adoption

Archive

July 3, 2011 by Patti

SoMe and KM lessons learned — more from E2.0

As I mentioned in my last post, previous Enterprise 2.0 conferences had a big focus on “adoption” — how to get companies and the people inside them to use new tools to get their work done. As I sat through sessions in 2010, I heard the lessons of knowledge management being learned anew. That is, I felt I could trace a direct line from these lessons to many of the bullet points I myself had used on slides during the years 1997 - 2005 as I worked inside organizations and as a consultant to knowledge management initiatives:

  • Focus on a business problem
  • Have senior management support
  • It’s 10% technology, 90% people
  • KM must be integrated into your business processes; it is not something “extra”
  • Look for key partners in HR, IT, and Operations
  • Capture and distribute success stories
  • Address “what’s in it for me”
  • “ROI” is very, very hard to measure and may not be worth the trouble
  • Culture trumps everything (that’s a direct quote from Tom Davenport)

And yet, speaker after speaker at E2.0 talked about these lessons without reference to the accumulation of learning within the knowledge management community (from which I believe many of these same folks came). I suspect that part of this lack of acknowledgment comes from not wanting to be tarred with the KM feathers. (Many people still don’t get it that “KM” isn’t one big monolithic system; that it is a collection of methods, practices, and tools that all support various aspects of identifying, creating, transferring, and augmenting both the hard and soft, explicit, tacit, and in-the-flow information, knowledge, and understanding that people need to know to get their jobs done. Think of these tools, methods, and practices as “apps” and good knowledge managers as people who are integrating these apps onto a platform. That’s the 2.0 way to think of it.)

Ok, so I got that off my chest. What was interesting to hear this year, 2011, at Enterprise 2.0 in Boston was that as the themes shift from technology to business transformation, the “K” and “KM” words are creeping in. (Yeah!).

  • Sarah Roberts (@robertsgolden): “You can make information flow down in the organization, but can you make knowledge flow up?” “Individuals, left to their own devices, are pretty resourceful and knowledge-sharing prone.”
  • Tom F. Kelly (@Moxiesoft): “The three key elements of success in social media: simplicity of design, knowledge as a center point, leadership” “Collaboration is about sharing knowledge, not data.”
  • Mike Rhodin, IBM Social network in an enterprise is an everlasting knowledge repository.”
  • Ross Mayfield (@ross): “Social software needs to create the knowledge trail as a byproduct of getting the work done, not as a discrete silo of “perfect” information.”
  • Daniel DeBow (@Rypple) “For HR, it’s ‘who has the knowledge’ in the organization and collaborative tools can provide the answer.”

One of the “KM fellow travelers,” http://www.elsua.net/(@elsua), an IBM evangelist was also tracking a lot of the KM themes throughout the conference. Mining the tweet streams (I shower blessings on the capture of these by @jimworth), I found an number of Luis’ nuggets of recognition of KM themes:

  • @elsua @joshscribner: finding experts, finding information, sharing knowledge. #IBM #BlueIQ ‘s 3 core values for socbiz. #e2conf” / Yes, sir!
  • @elsua: #e2conf knowledge transfer remains one of the biggest issues for any collaboration strategy, regardless the generations #e2conf
  • @elsua: #e2conf Ohhh, another flashback from KM in the late 90s: technology, process, culture (=people); was missing it, too! :) #E2conf

Most astounding to me was that Andrew McAfee, who coined the term eponymous term “Enterprise 2.0” gave a big shout out to one of knowledge management’s clarion calls from 1998, a quote from Lew Platt of HP: “If only HP knew what HP knows, we would be three times as profitable.”  (And,  If Only We Knew What We Know was the title of APQC‘s O’Dell and Grayson book that was one of the first KM books.)  Then as if in answer to my unspoken question (“How does E2.0 take KM to the next level?”) he says, “Enterprise 2.0. Succeeded because it solves knowledge problem and gives everyone in the organization voice in a community.”  McAfee’s talk addressed, in a way, the tacit/explicit model in KM. In the first part of his he cautioned against letting “old fashioned management” get in the way of using social technologies that promote tacit exchange and knowledge generation. The second part, on “new-fangled computers” , he focused on IBM’s Watson and its Jeopardy championship. His conclusion: the explicit part of knowledge capture, storing and recovery has been solved. Let’s now focus on “looking for questions that computers are not good at answering.”

I am thinking that this new territory, that computers are not good at answering, and which even in its fledgling days (Marcia Connor said of E2.0, “We’re in the first minute of social business. The next 5 years will tell so much more.”) is pushing beyond what knowledge management was able to address: relationships.  I’ve said before, in the 3rd (current) era of knowledge management, “knowledge is in the network.” Social tools, within, beyond, outside, and organizationally orthogonal to the enterprise are going to give us unbelievably new kinds of knowledge about who we are, how we interact, and the creative results of those interactions. These are the lessons that we haven’t learned from KM. Now that we have tools for creating, evolving, mapping, and -especially — analyzing the impact of relationships we are going to learn a whole lot more.

