Library clips

sharing ideas thoughts and feedback

March 31, 2008

Roundup : Twitter Teams, Twitter Treats, Twitter Lights, Twitter Soap, Twitter Friends Network Browser

Filed under: tools, roundup

Twitter Teams - similar to hashtags and twmemes as you can tag tweets and have them show up in a tag stream, only this time there is a team based stream. It’s like taking those tweets in a hashtag tag stream that are just from a select bunch of people. Team members get a daily d msg summarizing the team tweets with a link to the team page. Or you can use Twitter to track your teams hash tag.

Twitter Treats - a blog about Twitter templates and design

Twitter Lights - right-click on any page, type in your tweet and it will also send a tinyurl of the page you are on (which displays the highlighted content of the page).

Twitter Soap - similar to the idea of hashtags and twmemes, but mashed up with the micro photo-blogging Moby-picture (which will soon have video and audio like Utterz)…you can auto-tweet every time you post to Moby-picture.
TwitterSoap is about a series of posts or episodes, here’s one called Open Coffee Shop…you have to first create your soap space at Twittersoap.
An episode is simply a photo you upload to Moby-picture, when you do this you include a hash tag eg. #OC1, this creates an entry at Twittersoap for episode 1, and of course also auto-tweets this.
People on Twitter can reply by using this same hashtag eg. #OC1 hmm, makes me want to have a coffee…this tweet will display as a comment under the photo OC1 at Twittersoap.

Now this would be an idea for Twitter, be able to create a hash tag post which appears at a third party site, and then others who reply will have their replies threaded.

eg. #OC1 researching at the cafe

…and a threaded reply would be

eg. @#OC1 I’ll come for a quick visit

Twitter Friends Network Browser - view your visual Twitter network

March 28, 2008

Social learning and social computing

Filed under: km, learning

In a past post I linked to a post about social learning, and was really impressed in how similar the concept of “social learning” was to “social computing” or what we are calling “KM 2.0″…basically working in a more visible, open, collaborative and networked way.

When we take this more horizontal and public approach to working (collaborative culture); as we do our work we learn, we tap into the corporate know-how and learn informally on a needs basis.

Once we get scale and network effects from a thriving social organisational culture, we will see:

- we get things done
- we can find stuff through people (our network) and directly through participant contributions
- we learn from doing our work
- we contribute and absorb knowledge from doing our work
- the right people seem to find the right job (autonomy)…a feeling that we have not lost on opportunities as we know the talent we have

It’s amazing what the idea (and result) of an organisational culture change to a more social and collaborative work environment will bring. The hard challenge is to work with a new approach, more socially and transparently, and we get all these other benefits, we have a knowledge sharing culture without trying to directly create one, and we educate and learn off each other without it being a separate exercise.

The way we get things done on the open web, ie. social computing, is proof that it works (it’s not just a concept), and organisations have to experience it to feel what it’s all about.
The enterprise is a different framework than the open web, there are managers, hierarchy, people are designated job roles, benchmarks, targets, measuring, outcomes, expectations, and the prime directive being time, money and efficiency.
I’m keen to see how the social computing organism plays out in a structured and hierarchial environment, how it will sneakily cross boundaries and ways of doing and exemplify performance, creating a more transparent and effective enterprise.

I think social computing is very natural and will be seen less as tools and more as “a way”, these social tools gel well with the way humans work, they don’t get in the way, they flow as our companion in allowing us to effortlessly express and achieve our aims, and “more.”

Currently email gives us this freedom to tap horizontally across the organisation, but it does nothing for a visible corporate memory, collective benefits, discovery, network, etc… social computing will be what we like about using email, but it delivers much more in the way of sense-making.

We know social computing will be good for the enterprise, and is the only competitive differentiator left…all companies can outsource, offshore, have a prime supply chain, cash and assets, great people…so the only edge is an ecosystem where anyone can tap into knowledge and exploit it so we can get ahead (make decisions and innovate.)

Saying all that, here are some excerpts about social learning, I got from Conversations with Dina (via John Seely Brown and Richard P Adler):

“We participate, therefore we are…understanding is socially constructured”

Rather than someone teaching about an information object to someone else (knowledge transfer)

Here’s an excerpt on the value of the process and how we absorb knowledge by engaging with it, rather than what we are learning:

“What do we mean by “social learning”? Perhaps the simplest way to explain this concept is to note that social learning is based on the premise that our understanding of content is socially constructed through conversations about that content and through grounded interactions, especially with others, around problems or actions. The focus is not so much on what we are learning but on how we are learning.

There is a second, perhaps even more significant, aspect of social learning. Mastering a field of knowledge involves not only “learning about” the subject matter but also “learning to be” a full participant in the field.”

The below part in bold sums up what KM 2.0 could be about:

“In a traditional Cartesian educational system, students may spend years learning about a subject; only after amassing sufficient (explicit) knowledge are they expected to start acquiring the (tacit) knowledge or practice of how to be an active practitioner/professional in a field. But viewing learning as the process of joining a community of practice reverses this pattern and allows new students to engage in “learning to be” even as they are mastering the content of a field. This encourages the practice of what John Dewey called “productive inquiry”—that is, the process of seeking the knowledge when it is needed in order to carry out a particular situated task.”

March 24, 2008

Roundup : Quotably, Twemes, Twitzer, Twitsig, serendipiTwitterous

Filed under: tools, roundup

Quotably - now you can piece together a Twitter conversation as a threaded discussion, see this example…closest thing to this we have had so far is Twitter Digest.
To get an RSS feed of a users conversations, just whack a “.rss” at the end of the URL,
eg. http://quotably.com/johnt.rss
[via TC]

Twemes - a Twitter tag service, similar to Hashtags.
[via Twtooltrack]

Twitzer - from the ShortText edge feed service is a hack that enables you to post more than 140 characters… the remaining text is kept in a URL at ShortText.

Twitsig - a Twitter image signature for your email, forums, etc…

serendipiTwitterous - enter a Twitter user or hashtag, and it will scan the tweets for conceptual terms and lists these terms, then it goes and does a search with these terms and gives you the top hit at Yahoo!, Slideshare, YouTube, etc…
[via OUseful Info]

BONUS LINK
17 tools to visualise Twitter

March 23, 2008

Friendfeed : social filter conversations

I’ve already mentioned FriendFeed, but I thought I’d elaborate as finally we have a simple to use lifestream service, but most of all it’s got my community (similar to my Twitter and blog network).

Now the idea of a lifestream is to bunch all your profiles and content into one place, but even just as much fun is that you can add friends who are doing the same thing, basically a friendstream, and not only that but you can discuss the web with your social filter.

This is really the winning feature, up until now I use web 2.0 to subscribe to my trusted social filter (people who publish and point to stuff), now I’m extending that by discussing with them, but not in a scattered way, instead these discussions are all on the one Friendfeed site.

Like only a few other lifestream services you can add imaginary friends, and Friendfeed also recommends friends and has statistics.

Comments

Like many of the lifestream services you can even add inhouse content in the way of text or a link, and even leave comments on any item…Louis Gray seems to think this is unique for some reason.

Now this leaving comments brings up Duncan Riley’s point, why would I leave a comment on a blog post or a Twitter post within Friendfeed, why wouldn’t I just do it at the native service.

Now I tend to agree to an extent as I’d like comments to my blog post on my blog, but according to the podcast on Read/Write Talk there is a subtle difference. This is a way for you, your friends, and their friends to comment on stuff, you will not see comments by other people who are not connected to your extended network.
So it’s a quality discussion limited to people in your network, this sort of thing doesn’t happen on blogs
eg. imagine you could filter all the comments on TechCrunch to just your friendfeed friends, see more at the Lifestream blog.
But is this really unique, you have this same functionality at Jaiku.

