tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-91369378950942553252023-11-16T10:45:14.455+00:00Talent, work and technologyMusings on ideas gathered here and there ...Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16372306084445941143noreply@blogger.comBlogger84125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9136937895094255325.post-44344902812981129772017-03-22T16:19:00.001+00:002017-03-22T16:19:44.525+00:00Should CHROs be in charge of innovation?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiBv_xT-9q1GXQJrxq7zwwQx1P69Db6otxUprUv1Wag14GH-UedYpoBIwWohJ_3yhZysYZXDY3FJVo0bK2OIK0VmSGJa6km1IXTGbYmNvp92nah3qZKqiNGQG0iit_scgMysfCBkIfoPh0/s1600/Fotolia_31426218_XS.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiBv_xT-9q1GXQJrxq7zwwQx1P69Db6otxUprUv1Wag14GH-UedYpoBIwWohJ_3yhZysYZXDY3FJVo0bK2OIK0VmSGJa6km1IXTGbYmNvp92nah3qZKqiNGQG0iit_scgMysfCBkIfoPh0/s200/Fotolia_31426218_XS.jpg" width="181" /></a></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1"><b>I argued in a </b><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/should-your-chief-people-officer-have-automation-luis-alberola"><span class="s2"><b>recent article </b></span></a><b>that the Chief People Officer needed to own the organization’s automation strategy. The idea was to contribute to the company’s growth capacity while compensating for the inevitable cost cutting that the </b><a href="http://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/digital-mckinsey/our-insights/intelligent-process-automation-the-engine-at-the-core-of-the-next-generation-operating-model"><span class="s2"><b>first wave of IPA</b></span></a><b> will bring about. However, he should not walk alone: to succeed in this endeavour, he should also leverage Talent and L&D strategies to favour innovation.</b></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1"><b></b></span></div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<br /><div class="p1">
<span class="s1"><b>Automation and IA technologies will likely focus on efficiency gains</b></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"><b></b></span><br /></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">In this recent article, I argued that taking full advantage of artificial intelligence and automation technologies required clearly anticipating which occupations could be improved by the automation of some of their less critical activities, and also designing the new jobs that technology would make possible. I also argued that this needed the CHRO to engage the front-line in both these two projects.</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">However, activity automation is very likely to happen quicker than new job design, <b>even though it is </b><a href="https://hbr.org/2017/03/strategy-in-the-age-of-superabundant-capital"><span class="s2"><b>new job design that holds the highest value creation potential</b></span></a> (new job design is more likely to impact growth, whereas job automation is more likely to impact efficiency). There are a number of reasons for this:</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<ul>
<li class="li1"><span class="s3"></span><span class="s1">Efficiency gains seem to be just around the corner. Recent successes in the deployment of next-generation cost-cutting programs (Intelligent Process Automation) make sizeable gains in profitability relatively easy by the application of tested and consultant-led transformation programs. What we had with continuous improvement and lean we are going to have with IPA;</span></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li class="li1"><span class="s3"></span><span class="s1">The transition will be easier to manage from a talent management standpoint as the gig economy provides a safety net that HR leaders can leverage to smoothly manage the potential downsizing or evolution of their organizations;</span></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li class="li1"><span class="s3"></span><span class="s1">Financial markets want short term results, and they want foreseeable short-term results that are foreseeably beaten. Growth by acquisition and efficiency programs are easier to manage from this standpoint than innovation-based organic growth;</span></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li class="li1"><span class="s3"></span><span class="s1">And, finally, generating new organic growth opportunities through new job and activity development requires talents that are less easy to find (and manage) than the ones that deliver efficiency gains. According to PwC, “leaders will need a far wider range of skills than before – from a deep understanding of technology to the ability to manage a multigenerational workforce. This places huge demands not only on existing management, but on <b>the development teams tasked with creating the next generation of leaders</b>” (Source: PwC 17th Annual Global CEO Survey).</span></li>
</ul>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">That automation and IA will focus on efficiency should not come as a surprise: Clayton Christensen famously identified three types of innovation (empowering, sustaining and efficiency innovations), of which only the first two had a strong impact on growth even though organizations focus on the third: "In our traditional economic cycles, all three kinds of innovations occurred within a natural and repeatable sequence. Our current economy, however, has gone off of the rails in large part because we are focused almost entirely on efficiency innovations—on streamlining and wringing bottom line savings and additional profits out of our existing organizations.</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">...We are focused on the wrong metrics. Our universities are training entrepreneurs—and investors — to focus on fast and efficient return on capital investment. Efficiency innovations provide return on investment in 12-18 months. Empowering innovations take 5-10 years to yield a return. We have ample capital — oceans of capital — that is being reinvested into efficiency innovation. As long as this continues to happen, we will continue to experience the tremendous chasm between capital investment and the creation of meaningful numbers of new jobs and especially of highly specialized jobs.” (Clayton Christensen, Business Insider, 2012).</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">If, as argued above, the objective for the Chief People Officer is to ensure that the new jobs (and often client-facing jobs for new client services) that automation technologies make possible are conveniently designed and developed, he therefore needs to be championing innovation-based growth.</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1"><b>Chief People Officers should leverage L&D to develop innovation capabilities</b></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">In another recent <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/post/edit/6245324710763073536"><span class="s2">article</span></a>, I noted that according to Deloitte, “only 36% of HR departments are involved in the AI-driven work redesign, and that HR only leads this effort in 5% of the cases. It is as if L&D was overwhelmed by external, digital, trends and unable to cope with the operational challenges that these trends present it with.”</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">To react to this situation, I think that HR departments could follow three strategies to develop innovation capabilities in their organizations.</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">In the first place, and as a quick win, <b>adopt (or embark on) a number of time-tested initiatives</b> to push the innovation culture across their organizations, like for instance:</span></div>
<ul>
<li class="li1"><span class="s3"></span><span class="s1">Develop internal L&D programs on the potential of new technology and ensure their leaders and future leaders are technology savvy, which means understanding how these new technologies impact operations and the kind of decisions that they, as leaders, will be facing;</span></li>
<li class="li1"><span class="s3"></span><span class="s1">Connect with internal growth incubator initiatives and ensure that the talent aspect of these initiatives is well covered (how the participation to incubator initiatives ties with the talent system - mobility, assessment, L&D, …);</span></li>
</ul>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">Secondly, <b>push for disrupting initiatives that force the organization to look beyond efficiency</b>:</span></div>
<ul>
<li class="li1"><span class="s3"></span><span class="s1">Champion sizeable average salary increase of employees concerned by automation (backed by strong development programs), to ensure talent sits on top of technology but also to ensure efficiency gains translate into an improved Employee Experience; </span></li>
<li class="li1"><span class="s3"></span><span class="s1">Push for symbolic, visible initiatives around automation programs (for instance, allocate 50% of all gains on IPA to institutional innovation), so that employees can understand the relation between short term efficiency and long term innovation;</span></li>
<li class="li1"><span class="s3"></span><span class="s1">Lead <a href="http://luisalberolasblog.blogspot.ca/2012/06/unleadership.html"><span class="s2">unleadership</span></a> campaigns to uncover hidden talent around automation programs.</span></li>
</ul>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">And finally, try to <b>own or co-own AI-driven work redesign</b>, by focusing one of the OD teams on this effort. It would also be useful to dedicate one or two <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/post/edit/6245324710763073536"><span class="s2">Trusted Learning Advisor</span></a> on these work redesign initiatives, so that they are able to include these new positions as development opportunities in their Learning ecosystems and push the innovation culture throughout the organization.</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<style type="text/css">
p.p1 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px Helvetica; -webkit-text-stroke: #000000}
p.p2 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px Helvetica; -webkit-text-stroke: #000000; min-height: 13.0px}
li.li1 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px Helvetica; -webkit-text-stroke: #000000}
span.s1 {font-kerning: none}
span.s2 {text-decoration: underline ; font-kerning: none}
span.s3 {font: 12.0px Helvetica}
</style>
<br />
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">In the end, long-term growth will come through job-producing innovation. While the efficiency that short-term automation programs offer is a welcome (but feeble) boost to the economy, it is the increased productivity of a growing workforce that sustains long-term economic growth. As they always have, CHRO are today on the front line of growth strategies.</span></div>
</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16372306084445941143noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9136937895094255325.post-75453324257451907122017-03-08T19:02:00.000+00:002017-03-08T19:08:08.358+00:00Learning, beyond digital<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhGjP-jn09gP1sLsab583z4CMov7o-NYUm4qJMDKJ8sjNDsMnM4zinDC4XNl1VLieUhTSo3G05PsZpuBcCKTlU2gaceYYTq7uSknFz0v3FH17nkZC2Sf_JPFwJO2rWHGz9CjuGHKrILerE/s1600/Fotolia_48761940_XS.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; display: inline !important; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="178" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhGjP-jn09gP1sLsab583z4CMov7o-NYUm4qJMDKJ8sjNDsMnM4zinDC4XNl1VLieUhTSo3G05PsZpuBcCKTlU2gaceYYTq7uSknFz0v3FH17nkZC2Sf_JPFwJO2rWHGz9CjuGHKrILerE/s200/Fotolia_48761940_XS.jpg" width="200" /></a></div>
<div class="p1">
<b style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: initial;">Corporate Investment in L&D has been growing at double digits for five years and seems poised to continue. However, the results of these investments are strongly challenged. To increase its impact, L&D must reinvest in its own talent.</b></div>
<div class="p1">
<br /></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span></div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div class="p2">
<h3 style="text-align: left;">
<b style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: initial;">Increasing investment, mixed results</b></h3>
</div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">Today, corporate learning is delivered through an ever increasing number of methods, from time-tested Instructor-led training to emerging peer-to-peer learning or MOOCs. Corporate Universities have often been early adopters of new delivery methods and technology: according to Josh Bersin, from Deloitte, <a href="https://fr.slideshare.net/jbersin/the-future-of-corporate-learning-2016/19-LD_spending_has_grown_in"><span class="s2">expenses and investment</span></a> in Learning & Development have been growing at double digits since 2011, at the same time that 35 million people enrolled in MOOCs. McKinsey <a href="http://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/organization/our-insights/learning-at-the-speed-of-business"><span class="s2">reports</span></a> that above 60% of a panel of CLOs plan to increase their spending in L&D and the number of formal learning hours per employee. </span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">However, this increasing investment in L&D does not seem to be convincing everyone. According to Korn Ferry, CEOs “would rather invest in technology than people”; and according to Degree, employees give their employers L&D’s opportunities a … -31 NPS! while only 38% of L&D professionals think their organizations are ready for the learners of the future.</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">In the same report mentioned above, McKinsey <a href="http://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/organization/our-insights/learning-at-the-speed-of-business"><span class="s2">finds</span></a> that only 50% of a panel of CLOs think that their corporate universities “enable their companies to meet strategic objectives”, going on to suggest that digital provides Corporate Universities with an opportunity to change “on the order of magnitude experienced a century ago, when they developed from low-level workshops into mature institutions”.</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">What to make of these two contrasting realities? Does the transformation of L&D and corporate universities, from classic ILT approaches to a digital-powered blended learning experience, account for below average performance for L&D departments? Or could it be that the digital hype is hurting L&D departments?</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p1">
