://www.jasig.org/uportal

Liferay

Liferay Portal is an enterprise web platform for building business solutions that deliver immediate results and long-term value. Get the benefits of packaged applications and an enterprise application framework in a single solution.  http://www.liferay.com

Glassfish

• Free community-supported application server
• The best open source application servers in the industry today
• Next-generation modular and extensible architecture (OSGi)
• Enterprise reliability and performance with less complexity

https://glassfish.dev.java.net/

Bedework

Bedework is an open-source enterprise calendar system that supports public, personal, and group calendaring. It is designed to conform to current calendaring standards with a goal of attaining strong interoperability between other calendaring systems and clients. Bedework is built with an emphasis on higher education, though it can be (and is) used by many commercial enterprises. http://www.jasig.org/bedework

ZK Enterprise Framework

ZK^® is the most proven Ajax + Mobile framework designed to maximize enterprise operation efficiency and minimize the development cost by its groundbreaking Direct RIA architecture.  http://www.zkoss.org

Fav Five Faces

Who is on your “Fantasy Innovation Team” this week?

Here are amazing people that have connected me to new friends and new ideas this week. You might be familiar with “Fantasy Football Teams” , well this is my “Fantasy Innovation Team” this week. I recommend following these smart, creative people on Twitter.

	consultant and writer who helps firms and individuals with their blogs and other social media http://twitter.com/BillIves
	Managing software development / integration projects for a living (PMP); interested in collaborative workplace & learning environment; CMS, intranet, KM, e20 http://twitter.com/dzhu
	Technology news, videos, opinions, from an enthusiastic Rackspace employee who grew up in Silicon Valley and has interviewed more than 3,200 geeks. http://twitter.com/Scobleizer
	@20adoption council group therapist, girl geek poseur, wise cracker, connector, newbie activist, NYU mom, Jersey shore girl in TX, DG gramma http://twitter.com/ITSinsider
	nternet Strategist; Part Time Futurist; Corporate Leader. My thoughts, not those of my employer. http://twitter.com/jimworth

This evening in London, England, The Law Society will announce the winners of the 2010 Excellence Awards. The short list features several Dachis Group/Headshift clients in the legal sector, amongst them Matthew Arnold & Baldwin LLP, shortlisted for the Excellence in Innovation award.

Matthew Arnold & Baldwin LLP is a regional firm in the United Kingdom and the innovation in question is the firm’s intranet, “The Cube”. The Cube is one of three strategic investments that the firm made within a 12 month period, the others being a new practice management system and a relaunch of the firm’s public website.

The Cube is not just an intranet, it is a social intranet where work happens. Old style intranets were communications channels, a way for the central communications team to broadcast messages to staff. If you practiced knowledge management there would be a link from the intranet to a carefully curated (but often sparsely populated) collection of templates and best practice examples. A social intranet, in contrast, is a place for everybody to build their collections of useful information, store stuff they are working on and ask questions of their peers. The value of the social intranet is that those personal collections are visible to everybody else, and groups of people can collaborate on them.

Just like mablaw.com represents the firm’s embrace of Web 2.0, The Cube is Matthew Arnold & Baldwin LLP’s adoption of Enterprise 2.0 principles. Heloïse Paull, the firm’s marketing director and the project’s sponsor, witnessed that as the firm grew, “People relied heavily on email communication, which created exclusivity on certain knowledge. Information and knowledge became diluted in information silos. Accurate CRM and cross selling suffered. There was a decline in the social aspect of the firm.”

Mark Weston, the partner responsible for the project, explains that email is not necessarily a bad thing: It works just fine when clients email instructions to the firm for new matters. But when those instructions and other matter related communication is drowned out by internal conversation in a way that makes it hard to share valuable insights then there is a clear need to move that conversation to a different platform.

“We needed to create something that was easy to use and fun to use. We needed to create something that was community-based and without boundaries.” Any member of the firm can create a new community and invite colleagues to join. The communities range from industry sectors and strategic client groups to the netball team.

The fact that anyone can set up a new community has helped accelerate adoption, as has the fact that communities for non-work related topics have been encouraged from the outset. Each individual opts in to the communities that are relevant to them. It has led to a spate of groupings that can seem daunting when viewed as a list but recommendations, links and search help point people to relevant places. Communities are open by default, restricted groups require partner permission.

“The Cube is a living, breathing space where people can communicate and interact regardless of their office, their team or their qualification. Rather than information being hidden or inaccessible, all users can now view project updates and contribute to communities. We have started to manage CRM through The Cube with Client Relationship Partners creating communities to store information pertinent to the development of client/referrer relationships” explains Heloïse Paull.

Underlying the flexible groupings is an information architecture that reflects the firm’s structure and processes. This provides every member of the firm with a place they belong and from where they can follow recommendations to join communities and projects relevant to them.

A special area was set up for the firm’s library, where relevant news in the legal world are shared and bookmarks to resources on the internet are made available. Previously, updates from the library were sent out in email, which put the burden (and cost) of filing on each recipient. Now, new joiners can easily search library content (and everything else) without asking for past emails to be forwarded to them.

The Cube is integrated with the firm’s practice management system: An individualized chart of key performance indicators (KPIs) is prominently displayed on the home screen.