Mugshot and especially their groups feature has this down to an art, but they are going down the group member road, whereas Friendfeed is doing it via your network…Mugshot has plenty of other features like swarming, chat, share link, externals feeds, etc…

A real difference with Friendfeed to other lifestream services is that comments are not linear.
eg. on Jaiku when there is a new comment it appears underneath the item being commented on, but it also becomes a new post of it’s own.
Friendfeeds approach is for comments to not be a post of their own, but to only be threaded underneath the item.

So how do you know when there is a discussion around an item that is a day old and has rolled of the page?

Well, it doesn’t roll off the page…sure Friendfeed is a river of news of recent items, but if an older item is being commented on it moves back up the river, so it’s on the front page where you can see it.
The idea here is that these discussed items are popular and the discussion needs to be seen, it won’t pass you by.
In Jaiku you can be updated with recent comments in a discussion, but the discussion is not promoted, in fact if you miss it, it will pass you by, whereas Friendfeed tries to keep conversations visible (on the frontpage)

Basically, if you are tracking discussion you never have to leave the front page of either your “friends” tab or “me” tab. Heavily discussed items on both these tabs will always be on the front page, this is very much in contrast to the linear approaches we have seen so far. In fact this could make it a “hot news” ranked page based on comments and voting, so it’s kind of in TechMeme, Twitter, Digg territory.

Only thing I forsee is if this site becomes the discussion, where most items are discussed, then when I login, I indeed may have to go 5 pages back to see all the days hot discussions. I’m sure in the future they will a separate stream or tab for ultra hot discussions.

But is this exhaustive enough to make sure you have tracked every comment people make on your items. The Fast Wonder blog has a solution to create a feed of comments made to your stuff on Friendfeed.
Hmmm…the settings page says “Send me email when people comment on my feed and I haven’t logged in recently”

Search

And now they have search, which I see is kind of competing with my Google Reader search, as I can search just me, or my friends…or as TechCrunch say a “destination site”.
If “Tibet” is the news of the day, I can search my friends to see who is talking about it.
In Google Reader I’m most likely just subscribed to their blog feed, but here I’m subscribed to all their stuff.

The advanced search enables you to search just one person, and even filtered by service…this is awesome.

Hang on, this isn’t full-text search, but it’s still good…and it generates an RSS feed.

I am using TweetScan (core network) to track the term “friendfeed” amongst select Twitter friends, I can now do this with Friendfeed itself, both of these services generate a search feed.

NOTE: I couldn’t do without Google Reader

Icons, filters, full-text, bi-directional

Another good feature is that you have a view for all posts you have commented on.

I’d like another view for my items people have commented on, I know these will be on the front page, but once there are no subsequent comments, they roll of the page. But I guess on my own blog I can’t filter to see only posts that have been commented on…in the meantime we can use the hack linked (Fast Wonder blog) to above.

Next to each item is an icon from the service it was originally published on, if you click this you can see just content from that service.
So if you are on your “friends” tab, and see an item from Twitter and click the Twitter icon, you will now only see Twitter items from all your friends…this is almost like being on Twitter.

What you can’t do is post back to Twitter or comment on a blog, unlike SocialThing, or favorit.

Should Friendfeed be a two way thing, where you can post a comment back to appear on the original service…and at the time of commenting have the option to, “comment just here”, or “comment here and the original”.
[UPDATE 26/03/08: Just in…when commenting on a Twitter feed, you can send it to Twitter as a reply]

Another thing Duncan Riley mentioned was that to actually read blog posts you have to go to the original source, then come back to Friendfeed to leave a comment. Once I go to the original blog post, I’d probably comment then and there, so I think Friendfeed needs to work out a way to keep you from leaving. Perhaps they could do like Ask/Bloglines search where the full-text of an item displays when you hover over it.

Getting back to the icon view, eg. just see Twitter posts from your friends, I wish there was a list of these icons on the sidebar ie. a list of icons of all the services your friends use…more easier like Spokeo.
I’d like this for me as well, but the icon list representing all the services I use will launch to the native service when you click

…and where is an “FF” icon for my inhouse friendfeed posts.

Another thing is that I’m adding my Twixtr photo blog feed and my LibraryThing feed using the blog feed icon, this means if I filter a search with this icon I will get more than just my blog posts…darn.

Duplicates

I really like how it collapses items, so the stream is less congested, this is all part of the pleasant user experience.

You can also reduce the noise by hiding a service from a given user, meaning if you do not want to see userA’s flickr photo’s, you can turn that off, see more.
I’d like to do that for my whole Friends stream, ie. turn off the Flickr service from all my friends. There is a hack available to do this sort of thing for the moment , eg. Friendfeed minus Twitter.

But what about duplicate items?

eg.
- my del.icio.us links are in my blog feed (via Feedburner)
- my del.icio.us links are in my Twitter feed only because my blog feed is in my Twitter feed (via Twitterfeed)
- some items I share in Google Reader, I also bookmark in del.icio.us

So you see what’s happening here, if I add my:
- del.icio.us feed
- Google Reader Shared Items feed
- Blog feed
- Twitter feed

You will see an item I bookmark in del.icio.us appear in my Friendfeed 4 times.
You will see my blog posts appear 2 times.

There must be a way for Friendfeed to de-dupe URL’s or titles.

Identity

This could become a lifestream social network like Ziki where you can private message friends…public message would be good as well (also the ability to share or push an item to a friend).

If they want people to live in Friendfeed, I’m guessing in the future they would add ways to contact people, just like Ziki allows you to add sidebar links or widgets:
- GTalk me
- Jaxtr me, etc..

Why not go the whole way and have people tags.

But let’s not get excited as Friendfeed may want to keep it simple, as simple is the reason why people like del.icio.us, Google, and Twitter.

Mobile

I’m using this mobile version I found via Steve Rubel:
http://friendfeed.com/embed/googlegadget

Only thing is I can’t post or comment on my phone…when is Friendfeed mobile coming!!

More

Steve Rubel also has a post on using the Imaginary friends (private feature) and as an ego aggregator of sorts. You could use this feature to subscribe to all your Friendfeed searches, kind of like an inhouse watchlist.

Lifestream blog has picked up on a way to subscribe to a friends comments and likes, but it seems this is now a feature, you can go to a profile and get a feed for a friends likes, comments or both.

…and OPML.

The Facebook app is full featured, very nice…not sure if there is a general widget yet.

I wonder if it may include a newsfeed type feature where it tells you when a friend adds a new friend, it already displays when a friend comments or votes something.

What exactly is friendfeed?

- Personalised Memedigger/Breaking news based around my OPML (social filter and extended network)…the search feature is great for hot topics
(will we soon see blog post footer buttons saying “Share on friendfeed”)
- Conversational Web (based around my social filter)
- Lifestream/Friendstream
- Identity page
- Expert locator (if it added people tags)

I’m getting the feeling due to the comments feature that friendfeed is reminding me of the immediacy of Twitter conversations, but friendfeed discussions are more in context of an object.

Is Friendfeed going to cut the lunch of the new breed of social network RSS Readers like FeedEachOther?
I’ve been wanting Google Reader to be a social network, but now Friendfeed is just that and more, just wish you could fwd or share a link with another Friendfeed friend.

Google Reader is still my tool for essential reading, but Friendfeed may become the new conversation and recommendation/discovery place…to complement Twitter, and in a way to achieve what I hoped would happen on Facebook, ie. an aggregated conversation and link sharing social network.

I like this quote by AVC, as a result of a new place to see comments on his stuff and other conversations:

“…an aggregator of attention to a demander of attention”

The essence of Friendfeed:

“FriendFeed is for community discussion surrounding the social web”

March 20, 2008

KM 2.0 is about “showing your workings out”

Filed under: km

Two of my posts have linked and quoted blog posts that are bringing to light the difference that the renewed push in KM brings, in a shift to a “work in progress” mentality.

I have mentioned several times that km 2.0 is a social way of doing work, it’s not a separate task, instead it’s blended in our work routine.