<h3 style="text-align: left;">
<span class="s1"><b>Learning & Development strategy must move beyond the digital hype.</b></span></h3>
</div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">Corporate universities, communities of practice, e-learning approaches, leadership programs, on-the-job (OTC) learning, … This wealth of different delivery approaches for what used to be “training programs” begs the question : what exactly is Learning & Development, as a corporate function? And what real challenges does this organizational function face? </span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">At the highest level, Learning & Development is a corporate process implemented to develop individual and collective skills and behaviours that impact both the organization and the individual employee. </span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">For the organization, the main impact is the development of <b>new capabilities</b>, or the refinement or transformation of existing ones. Additionally, learning has other impacts, like improved engagement and mobilization and decreased overall cost structure through decreased turnover or improved mobility.</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">At the individual level, learning provides <b>opportunities for people development</b> by helping build new skills, enhancing professional behaviour, improving self-confidence and even by developing employee networks and reinforcing corporate culture.</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">From a logical point of view, there seems to be a <b>sequence</b> to Learning & Development impact: people equipped with new skills and professional behaviours are the means by which organizational capabilities are enhanced or created. At the same time, people learn and develop when they participate in a project that leverages new capabilities, making Learning & Development a key function in the organization’s learning cycle or journey. <b>It is the function that sets the direction and accelerates learning to align it with the strategy of the corporation, and therefore a key participant in the strategy design process or cycle.</b></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">Well, is it really the case today? Not necessarily: <a href="https://dupress.deloitte.com/dup-us-en/multimedia/infographics/human-capital-trends.html"><span class="s2">Deloitte reports</span></a> that only 36% of HR departments are involved in the AI-driven work redesign, and that HR only leads this effort in 5% of the cases. It is as if L&D was overwhelmed by external, digital, trends and unable to cope with the operational challenges that these trends present it with.</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s2"><b></b></span><br /></div>
<div class="p1">
<h3 style="text-align: left;">
<span class="s2"><b>Brokering learning to talent.</b></span></h3>
</div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">And being overwhelmed is understandable. Business is quick. New products and services appear overnight at some competitor, pushing us to consider the development of a new capability. But by the time that information reaches the L&D department, that very need might have become obsolete, thus putting an increased pressure on L&D to be as close as possible both to the front-line and to the strategic suite. Some of the new L&D approaches (like OTJ learning, peer-to-peer learning or even communities of practice) are an attempt to respond to that increased speed.</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">More generally, digital learning, by allowing learning to become independent of time and space, provides a new paradigm for the delivery and consumption of learning: learning can be consumed in context, when it is needed, and it can be consumed in small chunks, after-hours, when commuting … In short, learning can happen on demand,<b> it can be pulled by either the need of the employee or the need of the context</b>. It can even happen in micro-moments, (“micro-learning” has already been dubbed as the future of learning: “While spending copious amounts of time on such gadgets sharpens certain cognitive skills, it also shortens attention spans. This is why employers may want to seriously consider utilizing micro learning in corporate training” - Social Learning Blog).</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1"><b>We are here in the real of disintermediation</b>, that deserves careful attention. Disintermediation has at least two different dimensions: the first one consist in diminishing the number of steps / players that are needed to bring a service to a final customer/employee. For a financial controller needing to acquire new skills on the latest ERP feature, disintermediation of this kind brings important value add.</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">However, there is a second, more worrying, aspect to disintermediation: because of this need for speed, <b>the learning dimension of intermediation is in danger of disappearing</b>. The sheer pace of evolution in most trades and occupations makes becoming an expert in these a very complicated matter. Increasingly, internal L&D associates become experts at finding the right expert to deliver a course, the right key-note speaker to energize a meeting or the right curriculum on which to build her own course. </span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">John Hagel has noted an empty market space for <a href="http://edgeperspectives.typepad.com/edge_perspectives/2016/10/the-unmet-need-for-trusted-talent-advisors.html"><span class="s2">Trusted Talent Advisors</span></a>, that would complement the current activities of Universities and Learning Institutions and help individuals with their lifelong learning strategies. <b>Similarly, we think there might be an empty Trusted Learning Advisors function within some corporations.</b></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">Trusted Learning Advisors would engage in a long term view of individual and corporate development needs (capabilities, skills, behaviours), and would act as advisors both to employees and business leaders.</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">In the end, the increase in speed requires an intelligent use of digital technologies, and namely of delivery methods, but also a new player that is able to take a step back and ensure that the emerging Digital Learning System is oriented to developing strategic skills and capabilities. <b>There is a need, in short, for human management of the omni-channel learning experience in the corporation.</b></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s2"><b></b></span><br /></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p1">
<h3 style="text-align: left;">
<span class="s2"><b>Slowing the pace</b></span></h3>
</div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">At a time when digital transformation is set to increase its pace, when new and disrupting trends (AI, robotics, neuroscience, to name but a few) will certainly increase the speed of evolution of our organizations, our learning needs are as deep and as urgent as they get. We are in need of contextual learning to respond to the rhythm of evolution and we are in need of direction in our individual and collective learning paths if we are to remain skilled, engaged and mobilized to do our work every day.</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<style type="text/css">
p.p1 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px Helvetica; -webkit-text-stroke: #000000}
p.p2 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px Helvetica; -webkit-text-stroke: #000000; min-height: 14.0px}
span.s1 {font-kerning: none}
span.s2 {text-decoration: underline ; font-kerning: none}
</style>
<br />
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">In a context of accelerating business speed, continuous change, increased performance pressure and uncertain near future, employees need something more than technology to help them navigate their own professional future.</span></div>
</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16372306084445941143noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9136937895094255325.post-43789074271860707072017-02-16T16:05:00.000+00:002017-02-17T14:10:43.192+00:00Should your Chief People Officer have an automation strategy?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiBkJC_6rbExxYKKHGjUa71Puwa14b1kkiCCatKd6VGW00ogzomui6pFMIJMVDtHLfTBUvXQZoG1qz1fE5cLb0h6EwR1UNh6aVKO4aGCkT4mc95cND0K70Xf7dx-H1zT4Q9_Yr2ReXNQSU/s1600/Fotolia_31090355_XS.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="150" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiBkJC_6rbExxYKKHGjUa71Puwa14b1kkiCCatKd6VGW00ogzomui6pFMIJMVDtHLfTBUvXQZoG1qz1fE5cLb0h6EwR1UNh6aVKO4aGCkT4mc95cND0K70Xf7dx-H1zT4Q9_Yr2ReXNQSU/s200/Fotolia_31090355_XS.jpg" width="200" /></a></div>
<div class="p1">
<span style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-size: 12px;">Work automation is happening, and it is happening fast. It holds potential for efficiencies and reliability on the one hand, but also for new jobs and new ways of working. And therefore, the Chief People Officer should be given the task to craft a work automation strategy. Sounds like a paradox? Not as much as some would like to think, if we take the time to understand the different technologies involved and the two types of outcomes that are possible.</span></div>
<div class="p1">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
<span style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-size: 12px;"></span></div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div class="p3">
<span class="s1">Automation has been happening ever since someone made the link between process and mechanics: in the business world, two dates are significant: in 1913, Henri Ford used the automated assembly line for the first time and in 1981, IBM introduced the PC (personal computer) for use in the private and education fields. Those two events mark the beginning of automation. Automation of physical work, in the first place, which reaches new heights every day, with for instance Amazon needing only 60 seconds of human labour for each shipped package (see <a href="http://www.apple.com/"><span class="s2">story</span></a>); and automation also of knowledge work, of which one of the most disquieting examples is Uber use of algorithms in the assessment of driver performance: a company is using algorithms to assess and give feed-back on employee performance, once a hallmark of managerial skills. </span></div>
<div class="p4">
<span class="s1"></span></div>
<div class="p3">
<span class="s1">As automation expands its scope and threatens activities and occupations that were considered exclusively human only a few years ago, like knowledge work or even relationship building, it has brought a number of experts to wonder about its real impact, and to start putting some numbers together.</span></div>
<div class="p4">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p3">
<span class="s1">According to a McKinsey report on work automation (<a href="http://www.mckinsey.com/global-themes/digital-disruption/harnessing-automation-for-a-future-that-works"><span class="s2">Harnessing Automation for a Future that Works</span></a>), “60 percent of all occupations could see 30 percent or more of their constituent activities automated”, with some occupations being strongly threatened: for as much as 78% of the activities that compose “Predictable Physical Work” automation is feasible.</span></div>
<div class="p4">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p3">
<span class="s1">And obviously, where there is potential for efficiencies, there is an entrepreneur wanting to take a chance on it and build the business system that delivers the efficiency. As Erik Brynjolfsson writes in </span><span class="s3">Race Against The Machine: How the Digital Revolution is Accelerating Innovation, Driving Productivity, and Irreversibly Transforming Employment and the Economy</span><span class="s1">, “There has never been a worse time to be competing with machines, but there has never been a better time to be a talented entrepreneur.”</span></div>
<div class="p4">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p3">
<span class="s1"><b>Automation is coming soon to an enterprise near you.</b></span></div>
<div class="p4">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p3">
<span class="s1">For the worrying Chief People Officer and her staff, probably engaged in digital transformation issues, the question seems to be: should we have a strategy for coping with this coming wave of automation? Or, if the strategy is to be made clearer, should we have a strategy for automating our own work activities?</span></div>
<div class="p4">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p3">
<span class="s1">For automation, it seems, has a strong potential to lower the cost base of the enterprise, and even more importantly, to increase the quality and reliability of the process or finished product it participates in. It can free workers from dull activities and open opportunities for more rewarding, valuable work, at the individual and collective levels.</span></div>
<div class="p4">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p3">
<span class="s1">From a corporate strategy point of view, then, the Chief People Officer should be mandated to explore the potential of automation for his company.</span></div>
<div class="p4">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p3">
