Home
Bertrand Duperrin's Library tagged → View Popular, Search in Google
"A growing number of companies talk about the benefits of adopting web 2.0 tools inside the organization, but the list is short for companies that are using them for increased business results.
Unisys, the 138-year old tech firm, has quickly made "going social" part of its culture. Here's how they did it, and how they're using social media tools to become more agile, to share knowledge, and to increase the speed of innovation."
-
One of the biggest barriers to social collaboration is a disconnect between aspirations to become collaborative and the reality of being a closed organization. Unisys CEO Ed Coleman addressed this through leading by example
-
Gloria Burke, Director of Knowledge Strategy & Governance, along with co-directors John Knab and Rajiv Prasad, launched Inside Unisys, a social network internal to the firm. Coleman began blogging and soon his senior executives encouraged their teams to do so as well. Employees are automatically alerted to blog postings and microblog postings on the newsfeeds on Inside Unisys. Over time, Unisys sales people began using Inside Unisys to share information about recent wins as well as share lessons in losses.
- 5 more annotation(s)...
"Une approche, plutôt une méthode pertinente (en quatre étapes)et documentée (interviews) présentée par InSites Consulting."
"If you are thinking about bringing Lotus Connections into your organization in future or have already purchased it and are planning how to manage the introduction to your user population, read on for tips about getting started."
-
1) Identifying goals for the deployment; 2) Piloting the applications being rolled out; and 3) Defining an adoption strategy for the wider community.
There's an orthodoxy in Enterprise 2.0 circles about how you're supposed to run an implementation. The orthodoxy goes something like this: Start with small-scale pilots, define your business objectives, watch the pilots closely, evaluate their success, make a go/no-go decision. (A good recent articulation of this view is in Chris McGrath's recent post on 8 Tips for a Successful Social Intranet Pilot.)
As far as I can tell it's what everyone thinks. In fact, it's what I used to think. Unfortunately, it's dead wrong. The orthodoxy is wrong for a very simple reason: Size matters. By constraining the size of your pilot, you significantly alter the way your company can and will use the tools.
-
There's an orthodoxy in Enterprise 2.0 circles about how you're supposed to run an implementation. The orthodoxy goes something like this: Start with small-scale pilots, define your business objectives, watch the pilots closely, evaluate their success, make a go/no-go decision. (A good recent articulation of this view is in Chris McGrath's recent post on 8 Tips for a Successful Social Intranet Pilot.)
As far as I can tell it's what everyone thinks. In fact, it's what I used to think. Unfortunately, it's dead wrong. The orthodoxy is wrong for a very simple reason: Size matters. By constraining the size of your pilot, you significantly alter the way your company can and will use the tools.
-
An artificially constrained pilot is always a poor representation of post-pilot collaboration, because the range of potential interactions is so limited. The value delivered to each individual participant is exponentially smaller than it would be at full scale, and the ways that people will use the tool are different.
- 1 more annotation(s)...
I put together the graphic below as a framework for thinking about things like culture and adoption. It’s a process flow for pilot deployments of social software, based on some of my experiences. There are actually several different points included in it.
I drew on the core ideas in our Implementing Enterprise 2.0 report and framework (as above). Enterprise 2.0 is ultimately far more about organizational change than technology, though it happens to be driven by web technologies. As such much of my focus today is on how to change organizations, to literally create the next version of the enterprise. Far more details on how to put the ideas below into practice are in the Implementing Enterprise 2.0 report.
My list got an extremely positive response from the audience, so I thought I’d share it here.
To run through the core areas of value and of risk, the issue of risk is more prominent in executives’ minds than the business benefits. And because the risks are not clearly understood, these tend to be inflated and given more impact than they should be. But many of the risks, which can be very real, are also on the business side, not just on the technology side. I think there’s a minority of issues that are purely technological around implementation of the tools. "There are, very crudely, three categories of information: proprietary, which you maintain inside your organization; there’s some that you share with trusted business partners, clients, suppliers or alliance members; and there information that you actively disseminate to the public at large. And it’s not always immediately clear into which category information falls."
-
In many ways, it won’t be. That’s one of the things that’s not well understood. That fact is that most, if not all the issues related to these technologies, are addressed by existing policies. In some cases, though, those policies have not been developed with the detail in which the issues from these new technologies are fully addressed.
-
I think some forms of pilots are appropriate. You set up pilots likely to succeed, likely to add value, that allow you to move on to a broader scope. But you must also have a very high tolerance for failure or that pilots are not succeeding as planned.
Selected Tags
Related Tags
Top Contributors
Groups interested in pilot
Diigo is about better ways to research, share and collaborate on information. Learn more »
Join Diigo