Firstly people are working this way on the open web, and they are also using social computing tools in the enterprise, these people are sometimes referred to as IT rogues.
The second difference is the fact that the new interest in KM (by early adopters), is being initiated by the workers…social productivity.
Whereas the first wave of KM was more a mandate by management, KM 2.0 is coming about by workers saying to management, “I’m really productive in a social way, it’s how I get things done, can we use these social computing tools”…and management would say, “Is this the new KM way to share tacit knowledge”, and the workers would say, “I’m not too sure what KM is, but I get things done by collaborating and connecting with my network.”

Anyway I want to once again point to the Transparent Office blog (this is becoming one of my favourites), Michael Idinopulos posts about the real essence of the new KM. It’s about thinking out loud, more open collaboration, your workings out are visible (less private). People get to share, engage and nuture, insights and works in early stages or in the thought stages…before all the cream is sorted, and formalised into a final product.

Perhaps KM 2.0 is like showing all the workings out of your maths solution…we get to see how you got there.
It’s this “how you got there” that we are trying to tease out, actually as you are sharing, others can help shape your path, and bring you to perhaps a better place…the social capital at work.
Also, others can read about the stages in your path, and utilise that know-how for a totally different work at hand, eg. an approach, experiences and insights a blogger shares about her workings towards a “engineering” deliverable, could very well be usable by an HR person.
A HR person is not going to read an “engineering” deliverable, but if they happened to come across a post (a fragment) about a research method the engineer discovered and applied in the “engineering” deliverable, the HR person may be able to use that info in their research task.

This is how Michael puts it:

“The real paradigm shift in Web 2.0, I believe, is the blurring the line between publication and collaboration. In the old days, people collaborated in private. They talked to their friends and colleagues, wrote letters. Later they sent emails. All the real thinking happened in those private conversations. Eventually, once the key insights had been extracted, refined, and clarified, they published: books, articles, speeches, blast memos, etc.”

“…the really exciting thing that’s happening in Web 2.0 and Enterprise 2.0 is that more and more of those private “pre-publication” interactions are happening in public (or at least semi-public). I think of this as the dawn of the “Work in Progress” culture. We no longer think that something has to be finished before we let strangers into the conversation.”

In related knowledge worker practices, a post from Jeremy Thomas at the Social Glass blog, alludes to managers needing all the web 2.0 content data into a usable distilled format, as managers are about the “status” of work, in contrast to knowledge workers being about the “way they do” this work.

The Infovark blog explains this nicely:

“A lot of this E20 stuff is about transparency — improving employee awareness within the organization. Better visibility helps managers too — perhaps more than the average employee — but they’ll need a different set of tools to search and filter social content than “doers” will. The knowledge worker needs to find content so that they can do their work. A manager of knowledge workers needs to find out about the status of that work so they can measure progress and productivity.”

Maybe blogging can help here, a manager can subscribe to a team’s status blog rather than continuely needing meetings. They don’t need to wait for a formal report, or write down notes at a meeting, as blog posts can keep them informed…these blog posts enable the knowledge worker to capture stuff as it’s happening. When there is a meeting, the managers are already informed of what’s happening, this can be refined, and then most of the meeting can be spent on actions.
Better still a datablogging tool would be ideal…here are some examples.

What I like about web 2.0 is things like tag clouds where management can see the diversity, and depth of topics people are talking about…they can get a general picture of what’s going on.

March 18, 2008

Knowledge Management as an ecosystem

Filed under: km, network

I had a speaking engagement today for the Australian Geoscience Information Association (AGIA).
It was a breakfast session at a roof top cafe in Perth city…very pleasant and informal setting.

There were over 30 information professionals, and many were keen to know what enterprise 2.0 is all about, they had lots of questions. Most questions were about management buy-in, adoption, etc…these people want to take it on, but my presentation was an overview, so we didn’t have time to go over details of deploying enterprise 2.0. I did mention that management would like to hear case studies (success stories), and that open source virtually lets you do it for no cost.

I started my presentation explaining how I came to be there presenting:

- I participate (publish my thoughts/ideas/experiences/reviews/news, etc…)
- a person chooses to subscribe to me (I’m considered an expert they like to have in their social filter)
- I have never met the person I was invited by, but we interact on the web
- I was able to be there, because I’m visible (I’m on the map)

I mentioned how siloed systems and search aren’t really helping us, and that we use email to network, yet email is not a very good discovery tool, and again too siloed. So the idea is to use the free-form structure and ease of email and apply that concept to new social tools that allow for a more open way to exchange know-how, in the context of a system (eg. ask a question about HR in HR forums, post news about HR in the HR blog)…actually I have a post called Instead of sending an email….

I talked about pressing issues facing the enterprise like: Baby boomer retirement, understanding the millenial generation, IT Rogues, etc…and that the social tools have come at the right time to enable the flow of know-how. Another reason was that knowledge flow and tapping into social capital is the new competitive advantage.

Some of the key factors:

Wisdom of Crowds
The world is flat
Participation Culture
Knowledge as a flow
Create conditions and increase interactions for knowledge creation and exchange
Connect and Context vs Content and Collect
Distributed vs Command and Control
A “way to work” rather than a task
- not trying to create a knowledge sharing culture, it just happens
Sense-making
It’s not in the nodes, it’s in the networks
Strength of weak ties
Emergence
Autonomy
Social computing is the new KM
- it’s not a request from management, it’s a worker initiative, it’s the new breed of workers adopting this new collaborative and networked way of working, as it’s how they get things done

I’ve uploaded my presentation to Slideshare, this way the people at the presentation can view, download, embed, and discuss the presentation…I told them the discussion doesn’t end here, questions and comments can be left in context of the presentation at Slideshare.

Also check out these other great km 2.0 type slidedecks.

Shift Happens: how to share knowledge in a network centric world
IBM KM Blueprint Workshop: KM Goes Social
The Evolution Of Knowledge Management Km 1.0 Vs. Km 2.0
The Enterprise Knowledge Market V1.2

Knowledge Management as an ecosystem

Here are some of my blog posts that I went through in assembling this presentation…I’m glad I blog about this stuff, in a way I have distilled all the stuff in my head, my bookmarks and reading list (social filter).

March 17, 2008

Why km 1.0 failed in a nutshell

Filed under: km

CIO magazine has an interview article on enterprise wikis with Ross Mayfield from Socialtext, but don’t think you will just come away with wiki knowledge, this article has some of the best quotes on why KM 1.0 has failed.

This is explained so perfectly from the workers point of view…before you get into KM 2.0, if you want to begin to explain to someone what’s wrong with KM 1.0, these quotes will do the job:

“The way organizations adapt, survive and be productive is through the social interaction that happens outside the lines that we draw by hierarchy, process and organizational structure. The first form of social software to really take off to facilitate these discussions was email.”

“Most employees don’t spend their time executing business process. That’s a myth. They spend most of their time handling exceptions to business process. That’s what they’re doing in their [e-mail] inbox for four hours a day. Email has become the great exception handler.”

“Unfortunately, what it means is all the learning disappears because it’s hidden away in people’s inbox. It’s not searchable and discoverable…”

“So at the edge of your organization, there are all kinds of exceptions that are happening. If you handle them appropriately, you can adapt to where the market is going. You can adapt to the problems you have in your existing structures.”

“…the greatest source of sustainable innovation is how you’re handling these exceptions to business process.”

[ADDED: The Collaborative Thinking blog is on the same conclusion:

“Systems designed to support functional requirements do provide ways for workers to contribute, however the contributions are part of their explicit work actions and generally known ahead of time. Such systems cannot effectively support contribution scenarios not captured as part of the design process. Those involved in the application design process often place little effort on requirements that address the social and emergent aspects of communication, information sharing and collaboration. Workers resort to e-mail to solve such contribution gaps – a key reason why e-mail remains the most popular tool used by workers to express themselves. E-mail is one of the few universal tools workers have access to that allows contributions in a free-form manner.”]