<span class="s1">More interestingly, from an individual point of view, employees should be exploring the potential of existing technologies to make part of their jobs easier, simpler: automated. This would allow them to concentrate on higher value added part of their jobs or, at least, be proactive as to how to deal with the evolving value of their jobs. Arielle Paredes, in Vice, has a whole <a href="https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/how-to-automate-your-job-and-never-work-again"><span class="s2">story</span></a> on employees that have started “automating” their own jobs.</span></div>
<div class="p4">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p3">
<span class="s1"><b>The question is then, how do we craft a work automation strategy, how do we implement it and how do we ensure engagement around it?</b></span></div>
<div class="p4">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p3">
<span class="s1">Strategy, as we know, is a series of consistent decisions, which are taken in conditions of uncertainty and of which the consequences are hard to reverse. These decisions aim at creating a lasting competitive advantage.</span></div>
<div class="p4">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p3">
<span class="s1">Let’s first look at uncertainty. Regarding the evolution of activities and occupations, uncertainty is not in what types of activities will be automated by digital technologies nor in what occupations will evolve in nature. The uncertainty is in the speed and scope of this evolution.</span></div>
<div class="p4">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p3">
<span class="s1">However, there is greater uncertainty as to the type of new jobs, new activities, new occupations that other waves of technological progress will bring about. Artificial intelligence, starting with big data, machine learning, virtual reality and advanced analytics, used in context thanks to increasingly efficient location and context based tech tokens, has the potential to greatly expand the individual ability of scores of common jobs: doctors, architects, field engineers, to name but a few, will be able to mobilize the complete corporate knowledge corpus at will, and in context, to solve complex problems or find novel approaches. Dominique Turcq makes a <a href="http://www.boostzone.fr/2017/02/14/plus-demplois-grace-a-lintelligence-artificielle/"><span class="s2">useful distinction</span></a> on the impact of digital and AI technologies on the future of work.</span></div>
<div class="p4">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p3">
<span class="s1">Finally, there is also great uncertainty about the impact of blockchain and digital tokens, which, by providing alternatives to traditional intermediaries that establish trust and continuity in transactions and interactions, could strongly impact roles concerned with intermediation. Banks, insurers, notaries, even government agencies dealing with identity or ownership, among others, will be concerned by this trend.</span></div>
<div class="p4">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p3">
<span class="s1">Uncertainty for the Chief People Officer, then, is both short term (scope and speed of simple activity automation) and long term (value of new jobs and occupations to improve customer experience or deliver additional, value add services). </span></div>
<div class="p4">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p3">
<span class="s1">The decisions to be made are two-fold: how to drive operational efficiencies and improve are cost competitiveness and how to reinvent the business systems around our key processes and offerings to improve our value proposition.</span></div>
<div class="p4">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p3">
<span class="s1">Both types of strategic decisions will bring about consequences that will be hard to reverse, on the one hand, but that will also be hard to implement if the proper trust relationship is not established with employees.</span></div>
<div class="p4">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p3">
<span class="s1"><b>The key point to understand about the impact of technology on work structure, nature and organization is that this impact cannot be seen nor understood at executive level. Understanding happens in the front line, and a proper evolution of the work organization cannot possibly happen without the proactive, self-aware, trust-based engagement of the company employees.</b></span></div>
<div class="p4">
<span class="s1"></span><br /></div>
<div class="p3">
<span class="s1">The good news for the Chief People Officer is that this revolution is happening at a time when many companies have started to question old assumptions on organizational structure or talent management practices: Deloitte, GE, Airbnb, Spotify, Netflix, among others have taken steps to reinvent the organization in a way that, in the end, builds and leverages employee trust. As Netflix wrote in a much commented powerpoint in 2014, they will “Hire, Reward, and Tolerate Only<b> </b>Fully Formed Adults"</span></div>
<div class="p3">
<span class="s1"><br /></span></div>
<style type="text/css">
p.p1 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px Helvetica; -webkit-text-stroke: #000000}
p.p2 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 11.0px Helvetica; -webkit-text-stroke: #000000; min-height: 13.0px}
p.p3 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px Helvetica; -webkit-text-stroke: #000000}
p.p4 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px Helvetica; -webkit-text-stroke: #000000; min-height: 14.0px}
span.s1 {font-kerning: none}
span.s2 {font: 12.0px Helvetica; text-decoration: underline ; font-kerning: none}
span.s3 {text-decoration: underline ; font-kerning: none}
</style>
<br />
<div class="p3">
<span class="s1"><b>Talent strategy, it seems, just became the pivot of your corporate strategy. </b></span><span class="markup--em markup--p-em" style="background-color: white; font-feature-settings: 'liga' 1, 'salt' 1; font-weight: 700; letter-spacing: -0.003em;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Driving it responsibly and with a view on its near term and long term social impact is mandatory for any Chief People Officer.</span></span><br />
<footer class="u-paddingTop10" style="background-color: white; color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.8); font-family: -apple-system, system-ui, "Segoe UI", Roboto, Oxygen, Ubuntu, Cantarell, "Open Sans", "Helvetica Neue", sans-serif; font-size: 18px; padding-top: 10px !important;"><div class="container u-maxWidth740" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; max-width: 740px !important; padding-left: 20px; padding-right: 20px;">
<div class="row" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-left: -20px; margin-right: -20px;">
</div>
</div>
</footer></div>
</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16372306084445941143noreply@blogger.com0Montréal, QC, Canada45.5016889 -73.56725599999998645.145911899999994 -74.212702999999991 45.8574659 -72.921808999999982tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9136937895094255325.post-66189035961486102072014-02-20T03:02:00.000+00:002014-02-20T03:03:01.179+00:00The death and rebirth of social business<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Social business was dead ... and it has been born again as social media management systems. The question is, apart from VCs, who stands to gain from this transfiguration?</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">This posts stems from the <a href="http://www.adweek.com/news/technology/sprinklr-buys-dachis-group-boost-social-marketing-services-155809" target="_blank">acquisition</a> of <a href="http://www.socialbusinessindex.com/" target="_blank">Dachis Group</a> by <a href="http://www.sprinklr.com/" target="_blank">Sprinklr</a>, or, if you wish, the acquisition of social business by social media management. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">It was a matter of time. For those who have followed Dachis Group, you have to admire their medium-term strategic view and their decision-making capabilities. I remember a Dachis Group that was more of a consulting company, pioneer in the use of the term social business. Then, it came as a surprise to many of us that they would turn into a software and service company, targeting the external social business arena, instead of the deep transformation that many thought had to occur first within our corporations.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">At the beginning of 2013, I was a bit ahead of the pack when writing about <a href="http://luisalberolasblog.blogspot.ca/2013/01/the-year-we-kill-social-business.html" target="_blank">"The Year we Kill Social Business"</a>. I remember writing : </span></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">"w<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 18.479999542236328px;">hen looking at what has been written this past year on the impact of social technologies, what comes to mind is productivity and engagement. Why? Because the industry seems to have moved towards "social enabling processes" and "engagement and advocacy"</span><span style="background-color: white; color: #666666; line-height: 18.479999542236328px;">.</span></span></i></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The idea here was to take stock of the fact that, unable to prove its unique value proposition to the corporation, social business (the use of social technology within a corporation) was trying to tie its impact to well-known corporate spaces, like process improvement (measured by productivity gains) and marketing (measured by increased sales and brand awareness). And, following, players were having to choose their positioning. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">From a financial strategy point of view, it became an easy game for software players: becoming an acquisition target for one of the established vendors. The big software players started consolidating social in 2011, with incumbents like SAP or Oracle buying cloud or social vertical specialists like Taleo or SuccessFactors, and it is continuing today, with vendors in the "engagement and advocacy" space merging among themselves to get ready for the big acquisition. It makes perfect sense from a VC point of view.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">And yet, when I wrote at the time of the <a href="http://luisalberolasblog.blogspot.ca/2011/11/beyond-social-talent-management-as.html" target="_blank">Success Factor acquisition by SAP</a> :</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<br />
<div style="text-align: right;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #666666; line-height: 18.479999542236328px;"> "</span><i><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 18.479999542236328px;">I am more worried that, in so doing, it is also </span><b style="background-color: white; line-height: 18.479999542236328px;">the process specialists consolidating the social specialists</b><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 18.479999542236328px;">."</span></i></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">I had the feeling that making social dependent on process amounted to a missed opportunity for a deeper transformation of our corporations at a time when this transformation is needed. I have a similar kind of feeling today.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">I do not know Sprinklr that well, even if, looking at their HR offering from my talent management lens, I am rather impressed. They now need to make the choice of their strategic positioning : does conversation transform corporation or does corporation highjack conversation? There is more fundamental value to be created and to be made from the first option, but it needs a longer view than financial strategy. </span></div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16372306084445941143noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9136937895094255325.post-76563892181247685382014-01-15T02:19:00.000+00:002014-01-15T02:22:56.561+00:00CEO agenda for 2014 : build the management dashboard for your soon-to-be digital organization<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEif8CuvtRqoEkNgsnq68DfT7CZcaVFUjrRR-IIP02SWphjaH-q52VFIvf4TM5J4HN5eZ5RfpZ8k3BDgocoKlxNv06SxuJYU8PRF08Ped6mAXaAIpoRHn5Eb9ENj-rGdx2_RDjreVYiTFgs/s1600/Fotolia_21859743_S.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="132" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEif8CuvtRqoEkNgsnq68DfT7CZcaVFUjrRR-IIP02SWphjaH-q52VFIvf4TM5J4HN5eZ5RfpZ8k3BDgocoKlxNv06SxuJYU8PRF08Ped6mAXaAIpoRHn5Eb9ENj-rGdx2_RDjreVYiTFgs/s200/Fotolia_21859743_S.jpg" width="200" /></a></div>
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">The digital technologies that are slowly
invading each step in the value chain of our corporations will transform what
it means to lead and to manage them. Incumbent leaders would do well to take a deep,
hard look at how digital technologies are transforming their corporation and
then understand what new breed of talent they should develop to master this
revolution.<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"></span></b></div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span lang="EN-CA" style="font-size: 14.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-CA; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">The digital
disruption and the talent shortage<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">You have
probably already faced parts of it. Whether it is the transformed client
relationship management through social media, the upheaval in procurement and
alliances in multi-sided platforms or the increased part of revenue now coming
in through your internet channels, your organization hardly bears any resemblance
to what it was a mere two or three years ago. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Well, you
haven’t seen the best part yet. Digital technologies are poised to impact every
single element of your value chain, achieving the transformation of your
pop-and-mom organization into a vibrant, agile, high flying digital
organization.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Expect a
few surprises during the ride. These technologies will continue to transfer
large parts of your revenue generating operations to the virtual world.
