Home
Bertrand Duperrin's Library tagged → View Popular, Search in Google
"En lisant le très bon (et assez courageux) billet de Laurent, je me suis interrogé sur les freins à l’évolution rapide de la pensée dans les entreprises. Est-ce que la raison se trouve dans le déficit de confiance que les annonceurs portent à des consultants externes qui manquent trop souvent d’humilité, de crédibilité et surtout de compétences marketing suffisantes pour intégrer les enjeux des media sociaux dans les disciplines fondamentales ? Ce déficit conduirait-il à s’intéresser de façon obsessionnelle à un sujet secondaire : le ROI ?"
-
Les media sociaux seraient donc le royaume du collaboratif, de l’échange, de la conversation ? Oui, sauf au moment où il s’agit d’impulser la mise en place de l’organisation qui va avec. Le frein numéro 1 à l’évolution des structures est l’absence d’implication d’une direction générale qui doit aligner les décideurs de l’entreprises autour d’un plan stratégique et opérationnel absolument top down, marketé autant que possible et intégré
-
La bonne nouvelle est que les grands patrons comprennent très vite les enjeux et la posture à prendre dès lors que le sujet passe en haut de la pile de leurs urgences. La mauvaise est que ça se produit souvent pour de mauvaises raisons : une crise… Dans les deux cas, l’accompagnement externe requiert un niveau d’expérience que les experts des media sociaux n’ont pas toujours, en cela je rejoins le point de Laurent.
- 7 more annotation(s)...
"Brennan starts by saying that business is going through a transformation and top-down leadership no longer works well for companies. But he believes that too many of his managers still operate in a "command-and-control reflex." "
-
good at holding subordinates accountable but bad at setting clear expectations. When subordinates aren't sure what the boss really wants to accomplish
-
Most managers, he says, can't help but see collaboration as a kind of threat to their territory, and they raise a variety of "defense mechanisms" to thwart it.
- 3 more annotation(s)...
"A high number of common best practices have naturally emerged. Here are 10 of them :"
-
Fabrice Poireaud-Lambert showed a very interesting 4 axis graphs (Organization and HR / Competencies / Methods and Tools / Culture and Behaviors) that LdE used to evaluate the change factor of such a project on the enterprise scale. They reached a 12/16 value which is pretty high.
-
Executives support for project involving change of such magnitude. Big changes project need legitimation. The reason : without strong leadership and executive support, the project is a lost cause against managers who have day to day budget and objectives.
- 3 more annotation(s)...
"How do you decide what cause or causes to support? You have essentially two alternatives for this internal process: top-down or management-driven, and bottom-up or employee-driven. What are their pros and cons for you as a company? What’s the optimal way to decide on the direction of your strategic cause marketing?"
-
Strategic alignment with a cause relevant to your business benefits your company, as it creates a consistent affiliation with the cause in the minds of your stakeholders, including your employees. A company-wide cause allows employees to feel a part of something bigger than themselves, and focuses everyone’s effort in a single direction
-
The top-down decision-making process comes with drawbacks. By default and most importantly, it excludes employees from having a say in your company’s community involvement.
- 5 more annotation(s)...
Those trying to read the tea leaves about Enterprise 2.0 these days can see that the software at least has arrived in a bare majority of companies, even if it’s just Facebook or Twitter across the firewall. Genuine adoption and meaningful integration into business processes has certainly happened in a number of organizations, but is still the edge case today rather than the rule. That’s not to say the current case studies aren’t reporting gains, they generally are. But the message here is that many enterprises are now actively in full contact with the social computing world, whether they want to or not, and now it’s time to understand how to deal with the benefits and issues.
Significant changes are taking place in management and especially project management today. We hear that organizations, like the New York Times, Tribune Co., Ernst & Young switched from the so-called top-down management style to bottom-up management. Others, including some of the world’s biggest corporations, such as Toyota and IBM, implemented bottom-up management style elements in some of their departments. The popularity of the bottom-up approach to management is growing. In spite of this fact, the discussions about the two major approaches are still hot. Why have organizations become so anxious about changing their management style? If we compare the two management approaches, the answer to this question will be clear.
-
. Team members are invited to participate in every step of the management process. The decision on a course of action is taken by the whole team. Bottom-up style allows managers to communicate goals and value, e.g. through milestone planning. Then team members are encouraged to develop personal to-do lists with the steps necessary to reach the milestones on their own.
-
These methods include are Enterprise 2.0 technologies – wikis, blogs, social networks, collaboration tools, etc. They come into organizations and change the original way of executing projects. They turn traditional project management into Project Management 2.0 and bring new patterns of collaboration, which are based on collective intelligence. Collective intelligence is a collection of valuable knowledge from different fields that each project team member is an expert in. This knowledge is now successfully collected and shared shared in a flexible, collaborative environment brought by second-generation project management software. The project manager is the one to conduct the work of his team and choose the right direction for the project development, based on the information received from the individual employees.
“The first key characteristic of the emergent approach is best summarised as ‘architect the lines, not the boxes’, which means managing the connections between different parts of the business rather than the actual parts of the business themselves,” said Bruce Robertson, research vice president at Gartner. “The second key characteristic is that it models all relationships as interactions via some set of interfaces, which can be completely informal and manual – for example, sending handwritten invitations to a party via postal letters - to highly formal and automated, such as credit-card transactions across the Visa network.”
Si vous gérez l’intranet et l’introduction d’outils Web 2.0 dans votre organisation et en particulier la couche de «business social software», désolé les ami(e)s mais le «bottom-up« et le «patchwork organique» ne fonctionnent pas… «Bottom-up can’t be managed» comme disent nos Voisins du Sud. Vous êtes surpris ? Pas très 2.0 comme attitude non ? Faut être réalistes ici. Monter une stratégie d’intégration de tous les outils technologiques qui composent le coffre à outils d’une stratégie «entreprise 2.0» ne peut attendre l’intégration organique surtout avec un budget et des échéances à gérer…
Selected Tags
Related Tags
bottomup (5)- adoption (3)
- enterprise2.0 (3)
- communication (2)
- ROI (2)
- communitymanagement (2)
- management (2)
- socialsoftware (2)
- casestudies (2)
- socialmedia (1)
- externalcommunication (1)
- brand (1)
- socialmediamanagement (1)
- communitymanager (1)
- badbuzz (1)
- humanresources (1)
- delegation (1)
- hiring (1)
- hierachy (1)
Top Contributors
Groups interested in topdown
Highlighter, Sticky notes, Tagging, Groups and Network: integrated suite dramatically boosting research productivity. Learn more »
Join Diigo