March 14, 2008

A blogged experience on introducing enterprise communities

EMC (who you may know for their products Documentum and erooms) have deployed communities into their enterprise of 33,000 employees, they have chosen Clearspace from Jive who are getting rave reviews.

Here is an example of a Clearspace community by Ignite who run the Spark IM product…here is a random member page.

Chuck Hollis from EMC has a public blog that is documenting every stage of his involvement in the deployment of their communities, it’s called A Journey In Social Media.

There is so much we can learn from someone else’s experience, I recommend reading this blog, we can learn from proven methods of what not to do, and what works.

Reading Chuck’s experience is ideal for me right now, as I have been asked to be part of the team to develop, deploy and support Communities at my work. We are still in the development stage: learning the software, creating training guides, etc…I’ve kind of got two jobs right now, but soon enough communities will become my full-time job. I plan to read up on all things about Communities that I have been bookmarking in the last couple of years, and then publish some hearty blog posts on Community adoption, deployment, usability, leadership, sustainability, etc…

I get the feeling our communities will be both topic interest groups, and business unit groups…at the moment our Document Management System (DMS) houses business units (folders and documents), but I can forsee that the Communities will take over, as they house documents with all the DMS collaboration and versioning features, as well as conversation features like blogs, forums, Q&A, etc…
BTW we are using OpenText Communities of Practice, in my eyes it’s not the ideal product (they are currently making improvements), but we use them as our DMS system, and having the same vendor is an attractive solution.

The about page really rings true:

“I think most companies will be taking a journey to figure out this whole social media thing in the next few years.
And, at the center of each company’s journey will be an individual or two who are at the center of that company’s journey.
This blog is being written by an individual who is doing this at a very large company.
Hopefully, others will find it useful in the future.”

Chuck’s blog is 8 months in, so there is lots to learn, some of what’s covered is:

- buy-in
- usability/getting started
- viral adoption, as well as a soft roll-out (otherwise it has a “why do I have to do this”, “what’s in it for me”)
- champions/coaches/gardeners
- HR/IT
- senior involvement
- permissions/trust/shy/participation behaviour
- promotion/informal learning
- organising/taxonomy
- how it’s different to email and document collaboration
- conversation centric, rather than content centric
- ROI in stories

This is KM 2.0 at it’s best, the blog format is so casual (informal) and personal that you really get ground zero insight…imagine this compared to a formal report on how to do communities?
When it comes to personal know-how, what would you rather read Chuck’s “works in progress” or a formal report, I think I’d learn lots more with off the cuff posts that are published as they are experienced.

Firstly you get all the details (as it’s blogged as it happens), and it’s very personal, contextual, and includes a lot of peripheral stuff, that may not be included in a formal report. There’s a lot more tacit stuff going on in these casual and spontaneous blog posts than a manual on communities. Reason being is the nature of blog posts are sharing story nuggets, whereas the aim of a report is trying to achieve a planned and end result, so the content reflects the style of what is asked of the deliverable. The content of a deliverable is more a slave to the format and formalness (is that even a word?), whereas the free-form nature of a blog and the immediate publishing is more intimate and closer to a video montage of the moment/s.

You can always write a report using the blog as your source material, but there is the findability and “who can be bothered” issue.
Would you rather pull anecdotes to you (come to me web) as it goes along (time for you to absorb, breathe, and discuss content and experiences with the author as it’s fresh), or not even know where to find a thick report, and procrastinate reading such a lengthy book, and if you have queries try and track down the author who may have bad recall of the details of long ago.

NOTE: I’m not bad-mouthing reports, deliverables are always needed, but when it comes to the transfer of tacit know-how, blogs are the perfect complement.

If Chuck were to write a book or paper on introducing communities into an enterprise, there is no way he would remember all this “gold” if he didn’t blog it (and all the comment contributions). Plus would it be proper to write so casually in a “paper”, that would be unfortunate because it’s this casualness that gets us closer to those moments of personal know-how.

I myself in this blog post, have not had time to condense and add value to Chuck’s posts into a articulate review, someone else may want to do that ;)
What I have done is read through his blog and selected several posts of interest and highlighted excerpts (hope you don’t mind Chuck):

SEPTEMBER 2007

Recruiting Initial Communities

“I’ve come to think about the spread of social media (more properly thought of as community-building) as a viral phenomenon. Create a couple of stong, virulent strains, and let nature do the rest.

My thinking is that if we have a handful of small, vibrant, passionate communities — they’ll serve as the model for new ones, and we’ll get some organic expansion.

I’ve mentioned before that a community without authoritative voices runs the risk of being irrelevant. Not only do we need one or more authoritative voices, they’ve got to be committed to playing the role: showing up frequently, getting involved, being responsive, and so on.

There are important topics, and there are passionate topics. I’m also looking for topics that are fast moving — where the picture is changing day-by-day or week-by-week.”

Going Live

“For me, creating a good social media environment means that the platform and the processes have to be absolutely transparent to our end users. If they have to go through lengthy registration processes, or if the tool behaves in a weird way, it’ll put people off bigtime.

Going a bit further, we want this stuff to spread virally. One of the ways to enable this is to make it as self-documenting as possible. To the extent that potential users can be educated on context and process using the platform itself — that’s a good thing.

We needed a couple of basic processes. First, how does someone figure out the context here, e.g. what is all this about, and how do I use it? Second, if someone wants to play, how does a user register? Third, how does a community get built?

As far as “creating a context” goes, we created a “Getting Started” space and started to populate it with all sorts of contextual documents — e.g. what was this all about, what it could be used for, some basics on blogging and creating communities, and so on.

We also had to think through the process of how does a community get built. To do this, we created a “New Community Forum” space to help.

In this space, there’s a few coaching documents on how to think of a community: focus, roles, etc. We also created a template to help people answer a few basic questions.

The idea is that prospective community builders can post a proposal for their new community in the space, and we all can review and discuss it. Once approved (by consensus), the admin will create a new space and assign it over to the new community builder.

We also have a playpen / sandbox space where prospective communities can be built, and then promoted (moved) to active spaces — something that may not be obvious, but will probably prove to be useful.”

The Great Taxonomy Debate

“Organizing communities by corporate function meant that you’d be more likely to have small, isolated communities that didn’t span multiple organizations and boundaries. Not an issue in a small company, but a real issue in a bigger company with tens of thousands of people and hundreds of organizational units.

I think it’s worth pointing out the inherent futility of pre-ordaining what types of communities will be built.

We’ve made it really easy for anyone to start an informal discussion or community. This means we’re gonna have lots of them. I’m looking forward to being surprised at the types of communities that spring up.

Some will thrive. Some won’t. Some will spring into existence, passionately flame around a hot topic, and quiesce once the challenge has been solved, and people move on.

All part of the natural ecology of social media environments.

Who are we to pre-ordain what types of things grow? It’s the difference between a garden and a meadow. A garden has weeds, a meadow doesn’t.

I used a bit of my perogative to force a very simple top-level schema.

The first community space anyone sees is “Getting Started”. Lots of new users, we want them to go there first.

The second community space is ‘Active Communities’. The message is clear — go here to look at a linear list of communities that are up and running. I think the expectations here are pretty clear.

The third space is “Under Development”. I felt we needed a sandbox where prospective community developers could build their spaces, configure, add content, etc. before going “live” and promoting their community to new members.

The fourth space is “Archived Communities”. At some point, activity in a space tails off, but you don’t want to delete anything. At the same time, you don’t want people wandering in and contributing if there’s no one there. So everything in this space has the write permissions turned off — it’s still accessible and referenceable — but no comments, edits or discussions.

And, of course, the fifth space is “Feedback’ — what do people think, what do they want, etc.”