McKinsey, for instance, expects that consumer finance internet operations will
account for more than 40% of revenue by 2017. (Finding your digital sweet spot,
October 2013). More generally, the cost base of all industries will decrease
through the use of digital technologies and incumbents will be hard pressed to
reorganize their operations to keep pace with more agile new entrants, that do
not have the burden of legacy systems.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But let’s
take a closer look at this change in your organization’s DNA. It is brought
about by a complex combination of technologies that are already mature but
which are gaining mainstream status at a quicker pace than we were used to.
Most of these are digital technologies (like cloud computing, big data, facial
recognition, 3D-Printing or social technologies), even if corporations should
also be on the outlook for unexpected breakthroughs in life sciences or
environmental sciences.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">You could
argue that the transformation made possible by these technologies is already
under way and some leaders might even boast of important successes. That might
be true but it only tells half the story: the most important element to
understand is that these first successes have been based on process or system changes,
like automation of processes or improvement in automation of processes and
improvement in data management and insights.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">To move
further along the digital transformation path, companies need to change the way
their employees collaborate internally and externally. A specific breed of
digital technologies, social technologies (best known as corporate social
networks) are at the forefront of this change. According once again to
McKinsey, social technologies have the potential to increase knowledge worker
productivity by as much as 25%. To reach that prize of productivity improvement,
much deeper changes that the ones that drove the first wave of digital
transformation are needed. We think that, to engage in the way of success, organizations
should manage a triple evolution, an evolution in their ways of working, an
evolution in their management practices and an evolution in their organizational
design. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">The
evolution in ways of working will take time as it entails new computer and IT
skills, new real-time and contextual awareness and new collaborative
behaviours. It will demand new learning and development strategies, and
therefore will be long in the making.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">In
management practices, there will be a need to expand on much needed “command-and-control”
practices by designing and implementing new governance practices at all levels.
These government practices will aim at bringing operational and functional
managers together in new collaborative decision making practices. The objective
will be to develop a culture in which contextual decision making by any manager
takes into account the complexity of the organization she is in, and not only
its own functional or business unit priorities.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">And
finally, as organization design is concerned, there will be a double challenge:
to experiment with new organizational structures that are made possible by the
use of digital technologies, as many companies have already started doing with
professional communities; and then, in a more fundamental way, to rethink the
way in which work positions are designed and linked together. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span lang="EN-CA" style="font-size: 14.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-CA; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">Enhancing
talent development for the digital workplace<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Having
quickly gone through the changes that are needed to bring about the digital
workplace, how difficult it is to define the new managerial talent that will be
needed for that purpose! It is difficult because the skills, the mindset, the
ethics and the passion that define them are an evolution from the ones that we
usually associate with managerial and executive talent.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Before
briefly discussing these talents and some strategies to develop them, a very
important point needs to be made: the new organization will need more, and not
less, managerial talent, as is sometime argued by the gurus of “social
business” or the “digital organization”. As digital technologies push
operations and decision-making towards real-time, complexity reaches new
heights; and as technology transforms the competitive dynamics of most
industries, more and more decisions are made at the edges of the organisation.
As a result, it is safe to argue that a higher number of talented managers is
needed to understand and act on the new business context. But not all
organizations are ready to develop this new generation of managerial talent.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">There have
been discussions about this new managerial talent these past few years, often
uncovering some paradoxes: the skills needed for execution might not suffice
for successful innovation; the focus on results that defines great general management
might be a hindrance for visionary leadership; the excellence at managing
control systems might prevent IT or HR leaders from expanding their leadership
scope; …<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">How, then,
to fire-start the talent management evolution that will drive the digital
transformation? We would like to suggest a strategy based on two principles: “Engage
and Let go” & “Make Everyone a CIO”.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Why “Engage
and let go”? Well, to be sure, the digital transformation should bring
innovation much higher in the leadership agenda. It can be argued that the
focus on innovation should be as important as the focus on efficiency that has
been every organization’s overarching goal for the past century.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">It is why,
Learning and Development programs should aim at engaging managers to be the main
drivers in the digital transformation, and making them responsible for
developing the skills and abilities that are demanded by the particular digital
context of their organization. Engaging first, to make managers responsible for
their own and the organization’s evolution; letting go then, an even more
important step for Learning and Development programs, that should carefully
listen to and monitor to managers as they learn and evolve, in order to
identify next practices and skills with which to craft their own programs.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Engage and
let go, or Open Learning and Development with a beta mentality.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">The need to
“Make everyone a CIO” is probably more obvious as digital technologies continue
their invasion of the organization’s operations. The not-so-obvious aspect is
how to reach this goal. We propose a number of easy steps to get you started on
this :</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 0px;">
<span style="text-indent: -18pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 0px;">
<span style="text-indent: -18pt;">a) Focus basic and entre-level training
activities on developing common ways of working (a “collaborative way”, as it
were). The following topics could help to start a curriculum:</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 0px;">
</div>
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li><span style="text-indent: -18pt;">Using
the technology (learning to collaborate through social technologies and with
digital technologies);</span></li>
<li><span style="text-indent: -18pt;">Managing
collaboration (learning to manage the collaboration of one’s team taking
advantage of these technologies’ features);</span></li>
<li><span lang="EN-CA" style="text-indent: -18pt;">Framing
collaboration (real-time design of collaboration spaces, like virtual
communities, circles of workspaces, as explained in </span><a href="http://www.johnhagel.com/paper_pushpull.pdf" style="text-indent: -18pt;"><span lang="EN-CA">“From Push to Pull”</span></a><span lang="EN-CA" style="text-indent: -18pt;"> from John Hagel and John Seely Brown)</span></li>
</ul>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 0px;">
<span style="text-indent: -18pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 0px;">
<span style="text-indent: -18pt;">b) Develop a “slow learning” university
that focuses on developing an awareness of the larger digital context of your
organization for all managers. This university should include courses on topics
such as:</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 0px;">
</div>
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li><span style="text-indent: -18pt;">Identifying
and learning the main technological trends impacting one’s industry, in the
context of the competitive dynamics in the new digital world: cloud,
consumerisation, socialisation, automatisation, …</span></li>
<li><span style="text-indent: -18pt;">Understanding
the impact of these digital technologies on one’s industry, at all levels, both
internally and externally;</span></li>
<li><span style="text-indent: -18pt;">Understanding
the competitive dynamics of the software industry and how it impacts current
and future development of applications within one’s industry;</span></li>
<li><span style="text-indent: -18pt;">Understanding
new governance and decision-making practices that take advantage of social technologies
features;</span></li>
</ul>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 0px;">
<span style="text-indent: -18pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 0px;">
<span style="text-indent: -18pt;">c) Finally, develop a pipeline for
development opportunities that focuses on IT projects (developing a social
website, upgrading IT infrastructure, building a mobile application, …), and in
which IT managers and business managers collaborate to learn from each other.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">This is
just a beginning, but it should help you start moving your best talent in the
right direction.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">I would
like to conclude on these thoughts on managing the digital corporation with a
last idea on management dashboards. Social technologies have just begun their
integration with other digital technologies, both new applications and legacy
systems. This trend should continue in the years to come, if you follow the
strategic moves of such giants as Microsoft or SAP.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">There’s a
fair chance that these players are looking at their own breed of social
technologies as their Trojan Horse inside your IT operations. To be sure,
social technologies will soon gain center stage in the Employee-experience of
your organization and therefore become a key asset for development and
retention purposes.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">Corporations
moving towards mastery of their digital strategy should think of social
technologies as the opportunity to build a collective dashboard for their
digital enterprise, a dashboard not for command and control purposes but for
collective decision-making. You could imagine a fractal dashboard in which
every employee would have access to all the data, assets, knowledge,
applications and people of the corporation depending on his context.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:DocumentProperties>
<o:Revision>0</o:Revision>
<o:TotalTime>0</o:TotalTime>
<o:Pages>1</o:Pages>
<o:Words>1641</o:Words>
<o:Characters>9028</o:Characters>
<o:Company>Talent Club</o:Company>
<o:Lines>75</o:Lines>
<o:Paragraphs>21</o:Paragraphs>
<o:CharactersWithSpaces>10648</o:CharactersWithSpaces>
<o:Version>14.0</o:Version>
</o:DocumentProperties>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:TrackMoves/>
<w:TrackFormatting/>
<w:HyphenationZone>21</w:HyphenationZone>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:DoNotPromoteQF/>
<w:LidThemeOther>EN-GB</w:LidThemeOther>
<w:LidThemeAsian>JA</w:LidThemeAsian>
<w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
<w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/>
<w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/>
<w:DontFlipMirrorIndents/>
<w:OverrideTableStyleHps/>
<w:UseFELayout/>
</w:Compatibility>
<m:mathPr>
<m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/>
<m:brkBin m:val="before"/>
<m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/>