Share

Archive

June 14, 2010 by Patti

#e2conf - Selling the Case

My posts over the next few days will be “live blogs” from the Enterprise 2.0 conference in Boston. Rumor has it already that 50% of attendees are practitioners. I take this to mean that we are well over the “chasm” in adoption and that the focus now is going to be on how to implement well. My personal listening for this conference includes:

  1. Leadership — not just issues about  the management of IT in the context of enterprise 2.0, but what changes will be required of leaders in this interconnected world.
  2. Measuring effectiveness — one of my current client projects is focused on understanding what social media tools support organizational effectiveness in what ways.
  3. Related to #2, how to assist clients in selecting the right technology to meet their needs.
  4. How can companies build an intranet in such a way that it can grow from the inside out, that is design so that they can selectively open up content to outside partners as they evolve a knowledge base in the context of a social networking space

Sameer Patel and Oliver Marks of the Soros group have a session on “Selling the case for accelerating business performance with enterprise collaboration technologies.” They are up against the day-long “black-belt practitioners” workshop, so attendance is  sparse. I’m hoping for insight into #2 above (Bolded text below indicate the sectionof the 3.25-hour workshop).

The Big Idea  key question to be addressed is the “What’s in it for me?” Marks emphasizes that you have to be able to

  • tell individuals how they will be able to get the work done that they are being paid for, when they currently think they are fine with email
  • tell business unit managers how the shift will improve their business
  • address the culture. Get your arms around how the company works now.

Marks recounts / neutron bomb / culture will come out the same

[Concurrently, @rappe links to a post by Sam Lawrence, “Social media isn’t going anywhere. (What’s it for?)” by which he means, it’s here to stay, so let’s get going on doing it right. (This is a key theme of this conference.) The session I am in address the ways that you need to talk to executives. This is part of what you need to get right.]

Marks and Patel continue with the key elements of Designing the Executive Pitch. They caution that you have to be careful not to position this as revolution (execs like to hear that others have already tried this stuff out). You can’t go in and tell execs that you are going to change the company’s DNA.

Assuming that you have a good idea of the Vendor Landscape, you will know which vendors to bring in.

[enter vendor panel] Panelists talk about how they sell to the C-suite, focusing on the business problems without talking about technology. Elevator pitches:

  • Omar Divina from Socialtext: “You have the official org chart and you have the connective tissue of the informal organization. This software will help you make better connections across the
  • Jordan Frank from Traction Software (doesn’t think that you can sell with an elevator system). “Most companies have systems that are designed to work when everything go right. Social software helps us to build systems that will work when things are not going right.
  • Brian Stern from Newsgator: “I ask the question, ‘have you nailed your collaboration and communication needs within your company?’ “

Given questions about how to engage the IT department in the conversation during the initial sales cycle: A lot comes down to questions of “how does this app fit into my existing infrastructure” as IT people are not engaged with the “social stuff.” Some companies think they need to implement social social software but come to the table with a laundry list of features, but without

  • passion for what social media can do
  • understanding what business problems they want to solve
  • use cases

Most successful use cases: twitter stream, central place for monitoring events, intranet collaboration.

One of the interesting questions/ surprises from conversations with customers (as per Jordan Frank):  How are we going to apply six sigma to this? Though it strings one first as absurd to think about applying regimental continuous improvement, it is worth thinking about how a company could tune the implementation based on measurement of effectiveness. Jordan has been thinking about this lately, and  blogged his thoughts on social process engineering yesterday.

It’s reassuring that vendors (at least these three, and I’m sure many more) are able to articulate the importance of deploying to customers who are ready and willing to work to make the implementation successful.

[exit vendors]

Sameer and Oliver continue a discussion of Getting Executives on Board. Without using the word “network,” they imply that it’s important to get people “outside the room” on board. That is, the E2.0 pitch might happen in a closed meeting to the decision-makers, but when they leave the room they’ll be calling colleagues to find out what they think. Understanding this informal network of influencers is important. (Of course, this applies to selling anything, not just E2.0)

Execution Planning includes requirements definition, mitigating risks, and addresses the issue of metrics. You have to establish metrics to gauge the success of the project — agree on metrics.

  • Process performance. How well is a process executed today? What can we assume about what will be different?
  • HR performance. Evaluating contributions of people as a gauge of “keepability” (my word)
  • Communications performance. Teaching leaders to engage and communicate in new ways.

Launching the new environment is the topic of Bevin Hernandez of Penn State on the culture shift from “Me to We,” understands throing that every organization has (great phrase:) “a thousand points of ‘no’.” Her case study works through the steps from creating a core team, enrolling champions, launching a print media campaign with catchy postcards and getting started guides and thumb drives, putting the exec on YouTube, etc.

In transitioning the intranet, the Penn State outreach group re-branded their intranet portal from  “my.outreach” to “our.outreach.” A great example of using language to start to make a shift. She had more to say about language, but I’ll save that for tomorrow - she’s one of the morning keynoters.

Beyond launch is driving usage, always, and relentlessly. Social media isn’t going anywhere.

Share