OCTOBER 2007

We Have Been Live One Week

“We announced availability virally — we all pushed email announcements to people we knew who were interested in what we were doing. We wanted people to “find” us, and not have some sort of official corporate announcement. That, and we wanted to ramp slowly with people who might be more inclined to be patient with us.

If I had to do it again, I’d do it the same way.

But the second order effect was more interesting. Before long, we saw people on the platform that none of us knew. Yes, they were EMC employees, but they weren’t who we expected to join in initially.

We’re quickly putting some basic process in place. How do I sign up? How do I get help online? What are the known bugs, and how do I work around them? How do I feedback? How do I propose a new community?”

Creating Context For New Users

“We want our social media platform to grow virally.

But we’re finding out that a little effort in creating context can go a long way to easing the process.

We made sure that our “Welcome” page had a clear, upfront message about what this is all about, and had an obvious link to follow if people wanted to find out more.

We wrote short docs on how to get an account, rules of the road, etc.

We also don’t want to spend a lot of time hand-holding users, especially new ones.

Now, the traditional answer would be to offer up some form of training. Yuch. Expensive, and a real barrier to adoption. If people couldn’t figure out the tools on their own (albeit with a bit of coaching), we’d picked the wrong platform.”

And Now The Real Work Begins …

“We have more than a few people who bounce around a bit once they “discover” the platform. They ask questions that have already been answered. They fail to read the docs. They get frustrated, and post aggressive or assertive questions that are a bit inappropriate.

Part of social media skills is learning how to size up an environment when you’re new to it. Just like you wouldn’t go barging into a party and start acting inappropriately, the same statement applies to any social media platform.

A third problem is arising in community building. We get these great proposals for new communities, we approve them, we create the space, and then … well, nothing. The people who took the time to create the proposal aren’t following through with the basic steps of building their communities.

I don’t know whether its because they don’t know what to do, or got busy, or somehow think that communities spontaneously generate around a topic. I’m looking for a full-time community coach to help with this problem, because it’ll be a killer unless we surmount it.”

Developing Community Developers

“We have about 20 communities under construction. Only one has emerged as a viable, vibrant community. The signal to noise ratio is not acceptable, in my humble opinion.

The person who approached building the community did it totally different than everyone else. He gave careful thought to his initial community members. He prepopulated his community with great content. He encouraged targeted people to come, participate, post, contribute, discuss, etc.

For me, the trick will be to develop community developers. And, because I want scale quickly, I can’t do this function all by myself.

Second, they’re going to have to assemble a list of known “best practices” around designing and building a community. I have a lot of that in my head, but they’re going to have to pull it out of me and other people, and then validate that with our prototypical community developers.

Third, they’re going to have to coach an audience of about 20-50 community developers at any one time. Now, they’re going to have to learn how to do this without setting up lots of face-to-face meetings, lengthy phone calls, etc. Sure, their will be some need for this, but I’d like to see the majority of the activity done using the social media platform itself.”

Whew — Things Are Moving (Way Too) Fast

“We’re at 500 self-selected users, and more piling in exponentially every day.

Key learning: viral launches of platforms are best. Makes people get curious, explore, etc. — better than an Official Announcement. You also get a more patient breed of user, which has been helpful as we experience growing pains.

The best part — people are finding each other and productively interacting in ways I had never expected. I’m using the analogy of a “social computer” to describe what we’re building here.

I’ve found strong sponsorship in our HR group. They’ve appointed a leader around “social media proficiency at EMC”, building a team, and figuring out how we as 35,000 people get good at this stuff in a directed, thoughtful way.

And, of course, they’re forming an online community to discuss, debate and coordinate.

Some of our bigger business units are coming to the table with big initiatives of their own. Great stuff, it is. Our big challenge is that I think they’re expecting other functions to go implement their project for them.”

NOVEMBER 2007

The “Social” in “Social Media

“We’re meeting other people who are simply uncomfortable about expressing themselves on a semi-public platform. They’re afraid that something will go uncontrollably wrong with what they’ve said, or how someone uses their words against them.

Lots of 1990s command/control/process thinking, e.g “who approves blog content before it gets posted?”. “Who controls who can see what?”. “How do we make sure only authorized, approved content makes its way to the platform?” and so on.”

Warning: Social Engineering Ahead

“We’re finding out that people who want to work on the platform might be thought of as “just fooling around” or wasting time if their boss learned they were doing stuff on the platform, some of might be not strictly task-at-hand focused.

What I quickly realized is that we needed a message: a tight, focused communication that clearly set expectations for everyone.

Something like this:

EMC is investing in social media. Not only is it an exciting area of technology for our product organizations, we think it has the potential to transform EMC’s overall effectiveness and competitive position.
To be successful with social media at EMC, we’ll need to learn some new behaviors: new ways of communicating, new ways of collaborating, and new ways of creating value.
We’ve created a safe and secure environment where all of us can learn how to use these new tools: http://one.emc.com
We encourage all EMC employees — both individual contributors and managers — to take the time to discover how these new capabilities can improve your working environment, and your contribution to EMC.
We’re interested in your feedback as we learn how to use these new tools. Simply let us know your thoughts by leaving your comments in the “feedback” forum.

We’re finding that there are a LOT of people who want to control who sees what and when. Or who joins in.

There are some painfully shy people out there. As they look at the platform, they’re asking that their true identity be masked in some way, so they can say what they really feel.

People have to learn to trust each other, even if they’ve never met. At the core of all this, that’s really what it’s all about.

They need to trust that their words won’t be twisted, that they won’t be bullied, or flamed, or singled out in a negative way.

Building trust takes time. I don’t think there’s any shortcut.

So, despite all the things I’m thinking of doing, I have to remember that these things take time.”

I Guess I Owe You An Update

“First, there’s no question in anyone’s mind that this was a good idea. All doubters, skeptics and proposers of alternative courses of action have now gone eerily silent. It’s real obvious now.

We’re at about 1000 active licenses. About 900 of them are “lurkers” — that’s OK, we kind of expected that. I think everyone has gotten over the economic waste of paying for 900 licenses that really aren’t being “used” as we’d like. Compared to what we’ve done here, that’s splitting hairs.

The “core” — about 100 hard-core early adopters — are making this a fun and useful place to hang out.

Our “hit rate” on community formation is improving. The first wave was awkward, most of it stalled, but the second wave — people who were able to watch the interaction on the platform, and propose/build communities from experience — well, they’re doing much better, I think.

There’s spontaneous, value-generating interaction. I don’t want to share company secrets on a public blog, but there’s at least 2-3 “aha!” moments I can point to that created substantial, non-arguable economic value through interactions and discussions.

There’s buzz. Everyone seems to have heard about it, is curious, comes over to check it out. Sometimes, they wade in and start participating.

We were concerned with rapid adoption swamping our ability to provide a service. That’s not happening. Given the viral form of promotion, plus the natural human reluctance to jump into a new social situation, we have a steady measured pace of people coming on board.

We have our challenges. We haven’t cracked the code on repeatable community formation. We need to “legitimize” the platform (and its attendant social behaviors) to a wider audience — there’s a lot of social reluctance we’re hearing about.”

DECEMBER 2007

We’re Cool Now

“Simply put: it’s now “cool” to be an active participant on EMC ONE. It’s also cool to have a presence, and to have a plan to use the platform to solve a business problem. Once “coolness” kicks in with anything viral (like social media), you’ve got the wind at your back.

Our coolness factor increased a bit when I convinced one of senior execs to start a blog on leadership. He’s a great guy, and has wonderful stories about leadership, values, customer focus, etc.

In addition to being a good sport and just being generally willing to help out with cool projects, there’s a real benefit for him — he spends a lot of time telling the same stories repeatedly to different audiences. Now he tells it once (online) and everyone can read it.

It took a while, but it’s happening. People are getting comfortable enough to find each other (even though they’ve never met), discuss topics, find a problem, and start working to solve it. I don’t have a small number of examples, I now have a much longer list.