<m:smallFrac m:val="off"/>
<m:dispDef/>
<m:lMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:rMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/>
<m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/>
<m:intLim m:val="subSup"/>
<m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/>
</m:mathPr></w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="true"
DefSemiHidden="true" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99"
LatentStyleCount="276">
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Normal"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" QFormat="true" Name="caption"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" Name="Default Paragraph Font"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Strong"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="59" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Table Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Placeholder Text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Revision"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="List Paragraph"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" Name="Bibliography"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading"/>
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Tableau Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin-top:0cm;
mso-para-margin-right:0cm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt;
mso-para-margin-left:0cm;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-ansi-language:EN-GB;
mso-fareast-language:JA;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<!--StartFragment-->
<!--EndFragment--><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-CA" style="mso-ansi-language: EN-CA;">And there’s
no science-fiction here: Isn’t Google already building such a personal
dashboard in the consumer space?<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16372306084445941143noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9136937895094255325.post-66370051202205045802013-11-28T03:45:00.000+00:002013-11-28T03:46:09.829+00:00Explosive delegation<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<b>Why delegation has its dangers and a higher level of collaboration is the future of organizations</b><br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgjM8lBdRbfEKacx4suOI9DlsYEpR0FuOdmH2rko1Q63tS0UcFL5rRHNLyEHt0i8Ff5Rg-Icgnt8iPImtAySG9MYuqVh8MAR-A293cnw6E_tQKFxE7AcL6urrvpmhnii9kj42uARquY1PI/s1600/time+bomb.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgjM8lBdRbfEKacx4suOI9DlsYEpR0FuOdmH2rko1Q63tS0UcFL5rRHNLyEHt0i8Ff5Rg-Icgnt8iPImtAySG9MYuqVh8MAR-A293cnw6E_tQKFxE7AcL6urrvpmhnii9kj42uARquY1PI/s200/time+bomb.jpeg" width="200" /></a></div>
I was having diner at a great <a href="http://espcan.ca/" target="_blank">Canada-Spain business network</a> last Tuesday, and having an interesting conversation along the lines of <a href="http://www.rushkoff.com/present-shock/" target="_blank">Present Shock </a>with other participants. Most of them were managers, and the conversation led me to an aha moment: the reason why a higher type of collaboration needs to really take hold in all corporations resides in the lethal dimension of delegation, one of the mantras in classic management.<br />
<br />
Delegation can be seen as both a way to empower an employee or co-worker or a way to expand one's influence by leveraging the time and talent of one's network.<br />
<br />
Only, in present shock days, most conversations are loaded with time bombs. You know, those emails that get us out of our current activity and reload our day with one or two hours of extra work. We were wondering if irresponsible delegation was to blame for a number of burn-outs each of us had experienced in his or her own network.<br />
<br />
A higher type of collaboration would demand a greater sense of responsibility than classic delegation. In a business world where acceleration is transforming the nature of business cycles, while expectations (financial ones but also client expectations) continue fueling this acceleration, delegation cannot be a basic management skill. It needs to become a very evolved form of collaboration with one's team or co-workers, a reason why the term delegation does not really hold.<br />
<br />
I am currently working on expanding on management practices towards collaboration practices, that would bring practices such as co-creation, conversation, sharing or learning on a par with management. Probably making management a thinner practice.<br />
<br />
My conversation about explosive delegation tells me it is a good direction.</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16372306084445941143noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9136937895094255325.post-57773217906608697932013-08-16T17:35:00.000+01:002013-08-16T17:37:41.892+01:00The context of context<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjAUEU_Xm25FcTGIMQzHBa16RjLHBQOG7wgMbDdZwRpfYsjXEIcDPKXlERb6-oaSqkxbbD7WxGo4nz0Km5jqDQBl5DMh5OmhW8V6VUPtDq3x7-Onxu2Eh_ltQQ9vXUA02Q7Bkk0hyphenhyphen3hmOQ/s1600/Context.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="149" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjAUEU_Xm25FcTGIMQzHBa16RjLHBQOG7wgMbDdZwRpfYsjXEIcDPKXlERb6-oaSqkxbbD7WxGo4nz0Km5jqDQBl5DMh5OmhW8V6VUPtDq3x7-Onxu2Eh_ltQQ9vXUA02Q7Bkk0hyphenhyphen3hmOQ/s200/Context.jpg" width="200" /></a></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Is context really king ? I remember reading that in one of <a href="http://www.briansolis.com/" target="_blank">Brian Solis</a>' <a href="http://www.briansolis.com/tag/context/" target="_blank">blogposts</a>. Only it wasn't really true. Context might be the new lie. </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">I have been thinking about the <b>context of context</b> ever since having that intuition during a Google+ conversation in the <a href="https://plus.google.com/u/0/communities/109257599738414342408" target="_blank">Conversation Community</a>. I have tried to put my thoughts together, and it has proven more difficult than expected. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Social is about context. About context beeing king and about technology being a context enhancing engine (from an individual point of view) as well as a context leveraging engine (from a business point of view). And therefore, at first sight, about a need or an opportunity for people and institutions alike to master context and act in real time. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Only, after thinking about it, social is not solely about context: </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">by changing the depth of our personal context, </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">t</span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">echnological (and social) evolution is making the changing nature of responsibility and decision making visible.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Context has context and context needs to be managed, which is why Responsible Context Management might just become an imperative management practice in the next few years. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"></span><br />
<a name='more'></a><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<h3 style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Let's take a trip</span></h3>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Making informed, conscious and autonomous decisions is one of the defining traits of what it means to be human. We make decisions all day long, unimportant or critical, barely conscious or deeply pondered. And the fact of the matter is that </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">the very nature of those decisions</span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> has been altered by technology.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Let's move backwards a couple of centuries. Imagine you were intending to make a long journey to visit a relative. How would you make the final decision ? Most questions, I think, would have turned around the impact of that decision on oneself, or on one's close environment: How long will it take me ? What towns or locations will I cross ? Will it be dangerous ? What weather will I encounter ? What will happen to my family while I am away ? Will I be back ? ...</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Fast forward. Would you be asking the same questions today ? Probably not. In fact, our awareness of the immediate context of our actions is such, our connexions to the persons in that context are such, that we have turned old questions into opportunities for conversations : what do you advise me to wear ? At what time do you want me to be there ? Should I stop and visit anything in the way to your home ? Can I bring the kids ?</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The fact is that technology, <a href="http://luisalberolasblog.blogspot.ca/2010/01/has-web-changed-way-your-corporation.html" target="_blank">human infrastructure</a>, has expanded our personal context beyond anything we were intellectually prepared for. Hopefully, we are adapting, because the consequences of this expansion are deep.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<h3 style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Context, experience, impact and responsibility</span></h3>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Context is important because we make decisions in context. Contrary to animals, we react, but we also think, ponder, consider, project into the future, make assumptions, ..., before deciding. Our context includes our surroundings, our past learnings and our relationships. Technology has woundrously extended the reach of our surroundings, our past learnings and our relationships.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">As a consequence, even if the questions we used to ask ourselves to decide in context are still there, the answers very quickly become obvious. And then, we make our decisions based on different types of questions : will I travel by car or plane ? is there a value in really moving, couldn't I just phone, text or skype ? What will be my carbon footprint ? Interestingly, we could say these questions today, as yesterday, are still questions about the value or the interest of the <b>experience we will live </b>and the <b>impact of our actions on our relationships, surroundings and our future. </b></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Technology, apart from having wondrously expanded our context, has also totally transformed the meaning of experience and impact that now imply vastly different things to what they used to a mere century ago. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">In the first place, the experiences that we can live through our lives have expanded beyond what anyone could have dreamed of two centuries ago. Nothing describes it better than "the new normal" having become a catch phrase to describe almost anything that changes... </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Secondly, we are, as we were yesterday, aware of the impact of what we do. It's called <b>responsibility </b>: it's called being human. </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Only now we are also painfully aware of the complex and collective nature of that impact and therefore the complex and collective nature of that responsibility. What we do individually is part of what we do collectively and what we do collectively is a force for good or evil: the transformative power of our living-together is terrible and implies a terrible responsibility. That bears on our subconscious and translates into different individual strategies that we choose to be able to cope with that new awareness : we choose to concentrate on different issues like managing our carbon footprint, engaging in responsible consumption, supporting whistle-blowing, voting on an election day, reading the Occupy Wall Street Blog or participating to a feel-good community in Google+.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Both our experience and our collective impact have been transformed by our evolution, and particularly by technology and our use of technology. <b>Social technology, by connecting us, is making us collectively aware of it</b>. Social technology has greatly contributed to the social <a href="http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/16685268-social-acceleration" target="_blank">acceleration</a> that is making our context inescapably <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMGucd5vjfY" target="_blank">complex</a>. Trying to find easy explanations or one-fits-all causality relationships between events is no longer available to us. In fact, it is becoming unethical to do so (</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: sans-serif; line-height: 19.200000762939453px;">"Act so that the effects of your action are compatible with the permanence of genuine human life", <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Jonas" target="_blank">Hans Jonas</a>).</span><br />