The next step for The Cube will be to open up secure extranet areas for working with clients, something that was made possible in a recent version of the Jive Social Business platform which is being used to run The Cube.

Matthew Arnold & Baldwin LLP has earned their place in The Law Society’s shortlist. We will soon know who wins the award.

With the Enterprise 2.0 SUMMIT only one week ahead I really need to publish my thoughts and perceptions about the status quo of Enterprise 2.0 in Europe and our ideas towards what we want to achieve with this upcoming conference.

You might already have read the recent interviews (at Isabel Ayel’s blog or Wissensauslese) about my perceptions of the E20 developments in Europe. In brief I see the evolutions within the Enterprise 2.0 sphere very much in relation towards the “dissemination of a virus” - not yet fully spreaded but highly contagious to slowly infiltrate the whole organisation, corporation, industry and economy.

From wishful thinking back down to the diverse reality

But from a sales review last week (and yes - we are directly pitching corporates especially thowse who are still not reading blogs and social news regularly!) I also have to admit we are still at the beginning. Refering to my thoughts from March regarding the virus spreading paraphrase we are somewhere in the transition of stage 1 (corporate communications is in charge for E20) to stage 2/3 (knowledge management/operations is in charge for E20). As our sales team reports the topic E20 is still mostly related to the communications department as a misunderstood communications approach only. But those people have in many parts given up hope about the “new E20 thing” - as it has not work out for them (because they just limited it towards a communications and information flow idea!). If our sales team asked them whether knowledge management or operations is involved, many times the answer was: “No - they are not directly involved. As Social Media is about communications, we are in charge for the coordination of this topic!”

Well - this limitiation towards the information flow aspect and focus only on the improvement of internal (push) communications definitely fails the potentials of Enterprise 2.0. Therefore without no doubt the spreading of the E20 idea is disrupted at this point. Certainly there are shadow developments of E20 going on also in these companies but they are not big enough yet to cause a strategic relevance.

Investing other potential stakeholders of E20  we have to state that they are mostly still living in their own worlds and talking different “languages”. One potential group we have been approached are the people from knowledge management. When talking with members of this department our sales team got the answer: “the topic of knowledge transfer and knowledge retention is highly important but only relevant for specific departments e.g. R&D as well as sales where it provides a clearly defined and tangible return”.

The ideas of an Enterprise-wide “knowledge sharing” and the potential of the gained “ambient knowledge” with this practice are mostly inconceivable for these people - as they are very much incorporated by the knowledge management theories of Max Boisot and others who said “knowledge is only between the ears” and the externalisation of it can only be realized by external coaching (IMHO also the raison d’etre for the whole km industry!). Unfortunately I know from a lot of German Enterprise Wiki projects that support this statement with its low participation and irrelevance for the core value creation of the company. So there is a big discredit on the idea of “wikinomics” as an approach to preserve the knowledge of the enterprise.

Another group of people who could take a new and sustainable stance to the new forms of information and collaboration management is the department that is in charge for operations and the organisational development. But those people are mainly just entering the E20 arena and gaining first insights and knowledge of the E20 thingy. Though in charge for process innovations they are still very much resistant to visionary thoughts and above all to the “enthusiastic” language of E20 evangelists. Especially in Germany (but also in France as what I have heard from Bertrand) these people have again their own language-specific term definitions that are not really in line with the Anglo-Saxian E20 language.

Drawing the line

Wrapping up the situation - for the bigger parts of the corporations we are in a situation where E20 is not only faced with the problem of “siloed” information management to be solved by E20 but even with the problem of “siloed” expert languages to hinder E20 even get started right. So those people - who should sit together at the table to discuss the recommended changes to successfully start and adopt to the new forms of information and collaboration management - cannot come together as (1) they are not talking the same language and (2) see different things behind the idea of E20! As a result the E20 (r)evolution in Europe is much slower than in the US where this topic is very much flourishing. As a side note for the group of E20 evangelist - you have to start talking about this topic in a more old-fashioned language to really make an impact!

Nonetheless the E20 SUMMIT will try to make a veritable point and to advance the discussions in the directions of solving E20 project issues. Several of these issues are part of “expert talk” track like the cultural problems in pan-European companies, the pitfalls of the conception of E20 initiatives, the different adoption archetypes (as there is no one-fits-all solution!) or the already mentioned participation problem. Last week we even added a discussion between the “traditionalist” of knowledge management and the “E20 evangelists”. In our keynote sessions we talk about the “big wheels” of setting up new forms of leadership, the needed change towards the organisational design as well as new ideas for a socially enabled business model. On the other hand we try to show the potentials of E20 along the discussions of different practices and its lessons learned - distinguished by the different use case scenarios. And in order to really make an impact we are going to documentate all our discussions, provide video streams in realtime and after the show, collect feedbacks from the participants at the show (and publish these after the show!) as well as drive the distinguished discussion around the topic.

Despite all the adversities we are very excited about the upcoming conference and very much looking forward to welcome the attending crowd in Frankfurt as well as the virtual community on the networks. I personally like to say thank you already to all the participating speakers, the advisory board for its input, the ambassadors for the support as well as Cathrin Gill - our project manager for this year’s conference - in taking over the job of “herding the cats” of advisory board members, speakers and ambassadors.