EMC has a Center of Excellence in China. I don’t know how many people are out there (probably more than I realize), but there’s a legit business problem in getting people on board, helping them feel connected, etc.

The fellow who runs this COE tells everyone something simple: go to EMC ONE and write a blog entry, introduce yourself, and look around. And, surprisingly, people from this part of the world are writing back and saying “welcome!”. More coolness.

I get dozens of interesting bits of research, reports, analysis, etc. that flow through my email inbox. So do lots of other people. They’re in email, and then they’re gone, never to be seen again.

I created a space, started posting stuff, and invited others to do the same. They did.

Pretty soon, we had a big pile of documents. All searchable. All discussable. Not particularly well organized, but better than buried in email, or living on my hard disk.

There’s a somewhat petty control battle going on as well. We’ve defined the boundaries as “the business controls the user experience, not IT”, which is a role partitioning exercise I would highly recommend for just about anyone considering this stuff.

If I had to summarize the one thing we need to work on, it’s weaning people away from doing everything (and I mean everything) on email. Even people who are proficient on the platform will occasionally revert to old habits.”

JANUARY2008

Learning To Swim

“I’ve written before how I believe that social media success has everything to do with new behaviors, skills, roles, etc. — it’s not so much about the platform and technology (although you DO need a place to do this), it’s more about how you use it.

And — like all behaviors — we’ve noticed a certain reticence in the masses to adopt many of these new behaviors.

Sure, we have our early (and vocal) adopters. But for every one of those, there are literally hundreds who are watching, and not participating.

And we’ve given a LOT of thought on how to improve the situation.

And, to be successful at social media behaviors and skills, we’re probably going to have to think about the problem in much the same way as a swimming teacher thinks about teaching kids to swim.

We were coming up with things like “Learning To Be Proficient At Social Media”. Hardly compelling.

Now, we have titles like “Learning To Swim: Getting Good At Social Media Skills”. Better, I think.

Secondly, we have a way of immediately establishing empathy with our target audience, e.g. “look, this is like learning to swim, it might be a little uncomfortable at the beginning, but before long you’ll be having a blast”. You do know how to swim, don’t you?

Additionally, this metaphor helps bridge the “frustration gap” between the SM-skilled and the SM-unskilled. The people here who are comfortable with this stuff just can’t comprehend what could be so hard about doing this stuff — it’s easy, it’s fun, etc. A little empathy is a good thing here.”

We Are Now Corporate Legit

“I’d like to say we had a well-defined plan to move from prototype to pilot to early adopters to mainstream, but — like all things web 2.0-ish — things happen at their own pace, and — occasionally — in ways that you don’t expect.

This week, I think we made a phase transition from “interesting project” to “corporate legit”.

Our communication strategy has been largely viral up to this point. Someone tells someone else about the platform, they get curious, they look around, and many of them participate — a bit.

One of our biggest obstacles has been “fear of swimming”. People have openly told me they don’t want to participate for a multitude of reasons — shyness, fear of retribution, getting into an ugly discussion, etc.

It’s the elepant in the room. There’s no getting good at social media if people are scared to participate.

We understand the badge of “corporate legit, corporate endorsed” will go a long way towards making people feel more comfortable. If senior management likes the idea (and everything that goes with it), that’s a major obstacle removed.

Every year, EMC has a big leadership meeting in Las Vegas

Guess what? We got our airtime

Frank Hauck (the exec who leads the group I report into) spent 5 minutes or so showing screenshots from EMC|ONE (the name of our Clearspace-based platform).

He positioned it as a place to have conversations, and not a repository.

He said it was a way to find people, and start to build EMC’s social computer.”

Homepage of all communities and discussions:

All communities homepage

A blog (I like the action box):

Clearspace Community blog

What I want to know is that do communities have blogs, or do you have a profile blog which can choose to send posts to a community?

An active community:

A Clearspace Community

FEBRUARY 2008

Progress Is Now Coming In Big Chunks …

“I wrote a while back that we saw one of our most formidable challenges would be around getting people to participate in this new environment. We found out people were holding back for a variety of reasons, nothing do with technology, more to do with human behavior.

The facts are clear. New people are showing up on the platform — dozens a day — and are jumping right in. They’re blogging, they’re starting discussions — bottom line, they’re not shy.

I’ve mentioned before that this — above all else — will lead to social media proficiency as a business tool. And I also probably mentioned we’re pretty abysmal at this today.

So I decided to do something about it. I got approval to create a new role (Community Coach), and found a wonderful, enthusiastic person who agreed to give it a go.

Her job will be to work with people targeting the larger communities to help them get better at going through the process. As we get good at this, we’ll document what we learn, and use that as a basis of a self-help community for — you guess it — community builders.

But, about 20 minutes into it, one of the execs lit up and started talking about some of the real challenges in the finance group: developing leadership, helping them to understand the entire business, building a culture of continual improvement, etc. — and basically got the SM bug bigtime. She’s a natural leader, and I think others will surely follow her.

Our platform is being mentioned everywhere. There’s no formal campaign, it’s just the advanced stages of our viral program. I see us being referenced all over the place, pitched, described, etc.

The overall communications effectiveness is off-the-charts, in my book. And there’s no way we could have achieved this with a traditional, organized approach. Viral marketing takes a bit longer, but it achieves results in a way that’s truly amazing to behold.

We now have so many business value stories that we don’t really need any more to make our case, even to the most stubborn ROI cynic. I have a nice email I forward around that tells the story, and includes the links to the specific places on the site where it’s happening.

Viral marketing once again, since these tend to get forwarded around a bunch. I don’t need to tell my story, I can enlist others to tell it for me.”

On Conversational Collaboration

“The ideas are pretty simple. Enterprise value is created when people collaborate, share ideas, work together, etc. Most of the discussion has been around document-oriented collaboration, e.g. people working together around documents.

We had decided that — ahead of that — having conversations was a necessary and vital “feeder process” to document collaboration.

Now, don’t get me wrong. Document-oriented collaboration is pretty darn cool, and can create significant value in the right context.

And if you surf the E2.0 blogosphere, there’s an intense focus around wikis — the quintessential document collaboration model — as a stellar example of all things 2.0-ish in the enterprise.

Early on, I became fascinated with community dynamics at EMC. Sure, we were pretty adept at pushing tons of information at each other. Emails, web sites, portals, repositories, etc. — we were adept at creating content, and shoving it around at each other.

Terabytes of the stuff. All neatly written, organized and syndicated. We were not perfect, but we were reasonably proficient at generating and orchestrating static content. And it just didn’t ring my bell, so to speak.

But, I kept thinking, the really high-value stuff was the conversations I was having with other people.

About ideas, perspectives, context, etc. — the discussions I was getting into were very intense, and usually incredibly productive. They influenced me, I influenced them. And good stuff generally came of it.

These conversations were personal, honest and context-rich. And they were perhaps the most important source of innovation and value-add in our corporate culture.

To go even further, the really cool conversations I was having usually started with someone saying “you know, I was talking to so-and-so, and we came up with the idea that …” so we had one conversation feeding into another.

Now, if you come to the conclusion that conversations matter, you’re also struck by just how difficult it is to have lots of conversations with lots of different people.

Emails are poor substitutes for conversations, especially when distribution lists are involved. Concalls and large meetings are absolutely painful — I’m always the guy who’s politically incorrect, and tries to take the discussion into an area that might be interesting. Not to mention the pain of managing a calendar so you can synchronize with your peers around the world.

And, more subtly, there’s a skill (and a confidence factor) involved in having an open, naked conversation about what really matters. I, for whatever reason, have no problem saying what’s on my mind.

Others may not feel so inclined — so there’s a cultural aspect to this that is very subtle but oh-so-important.

If you believe that conversations were creating incredible business value, maybe the focus should be on having many more conversations, much more easily.