<br /></div>
<h3 style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Responsible Context Management</span></h3>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">For us social technology practitioners, addressing the depths of context, understanding that, i</span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">n a given context, a whole succession of contexts unfolds, </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">has become an </span><b style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">ethical imperative because of the potential impact.</b><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">I am thinking that this entails implementing a <b>continuous feed-back loop between understanding and influencing context</b>. Understanding and influencing context, at the corporate level, imply re-imaginging the links between such corporate processes as Learning and Development, People Engagement, Marketing and Sales. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Most importantly, it gives an opportunity to focus formal training in the corporation not on skills and operations (which will be developed through social on the job learning), but on corporate responsibility. Real corporate responsibility.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">I will write about that in a future post.</span></div>
</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16372306084445941143noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9136937895094255325.post-3300304806515842342013-03-21T16:54:00.003+00:002013-03-21T19:51:20.200+00:00Why "Tweet" and "Like" are primitive social actions<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Social technologies are not mature. They are a primitive multi-layered bunch of technologies, that are clumsily integrating with each other, while also integrating with and changing our individual and collective thinking and communication habits and skills. They will probably change the very nature of what it means to communicate. And someday, we will forget that they are a technology altogether ...<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div class="p1">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhRt3V0pwBv6j_5EcDB4yUNfbUildkrCyo1WIwSqTa02YhU2OgYQUf8mpFTqNRR-s3d_O3HYDgyK_jAog-qPUck4S8NHEZibWVkoPOTuQD-uz1hKFz87mai-5dQR6lcUMyP4XeCfH2V0jk/s1600/Fotolia_38244303_XS.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhRt3V0pwBv6j_5EcDB4yUNfbUildkrCyo1WIwSqTa02YhU2OgYQUf8mpFTqNRR-s3d_O3HYDgyK_jAog-qPUck4S8NHEZibWVkoPOTuQD-uz1hKFz87mai-5dQR6lcUMyP4XeCfH2V0jk/s200/Fotolia_38244303_XS.jpg" width="150" /></a></div>
<h2 style="text-align: left;">
Born out of need</h2>
Language is a very deep and very old technology of which the source code has been forgotten. Much has been written about it (for instance <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-changizi-phd/language-and-evolution_b_930075.html" target="_blank">here</a>); my own take is that language evolved out of the need of primitive tribes to better master their environment. Whether language has it roots on our ancestors mimicking natural sounds or an existing predisposition is difficult to say. What is more interesting is that language probably appeared out of the need to better coordinate collective action, before it also became a media for codifying and transmitting ideas. I do not know if the fact that tribes grew in size had something to do with it, but I'd like to think so. Hypothesis one: language first appeared to coordinate physical action between humans.<br />
<br />
Because it is a very old technology, language had time to very closely integrate with our other communication habits (gestures, stares, breathing rythmes, tension, ...) that it now complements so well. It so closely articulated with our thought processes, that it is now difficult to render any intimate feeling or thinking activity if it is not through language. Language has helped us to better express our feelings and thoughts and has allowed us to develop more complex and deeper thoughts and ideas. Hypothesis two: language changed us as a species.<br />
<br />
Rather similarly, social technologies (in the 21st century sense) ancestors appeared out of the need (or possibility) to allow participation of distant people in a collective research or thought process. Remember <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARPANET" target="_blank">arpanet</a> or the first email systems ... But primitive social technologies (like email), did not need that much time to very closely integrate to our existing communication (and even social) habits. Life without email would be difficult to imagine even today in some corporate communities ...<br />
<br />
<h2 style="text-align: left;">
A technology reinvented by technology</h2>
Language evolved with other technologies like writing or printing for instance, that very deeply impacted it, helping to codify it, prompting for rules (grammar), and also probably deeply altering it as well as our own language skills: our ability for story-telling today differs from our ability some hundred years ago, because both the tools that we rely on (books) and the aim of story-telling have strongly evolved (Nicholas Carr beautifully describes all this in <a href="http://www.theshallowsbook.com/nicholascarr/Nicholas_Carrs_The_Shallows.html" target="_blank">The Shallows</a>). And language itself integrates now with these other technologies (I am not sure that it was always the case) in such a way that sometimes we forget that reading, writing, speaking are very different activities, that demand very different skills. Hypothesis three: language as a technology was enriched by other technologies.</div>
<div class="p1">
<br />
In a very similar way, social technologies were transformed by other technologies, like computing technologies (computation and storage capabilities of hardware) or mobile technologies. Changing the capability of browsers so that they now allow for conversations is a lot like inventing writing and developing mobile technologies is also a lot like printing: both technologies have transformed interaction in scope and depth.<br />
<br />
<h2 style="text-align: left;">
What comes next</h2>
This whole post was prompted by a <a href="https://plus.google.com/u/0/communities/109257599738414342408" target="_blank">conversation</a> started by <a href="https://plus.google.com/u/0/110465386078989533154/posts" target="_blank">Mike Fealty</a> in G+. The post was a conversation on the value of physical versus virtual teaching, more precisely lecturing. And my own position is that it is not as much these different values as of today than how virtual social technologies will transform the whole lecturing experience that is important.<br />
<br />
In that respect precisely, it is good to acknowledge that social technologies are rather primitive, and mainly their social dimension (versus the technological one). What I mean is that, even though technology in itself is evolving rapidly and giving us incredible user experiences, how we share, write, think, relate to others, how we have conversations, discussions, arguments, is still done in a very "physical" way.<br />
<br />
This is where social actions will come into play (I hope). Social actions (linking, tweeting) were all the rage a couple of years ago, but most of it was just translating "like" to other contexts ("Pin-it" or "+1"). I am not saying that these social actions have no value, or that there is no difference between them. Actually there is, and I know there have been some conversations about the difference between Like and +1 (to me, it is a cultural difference ...).<br />
<br />
But the point is that the vocabulary and the grammar that we need to really collaborate virtually are yet to be invented. It will be a lot of fun ... and it might actually bring some surprises. If I go back to my hypotheses, then the future will look something like this:<br />
<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>Social technologies appeared to coordinate intellectual action ...</li>
<li>They are being enriched and transformed by other technologies ...</li>
<li>They will contribute to changing us as a species, not only culturally, but in our ability to think, relate and live virtually collectively</li>
</ul>
<div>
Or don't you think so ?</div>
</div>
</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16372306084445941143noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9136937895094255325.post-836131830495854342013-02-14T04:20:00.000+00:002013-02-14T04:20:04.171+00:00Professional communities and the pace of time<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhJHI2Uv4XR3whQmAUfTzb6DRMoLxtFAiwsAENXLEJhb-CzU_ADh3s_iGomhBIefC7gcnEFujOoQ31CEBvUeuhM2njqa7L9KeT6GFLrMvAReqFHwZzpXpaa3STiQrWBEz5HXldm2UuKO7Y/s1600/Fotolia_1545704_S.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhJHI2Uv4XR3whQmAUfTzb6DRMoLxtFAiwsAENXLEJhb-CzU_ADh3s_iGomhBIefC7gcnEFujOoQ31CEBvUeuhM2njqa7L9KeT6GFLrMvAReqFHwZzpXpaa3STiQrWBEz5HXldm2UuKO7Y/s200/Fotolia_1545704_S.jpg" width="132" /></a></div>
<a href="http://www.editionsladecouverte.fr/catalogue/index-Acceleration-9782707154828.html" target="_blank">Acceleration</a>, by Hartmund Rosa, should be compulsory reading in business school, and it was actually recommended to me by the CEO of a client.<br />
<br />
Hartmund Rosa defines three causes for acceleration, technological acceleration, social change acceleration and acceleration of the pace of life. These are major trends, and even though they are some times softened by havens or deceleration (relative deceleration), they are trends that corporations need to cope with to compete in an increasingly social market (I am using compete in a positive way, like in compete to provide the best customer experience ...).<br />
<br />
Put it in another way, leaders must ensure their company moves faster than any other if they are to survive.<br />
<br />
But acceleration is also, and foremost, a dangerous trend. I tend to think of it alongside other trends like the <a href="https://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/The_second_economy_2853" target="_blank">second economy</a> or the <a href="http://www.boostzone.fr/en/2012/06/the-third-economy-or-how-the-collaborative-culture-will-displace-jobs/" target="_blank">third economy</a>. It is already producing some <a href="http://www.aspeninstitute.org/policy-work/communications-society/power-curve-society-future-innovation-opportunity-social-equity?utm_source=iContact&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Communications%20and%20Society&utm_content=" target="_blank">frightening results</a>, and the existing business mindset, without deep changes, will only make things worse.<br />
<br />
There is reason to be optimistic though. Michael Fauscette writes in Enterprise Irregulars that <a href="http://www.enterpriseirregulars.com/58622/new-data-on-social-business-communities-are-the-1-initiative-in-2013/" target="_blank">community building is the major initiative</a> for 2013, in the social technology field. This is important. Because communities are one of the few spaces where time is deep. In fact, communities can accelerate time around them while providing a slow conversation space, a somehow protected environment, where relationships, genuine caring, subject interest, shared responsibility, mutual trust, provide the virtual equivalent of the ancient British Clubs ... Communities are the new people-centric environments, where people have the possibility to reclaim mastery of time.<br />
<br />
Which reminds me of a great insight from my friend <a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/garniera" target="_blank">Alain Garnier</a>, "social technologies are moving the focus of work from space to time".<br />
<br />
What I am more concerned about is how companies will manage to develop the community managers (I prefer host or owner, or the French "animateur") in their existing HR processes. The only answer I have today, I have called it <a href="http://luisalberolasblog.blogspot.ca/2012/06/unleadership.html" target="_blank">unleadeship</a>.</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16372306084445941143noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9136937895094255325.post-81506068795800764732013-01-24T00:51:00.002+00:002013-01-24T00:59:20.826+00:00The year we kill social business<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Social Business (or #socbizz in Twitter) has reached buzzword status. If you want to live by the ambitions that were behind it, you probably need to kill it.<br />