I don’t know when it happened, but at some point a relational model appeared in my head about how all this stuff was related, and — since then — I can’t think about anything else.

Conversations lead to passionate topics of mutual interest.

Passionate topics of interest lead to ad-hoc community formation.

Community formation leads to collaboration around shared activities, including document collaboration.

Community collaboration is the quintessential magic of all things E2.0.

So, not to oversimplify, but if EMC got really, really good at starting interesting conversations, the rest would follow naturally and organically.

Not to oversimplify, but wiki collaboration assumes that there are people aligned around a common set of interests and goals who are willing to help out and make the wiki a success.

How do these people find each other? How do they debate their respective points of view? How do they decide what roles various people should play, and what the outcome should be?

That’s a conversation, in my mind. Hence my passionate interest in conversational collaboration.

Who, in their right mind, would invest serious corporate resources (IT, people, process, etc.) in just making sure that people are having more conversations? Isn’t it all an idle waste of time? Shouldn’t we all be spending more time on serious work? Way too touchy-feely for my tastes …

Well, I’ve spent enough time in the corporate world to realize that everything worthwhile started — at some point — as a conversation. In my mind, more business-oriented conversations lead directly to more business value. It’s that simple.

And that’s what I’ve got EMC focusing on — conversations that lead to communities that lead to collaborative work efforts. Right or wrong, at least I have the courage of my convictions. And, surprisingly, I’ve got other people agreeing with me.

I have come to the perspective that — in my defined world — it all starts with blogging behind the firewall.

A competent blogger is like a beacon in the dark, foggy night. Here I am. Here is what I’m thinking about. Here is what I’m worried about. Come, share your thoughts with me. I care, and if you care, we can perhaps work together.

Blogs can start conversations. Very interesting ones, based on my personal experience.

For this simple reason, my personal crusade for the next few months is to encourage more blogging behind the firewall. Sure, a lot of it will be fluffy stuff. But, somewhere in all the fluff, there will emerge the hot, burning light of intelligent discourse. Others will be attracted, and become engaged. And, if all works well, good things will inevitably happen.

People are coming out of their shells. They’re sharing what they know, and what they think. They’re coming together in unpredictable ways to create value for the company. There’s no project plan anywhere that could have captured what’s happening here. For those of us close to it, it’s truly a magical experience.

The whole thing for me with all things 2.0-ish is that conversations matter. Whether it’s blogging, or discussion forums, or whatever — the simple notion of human intellect reaching out and connecting with others is the core engine powering this transformation in corporate culture.”

Your Best Salesforce: Your Users

“Our internal platform, EMC|ONE has been up since last September. We’re at 3,000 registered, named and participating users, and a much larger number of lurkers who’ve shown up to look around — often repeatedly.

And we don’t need to sell this thing internally anymore. Our users are doing it for us.

If you remember, we opted for a viral ’soft launch’ of the platform (friends telling friends) for a variety of reasons, all of which turned out to be good ones.

We also opted for a ’soft sell’ — we didn’t want to push too hard on people, again for a variety of reasons.

First, I think this social media stuff has to be fun. You do it because you want to, not because someone told you to do it.

Second, even if they weren’t directly participating, we wanted to make sure that everyone knew that other people were participating — including, in some cases, your coworkers, your boss, your direct reports, and so on. Awareness was just as important to us as participation. This set up a fascinating social dynamic that was fun to watch.

Someone on the platform asked for a “business justification” around EMC|ONE — why it existed, why it was good to use it, and so on. A reasonable enough question in any business environment, no?

None of us who were on the core team really responded.

But lots and lots of other people did!

They offered up personal stories about where they saw the value coming from, including some pretty surprising ones.

They talked about how it helped them do their job better, how it helped them understand what the company was up to, how they could find out who did what quickly, or just ask a question and likely have it answered.

They spoke to it on an emotional level as well — how they now viewed their careers differently, their role as leaders differently, how they felt about working at EMC, and with other EMCers.

Dozens of personal testimonials, far more effective than any ROI study, or a spreadsheet, or a powerpoint deck.

It’s kind of cool when your best sales reps are the people who are using your platform, isn’t it?

I think the person who asked that question might have been a bit overwhelmed with the response. I wonder if she got what she was looking for, or was just scared to ask again!

I have been in the business world for about 30 years, and — as a result — I’ve problably seen perhaps every flavor of “business justification” you can imagine.

Usually, a business justifcation takes the forms of economic inputs in (time, money, people, etc.), anticipated economic outputs (money, market share, or other benefit), couched by risks, timelines and assumptions. And, for big parts of the business world, it’s an essential tool and methodology.

But there are some really important things in the business world that are very difficult to quantify in terms of economic value.

How do you quantify the value of making your knowledge workers more effective?

Or avoiding a big mistake on company strategy?

Or being able to drive hundreds of new initiatives across the company at almost no incremental cost?

Or having employees that really want to work at your company, and not another place?

Or, perhaps, the next product, market or solution breakthrough?

Traditional business justification has its role in the world, but — I’d argue vehemently — there is a class of real important things in this world that are inherently difficult to measure and quantify — we just don’t have the tools at our disposal to do this easily or cost-effectively.

So we have to use our good judgment. I tell people that a business plan is a poor substitute for good judgment.

We’ve now created something here that promotes itself, justifies itself to others, and answers the critics with a sharp community tongue.

Sure, it took a while to get to this state (about 6 months live), but I’m glad we had the patience to do this organically and naturally, rather than construct an arbitrary schedule with milestones that had no bearing in reality.

This is social engineering, folks. You’re creating social constructs, and — as a result — things tend to move at people speed, and not according to some project plan.

Sure, we had to do some selling (and defending) early on.

But not anymore — our users are doing it for us.”

MARCH 2008

Passion : the Secret ingredient

“Old Wisdom = get people to blog
New Wisdom = find the passionate people, and get them to blog

Old Wisdom = build communities around what’s important to the business
New Wisdom = build communities around what people really care about

Old Wisdom = keep the discussions on the original thread
New Wisdom = keep the discussions where people want them to go.

1 — Social media proficiency is essential to the long-term competitive success of our company, and perhaps yours as well.
2 — To get people proficient, you’re going to have to get them to engage. Not because they have to, but because they want to.

3 — The #1 incentive for people to engage is because they’re passionate about something — they really care, and they want to engage.

This leads us to something very strange to contemplate — a passion-driven model for social media proficiency in large enterprises.”

March 11, 2008

KM 2.0 : doing your job or giving back to the organisation

Filed under: wiki, km, network

Continuing on from my posts on the design and structure of web 2.0 tools that enable flexible ways to get things done, ie. everyone approaches things a different way, and these tools allow you to bend them to your style, further to this is in aggregate (hopefully network effects) we are able to see emerging patterns.

This post identifies two approaches to using these new tools, and how “In-the-flow” is an easier adoption method as you don’t have to do anything extra other than doing your work.

The first (Above-the-flow) is a more traditional way of sharing knowledge as a task, the second (In-the-flow), is more a way to do your work, and by default you have shared knowledge at the same time, without it having to be an explicit task.

This insight is taken from the Transparent office blog (Michael Idinopulos from SocialText), in this explanation Michael is talking about wikis, but I feel it applies to all web 2.0 tools, the crux of it is, using social tools that blend into the way you get work done, or to use social tools to cognitively/explicitly share knowledge.

From this we see that even though these new web tools are free-form and really easy to use, it doesn’t mean they will be any more successful than earlier knowledge management tools, in ultimately sharing knowledge. The defining thing is they have more of a chance to be successful as they can be integrated into your regular daily process in getting your work done.

In the end it’s a culture thing, it’s demonstrating how you use these tools to sometimes substitute the tools you currently use to get your job done, such as email. eg. use a wiki to contribute to a meeting agenda rather than 50 back and forth emails.
Anecdote mentions that culture shaping is a leadership thing…champions, role-models, guides, examples how new tools can achieve the same thing as old tools but only better, etc…I had a rant about the culture yesterday.

Above-the-flow

- a place for people to stop their daily work and reflect and share information
- this is a harder adoption method and is not unique to wiki’s, it’s the KM sharing barrier
- more a task oriented “giving back to the organisation” (similar to KM 1.0)

In-the-flow

- this is more about a wiki for collaborating and a method for how people do work
- easier adoption using it this way as this is the chosen tool to do work
- more about “doing your job” (this is KM 2.0, where you use these new tools to do your job, and a bonus is that you happening to be sharing at the same time)

Michael concludes, “…the challenge of getting people to use above-the-flow wikis is an above-the-flow thing, not a wiki thing. Left to their own devices, people don’t collaborate very much in above-the-flow ways. That was one of the great (if depressing) learnings of the Knowledge Management movement.”

Often some of the questions to knowledge sharing are: what’s in it for me? I’m too busy? How does this contribute to getting my tasks done?

As we can see when knowledge sharing is a task or even a request, and you have clunky tools, this is the natural reaction…but it’s still the same reaction with new social tools, what has to change is the new tools have to be incorporated into your daily flow of work, rather than an extra thing you “have to do”.

NOTE: recognition from management is a good measure to sustain adoption, but things like an internal blogosphere will be self rewarding, the more people link to you, subscribe, leave comments, visit (page views), the more you will find it becomes an essential way of doing work as your being heard and a worthy and recognised contributor to the enterprise…this will spur others.

The result will be two fold:
- you will be more productive and less frustrated
- participating is not a task, in fact it’s a benefit, as you are able to draw on the collective intelligence.

In the end you are “participating” rather than “sharing knowledge”, there is a lot of personal benefit, and social benefit via the sum of everyone participating. As the culture grows you may indeed explicitly share stuff for the benefit of the network, what began as a personal benefit, with time brings out the altruistic part of a person. We get so much from the network, we thrive to give back…this all happens without a mandate, the enterprise begins to operate like a hive mind.

In a follow up post Michael sums up the difference between KM 1.0 and KM 2.0:

“In the old world of emails and knowledge management systems, our tools and processes force a rigid distinction between “doing your job” (i.e., in-the-flow activities, usually in email) and “giving back to the organization” (above-the-flow contributions to a knowledge management system). That framing of the issue ensures that people will spend almost all their time in email and very little time contributing knowledge–hence the “culture and incentives” problem that has bedeviled Knowledge Management since the very start.

What excites…me…about Enterprise 2.0 tools is that, when used well, they blur almost beyond recognition the line between in-the-flow and above-the-flow. In-the-flow wikis help teams (and sometimes even individuals) do their daily work better and faster. They simultaneously create–almost as a by-product–and enduring, searchable, assets which is tremendously useful for the rest of the organization to find experts, connect colleagues working on related issues, reuse documents, train new hires, etc.”

Dave Snowden thinks along the same lines in his discussion of blogs and social computing, he goes further into how how our brains work in favour of unstructured or messiness in contrast to the battle people had with the first generation of highly structured knowledge sharing tools:

“We live in a world where everything is fragmented. Blogs represent fragmented conversations and comments that link and connect in unpredictable and unstructured ways. When we ask people for advice we don’t receive fully constructed stories, instead we get fragments or anecdotes that we can blend and connect with out own experience.

In these worlds no one asks “How can we create a knowledge sharing culture”, knowledge sharing comes naturally. One reason is that the nature of narrative and many aspects of social computing reflect the way our brains have evolved to handle knowledge and collaboration - fragmented, messy and unstructured in many ways the antithesis of much of the focus of knowledge management over the last decade and more.”

Andrew McAfee encapsulates this nicely, via the Rough Type blog:

“…the new technologies “focus not on capturing knowledge itself, but rather on the practices and output of knowledge workers.” By providing both a platform for collaboration and a means of recording the details of the collaboration, the technologies create a public record of previously private knowledge-sharing conversations, a record that’s permanent and easily searched. Knowledge is captured, in other words, as it’s created, without requiring any additional work. As people search and use that knowledge, moreover, they refine it - through commenting, linking, syndicating and tagging, for instance - which makes it even more valuable.”

An article in Backbone magazine quotes Ross Mayfield:

“…have highly structured enterprise systems designed and implemented from the top-down — in many ways as an instrument of control — with rigid workflow, business rules and ontologies that users must fit themselves into. The problem is that users don’t like using those kinds of tools and end up trying to circumvent them. That’s why 90 per cent of collaboration exists in e-mails.” In contrast to complex group collaboration tools, wikis conform naturally to the way people think and work and can evolve to the needs of the organization.”

From the Dresdner Kleinwort Wasserstein Case Study:

“The long-term evolution of the wiki will rely upon more people viewing it not as some specialist application used by IT, but as a fundamental part of their suite of everyday communication tools.”

The second quote reminds me of my reference to Nathan Wallace in an earlier post in regards to “work in progress”:

“The benefit of the wiki…is to be able to say to your company…this is what we are thinking at this moment in time. It will change and when it changes you will be told about it”

More from Ross Mayfield in a ZDnet podcast (this is not verbatim):

- Emergent social software
- Work in unstructured way like email
- The structure emerges as a byproduct of using it
- Have been designing complexity in software not realising complexity in the networks, if we make tools simpler emergent behaviours surface (collective intelligence, bubbling up, percolate)
- We have been pre-defining what structure an app should have before people use it (this is a mistake in how we design it)
- When we implement there is issues of control, we structure apps to automate business processes to drive down cost, in the end this is what everyone replicates, not a sustainable competitive advantage
- You get productivity benefits
- Further these tools change corporate culture (transparency) people who hoard are punished those who share are rewarded
- Wisdom of crowds rather than command and control
- From individual product worker to work in groups (new ROI)
- Tools that let us work together, tools that suit different styles
- People want their tools to get their job done even if it violates corporate policy
- GenerationY have different expectations of what work should be like

I’d like to add a post from the Grow your wiki blog about the benefits of participating or sharing your know-how:

“Jason called chefs the smartest business professionals. He explained this is because they are aware that you become famous and successful by giving knowledge away. For example, chefs have cooking shows and write cook books. Yet it doesn’t stop their restaurants from being successful. In fact, he claimed they are probably more successful because of their sharing.”

To conclude:

“Enterprise 2.0 provides a competitive advantage because it is so hard to do, so hard to get adoption.”

[ADDED 13/03/08: What is a wiki:
“If you need to move off of the wiki to finish what you’re working on, that’s good too: yes, a wiki is good for collaboration, but it’s more important to have a shared memory than a shared workspace”]

March 9, 2008

Could this be your fav.or.it RSS Reader

Filed under: blogs, rss, readers, attention, network

fav.or.it is the latest social RSS Reader, just not sure if it is a social network.

RSS re-mixing

You read feeds (by category, rank or tag…also generate a spliced feed), comment on posts (even send to original blog), even blog posts, etc…

The screenshots show a profile page, I’m not sure if these are public, or if you can: add someone as a friend, msg friends, get recommended feeds…

Link sharing

There is plenty of link sharing going on, here’s a screenshot. Basically share links to external services like Twitter, and share links into your library, and make communal libraries…still not sur eif you can share a link to another user.

Attention

The rank works according to how long you read a post, in aggregate this will make it a powerful attention engine (there is also voting)…most services determine what’s popular or hot in the blogosphere based on inlinks and more (TechMeme), submit/vote (Digg), or clicks (Spotback).

Comment on blog posts without leaving

What a great idea to be able to not only comment with the fav.or.it network, but to also have that appear on the actual blog.
What about displaying current comments from the actual blog, and these being synched in fav.or.it as they appear in the actual blog posts.
For comments to appear on actual blog posts, these blogs need to hook up with the system via an API.
If you use Google Reader, try the Firefox hack to read and post comments.

You own blog