<a name='more'></a><h4 style="text-align: left;">
</h4>
<h4 style="text-align: left;">
</h4>
<h4 style="text-align: left;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhXVRYmPR6VtUqz8cuZYfmzj6ffOxwI0N3mDCQEL9uLANkf_VZPNBxE6ASNsAXm28sYZw6PCI9Ehw7Sci2jZVdB-6DACxQC1iy1JGTYX2sZ3qdr9R-OwgZ0ABIB7ESU2aYSi1zGM7X0Z84/s1600/Fotolia_26575495_XS.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhXVRYmPR6VtUqz8cuZYfmzj6ffOxwI0N3mDCQEL9uLANkf_VZPNBxE6ASNsAXm28sYZw6PCI9Ehw7Sci2jZVdB-6DACxQC1iy1JGTYX2sZ3qdr9R-OwgZ0ABIB7ESU2aYSi1zGM7X0Z84/s200/Fotolia_26575495_XS.jpg" width="178" /></a></h4>
<h4 style="text-align: left;">
</h4>
<h3 style="text-align: left;">
<br /></h3>
<h3 style="text-align: left;">
I have a dream ...</h3>
<br />
Ever since Andrew McAfee described Enterprise 2.0 as the "use of emergent social software platforms within companies, or between companies and their partners or customers", I think most projects involving social technologies have set their views too high. Probably because of the liberating breeze that came with the web2.0 movement (remember <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/You_(Time_Person_of_the_Year)" target="_blank">this</a> from Times magazine ?), it was widely believed that E2.0 would allow every employee to demonstrate her deep creativity skills and would also help reduce management to what it really should be ... A few technologies and some change management would change the world, and along with it, the nature of our workplace and our firms. And well they have, but not as expected.<br />
<br />
Today, social technology vendors have built a multi-billion dollar industry, social networks firms have reached very high valuations, social media agencies are busy selling new ways of engaging prosumers ... and, yes, consultants are busy trying to figure out just what kind of value they are delivering to their clients.<br />
<br />
What probably has not happened has been this liberating movement that most employees that first engaged in social business projects expected. And that is perfectly understandable: such liberating movement would only have succeeded with a deep change in the institutional nature of our favorite institution, the corporation. Such a deep change would have resulted in companies concentrating in something more than just financial value... Such a deep change, though, is slow in the making, and even though I am convinced we are right in the middle of it, it will not live up to the dreams of the pioneers (not in the short-term, that is).<br />
<br />
<h4 style="text-align: left;">
</h4>
<h4 style="text-align: left;">
</h4>
<h3 style="text-align: left;">
Killing the dream ... and awaking strategy</h3>
<br />
The use of social technologies is mature now, and it is slowly transforming behaviors outside our companies and also within them. The impact of social technologies also seems to be widely understood and documented (see this <a href="http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/mgi/research/technology_and_innovation/the_social_economy" target="_blank">document</a> from McKinsey). So maybe it is time that we abandon buzzwords and false hopes and concentrate on deep transformation work, and go beyond software vendors promises or simple ROI fallacies.<br />
<br />
When looking at what has been written this past year on the impact of social technologies, what comes to mind is productivity and engagement. Why? Because the industry seems to have moved towards "social enabling processes" and "engagement and advocacy". I would argue first that we are speaking about a different kind of productivity and engagement, and that a new kind of transformation is needed to unlock the value hidden there; then, I would argue (in a future post) that productivity and engagement are not enough, that a new kind of growth is the real promise of the strategic adoption of social technologies, which brings us back to a sometimes forgotten word in business, strategy.<br />
<br />
<h3 style="text-align: left;">
From simple productivity to operational innovation</h3>
<br />
Improved collaboration will help improve productivity. Obviously, yes. Now, contrary to what was the case during other much publicized technology led transformations (some that succeeded, like ERP and other process or task-centered technologies, and some that did not, like KM-centered technology), impacting productivity through collaboration demands that we transform how people interact with each other through technology, and not really how people operate the machine (which was the case then). And so it's not <a href="http://raceagainstthemachine.com/" target="_blank">race against the machine</a> we are in, worrying that the machine's next version will do the task I am doing now, it's collaboration through and with the machine that needs to happen within our corporations. That is a deep change in professional behaviors (ways of working), in the organization of work and in the management of the organization.<br />
<br />
Let's start with management. Contrary to usual productivity approaches, this one will not be based on reengineering of existing processes, performance improvement of individual tasks or activities nor continuous improvement of existing teams or corporations. Those are consequences of the adoption of social technologies in some particular situations, but not the real promise of adopting social technologies. The real promise is operational innovation, that comes about because social technologies participate in enabling a new kind of collaboration, the one that comes with reach, access, sharing, contribution, participation and sense-making of all of this through enhanced intuition and big data strategies (look at what <a href="https://plus.google.com/u/0/101010252943098026073/posts" target="_blank">John Kellden</a> has to say about all this). The key word here is participate, of course. Social technologies are the machine, but we definitely have not invented the real uses of this machine, like it happens often in technological revolutions (see <a href="http://www.carlotaperez.org/" target="_blank">Carlota Perez</a>). And therefore managers need to concentrate on inventing the new ways of working that will allow corporations to really institutionalize operational innovation.<br />
<br />
As managers, it's important to understand that operational innovation does not come from usual command and control approaches. Operational innovation is people-based and needs that managers engage in the kind of professional development that the best project leaders of some professional firms engage on. In this case, though, to reach the real promise of social technologies you need to do that on a big scale. And therefore, it is important to<b> </b>enlarge your line management's mission. Appart from aligning to strategy, distributing tasks, ensuring execution and controlling, managers today need to learn to do two things:<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>Ensuring that people development processes are adapted to deep development of their team, so that they not only master the new skills needed for using social technologies, but that they learn how to collaborate with and through the machine. Obviously, managers are the first that need to be developed there;</li>
<li>Working on framing collaboration. The idea here is that collaboration does not happen only because of tools, but basically because of engagement and common ways of working. If managers only invest in social technologies expecting that tasks will be done quicker ... well, that is all they'll get, but along will come burn-out, turnover and disenchantment.</li>
</ul>
Is it an oversimplification to say that using social technologies will help us do more tasks in less time ? It's actually worse: it's using a taylorist view of the corporation for measurement, while dreaming about a post taylorist organization, in which collective intelligence is more than organized industrial work ... That dream will come through <a href="http://luisalberolasblog.blogspot.ca/2012/11/visibility-will-kill-management.html" target="_blank">management</a>.<br />
<h4 style="text-align: left;">
</h4>
<h4 style="text-align: left;">
</h4>
<h3 style="text-align: left;">
From Taylor to network</h3>
<br />
Let's now move to organization and organizational development. Some have been arguing for a long time that this is where most work is to be done (see <a href="http://wirearchy.com/" target="_blank">Jon Husband</a>, for instance), and I definitely think that this professional practice should be brought back to light in our firms.<br />
<br />
What happens when you open the doors to collaboration and that you have innovation in mind as its first outcome, is that efficiency ceases to be the overarching operational goal of the organization. Remember, efficiency basically is what corporations were created for. If you bring innovation at the same level (from an organizational point of view, not only from a managerial point of view), then you need to accept changes in at least three dimensions:<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>The structures on which you organize your corporation; communities or networks are actually important from that point of view, because they help organize a work that is different from industrial work, that was efficient when organized by department, functions or projects;</li>
<li>The main roles around which you organize work; I had some <a href="http://luisalberolasblog.blogspot.ca/2009/12/beyond-enterprise-20-age-of-builders.html" target="_blank">ideas</a> some time ago about that. And it's rather simple: when efficiency was the main focus of the organization, most roles where designed for efficiency. Now that operational innovation and even deep innovation are becoming part of the organization DNA, the design of work should change;</li>
<li>The missions of your central corporate departments, the ones that are key to build or transform the <a href="http://luisalberolasblog.blogspot.fr/2010/01/has-web-changed-way-your-corporation.html" target="_blank">human infrastructure</a> of your organization (IT, HR, communications, basically), that is, the way your corporation thinks.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
<h4 style="text-align: left;">
</h4>
<h3 style="text-align: left;">
From common ways of working to common ways of working</h3>
<br />
One thing that will probably not change is the need for consistency amongst an organization's employees ways of working. Consistency in ways of working (including ways of learning, ways of thinking, ways of designing) allows for enhanced understanding of each other goals, ambitions, intuitions, when collaborating.<br />
<br />
But consistency is not standardization. I would say that organizations need to move from standardized ways of doing things to common reference frameworks, like the ones used by some professional services firms. Many organizations are already there, they are known for their strong corporate culture, and their employees are remarkable because of their approach to business (and often, their lack of success outside those organizations).<br />
<br />
In a social technology powered collaborative environment, though, there is a need to work on designing these frameworks, and on designing the participation of employees to the evolution of these frameworks, with a very thorough understanding of these technologies. Wikipedia and YouTube will be seen as the ancestors of the collaborative environments that some corporations will built (are already building, I surmise), and that will completely change their competitive positionning vis-a-vis competitors. Those environments are based on an intelligent use of social technologies, powerful governance systems and common ways of working.<br />
<br />
There are at least two dimensions to work on : individual ways of working and collective ways of working. To reach consistency in new individual ways of working, the best is to reinvent L&D in your organization (for instance, along the lines presented by Harold Jarche <a href="http://www.jarche.com/pkm/" target="_blank">here</a>, to begin with). For collective ways of working, the best I have come up with is experimentation, following a vision, or some principles about the value of collaboration, the need to have new roles and the need to change management's mission.<br />
<br />
<br />
If you commit to changing management, organization and ways of working, you will have made a commitment that will have earned the engagement of the people around you. Not the engagement that is sometimes heralded by HR team, but the strong commitment of those that know that the corporation really has to change to continue serving its clients in completely new markets, serving it differently than was the case yesterday. Those engaged employees, as has always happened, are your best advocates. Only now, it happens at the internet scale.<br />
<br />
<br />
<b><i>Are these some areas where your organization is expected to work on this year? Do you think you might forget about social business alltogether, by deeply transforming your organization ?</i></b></div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16372306084445941143noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9136937895094255325.post-75211393505646728452012-11-14T18:45:00.000+00:002012-11-14T18:47:07.567+00:00Visibility will kill management<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
The main issue with social technology in the corporate context is visibility. These technologies will show anyone anything, and that is terribly annoying to management, that has made a living on control and information brokerage.<br />
<br />
And therefore management needs to evolve ... but not in the direction most managers fear. Really, we need more managers, not less. We need stronger skilled managers, able both to manage content and context, people and process, internal and external.<br />
<br />
Because visibility does not come with talent. It's only visibility. And the capability for insight, that would allow any employee to act on this new-found access to most information / knowledge / people / issues is definitely not a given. On the contrary, it is talent that will be long in the making for most people, notwithstanding what the tenants of "<a href="http://www.fastcompany.com/1802732/generation-flux-meet-pioneers-new-and-chaotic-frontier-business" target="_blank">generation flux</a>" may say.<br />
<br />
Social technologies should have us working on increasing the number of managers, I mean of people entrusted with the responsibility of achieving the company's mission.<br />
<br />
Obviously, as Dominique Turcq hinted at in a recent <a href="http://www.boostzone.fr/2012/11/my-takes-of-day-3-and-last-at-techonomy/comment-page-1/#comment-3170" target="_blank">post</a>, it should also have leaders thinking on this mission and on the corporation as an institution. But that is another story.</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16372306084445941143noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9136937895094255325.post-23484662445874312202012-10-31T10:07:00.001+00:002012-10-31T10:09:56.977+00:00Facebook and the Commons<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Should we think about Facebook business model or insist on it becoming ... a public utility ?<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
I was going through my reader a few days ago, and learnt that Facebook had just reached <a href="http://digitallife.today.com/_news/2012/10/04/14207393-facebook-hits-1-billion-users?lite" target="_blank">1 billion users</a>. The <a href="http://www.technologyreview.com/view/429508/will-facebook-make-as-much-from-its-next-billion/" target="_blank">article</a> focus was on whether Facebook would be able to generate revenue from its next billion users in the same way it has from the first billion, which is in itself an interesting question. My feeling, though, is that revenue is not the issue for Facebook. The question is, what is the nature of Facebook ?<br />
<br />
<h3 style="text-align: left;">
Challenges to Facebook business model are not where you might think</h3>
<br />
It's difficult for any brand not to be tempted to be present in a space where there are 1 billion potential customers ! So my feeling is Facebook will keep growing advertising revenue (it has definitely <a href="http://www.businessesgrow.com/2012/10/31/facebook-youve-failed-us/" target="_blank">chosen who its customers are</a>, not us, not companies, just advertising agencies), as its models gets more sophisticated, as Facebook usage also gets more sophisticated and the ways of accessing Facebook expand - mobile as we know it is probably just a first step. But trust the guys who built this company to leverage technological innovation.<br />
<br />
Obviously, it will be a different kind of revenue, as the user experience is very different in mobile devices. That might impact revenue per user, which is already below what investors expected. Now, is this a problem for Facebook or for investors ? Investor expectations (or dreams) have always been a key innovation and growth driver, regardless of whether they held true or not. This will very probably be the case here. I can't help thinking about other technological revolutions, say, the railroad one ...<br />
<br />
Facebook should also see another impact on its revenue per user from competition building up. And I am not only thinking of the "next Facebook" or innovative social network. I am thinking about the arrival of new entrants to the "attention market". Follow my thinking: companies are beginning to build internal social networks that could be as attractive to people as Facebook can be. In this internal corporate social networks, relationships are not based on public social objects (or consumption, or friendship), but on professional interest. Professional interest can be a very powerful driver if it is conveniently aligned with individual professional development (let's put it even more bluntly, personal growth), and it is very likely some people that now spend time on Facebook will spend less time when companies learn how to mobilize minds in ways that are different from what they do today.<br />
<br />
Professional interest will not be the only new entrant in this attention space. Learning and personal growth will take place outside corporations, because most existing academic institutions are already working on new learning experiences and because learning itself is changing.<br />
<br />
And last, Facebook is not that old. It might just be that the generation that allowed Facebook to grow as it has so far decides to migrate. Not permanently, no. Just spending more time somewhere else ... As I see my kids usage of Facebook evolve, I would bet they will outgrow it.<br />
<br />
<h3 style="text-align: left;">
Thinking of Facebook as just a company might not be enough</h3>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgRWocxShQ_FIta6VLzZcfuAPh1JbtBxnGX_7NfJGOVkh1lvO0512tvuUDbwI3OFGDrrqYinWHVb8IjObnRy6NQc8LtdhFIi3pGzb3coN2gxcDls3Z-xAD_fxDElHS2hYg-7fUbXJ39vB0/s1600/Fotolia_36630587_XS.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="132" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgRWocxShQ_FIta6VLzZcfuAPh1JbtBxnGX_7NfJGOVkh1lvO0512tvuUDbwI3OFGDrrqYinWHVb8IjObnRy6NQc8LtdhFIi3pGzb3coN2gxcDls3Z-xAD_fxDElHS2hYg-7fUbXJ39vB0/s200/Fotolia_36630587_XS.jpg" width="200" /></a></div>
That is probably the most interesting evolution to come, and it should not take long, as some disenchantment about Facebook is slowly building steam. One is allowed to think that the choice of advertisers as their real clients was made by Facebook because of short-term financial reasons ("monetizing"). From a strategic viewpoint, though, that would be just a first step on building something different, say the first public infrastructure of the Attention Space.<br />
<br />
Because, we've seen it, there are definitely huge risks on Facebook revenue per user. That would be really worrisome for investors if Facebook had not a more sophisticated vision, for instance, becoming the more sophisticated of a new kind of infrastructure that is expanding our ability to share, to relate, to travel indeed. After roads, railroads, telegraphs, phones and internet, social networks are building new avenues for relationships. Different kind of relationships.<br />
<br />
Is Facebook just another road ? Or has it learned from other social networks fates that it holds the potential to transform just what a virtual network for relationships is supposed to be ? Will it keep its focus on advertisers or was that just a short-term move ? Disenchantment might not wait for the answer before it goes viral ...<br />
<br />
Wouldn't it be interesting if Facebook was just the infrastructure and service provider and if the data belonged to the commons ? That would made Facebook concentrate on serving users of the infrastructure (not just those that advertise on it), and would give others incentives to build new offerings based on those data and existing infrastructure.</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16372306084445941143noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9136937895094255325.post-20122075332559608602012-10-18T22:12:00.001+01:002012-10-18T22:29:14.565+01:00Dreams (and nightmares) of an HR leader<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
HR Officers need to jump on the driving seat (or committee) of major technology projects (HRIS ones, but also social business, big data, mobility and even BI). Otherwise, they might loose their influence or even worse, their soul, in the next few years.<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<h3 style="text-align: left;">
The social technologies revolution is not what you think</h3>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiNIyWT3SFFQOsFJUEU7WFwM9tEtbwlMnU_oPjbguKnh8UybQOel5H5mwGubAhS49t_eS9CYk1XxPaMskilk5lA_F5abKayYE96n-2_PTUiREqyh4825QSjmr3x_PiOsrVm0Clzya763Es/s1600/Fotolia_45213849_XS.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiNIyWT3SFFQOsFJUEU7WFwM9tEtbwlMnU_oPjbguKnh8UybQOel5H5mwGubAhS49t_eS9CYk1XxPaMskilk5lA_F5abKayYE96n-2_PTUiREqyh4825QSjmr3x_PiOsrVm0Clzya763Es/s200/Fotolia_45213849_XS.jpg" width="167" /></a></div>
HR Technology continues its revolution. Solutions are becoming more sophisticated by the day, adopting major trends like social features, mobile interfaces or customer-centric design. And yet, beyond this improvement in HR technology, it is the slow, quiet, pervasive, integration of HR technology (systems and data alike) in the overall enterprise architecture of the company that constitutes the main revolution. And also, that main threat and opportunity for HR as a corporate institution.<br />
<br />
There are two main drivers to this integration : social technology and big data. Social technologies, in the first place, have at least three types of impacts,<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>The production of massive amounts of people data; and not only employee data (the one HR has historically concentrated on) but also professional and social data (meaning business, functional data that is linked to an individual, regardless of his organizational position). This is a growing trend (see how Michael Fauscette describes <a href="http://www.mfauscette.com/software_technology_partn/2012/09/applications-that-are-social.html" target="_blank">applications that are social</a>);</li>
<li>The breaking of existing organizational silos and functional silos, and therefore the questioning of some dimensions of the added value of central support functions - say, for instance, do we really need HR for mobility management ? </li>
<li>The possibility for the individual employee to take charge of her own development, of her own "<a href="http://luisalberolasblog.blogspot.fr/2012/07/hr-from-training-to-framing.html" target="_blank">employee experience</a>" within the company, as she gains easier access to its people, knowledge, tools and other ressources, and is able at the same time to better assert (based on data) her own, specific talent.</li>
</ul>
There is a huge potential for productivity gains in this revolution. A seminal <a href="http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/mgi/research/technology_and_innovation/the_social_economy" target="_blank">report</a> on the social economy by McKinsey Global Institute points to a 25% productivity growth opportunity for interactions workers.<br />
<br />
Social technologies, though, are not the whole story, and would be less interesting, from a business perspective, without the technological innovations that big data ("growing volume, variety and velocity of information" - David Corrigan <a href="http://www.smartercomputingblog.com/2012/06/05/what-is-big-data-and-why-does-it-matter/" target="_blank">quoted</a> by IBM), and the need to store, analyze and act on this data, are driving. When data produced by social technologies, and by "technologies that are social" can be acted upon by these new technologies, whole new perspectives will open for businesses. Read, for instance, this <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443890304578006252019616768.html" target="_blank">article</a> of the WSJ, that contends that Big Data is becoming the new boss, as recruitment is concerned. Using big data analysis can indeed help better assess candidates for a number of positions (mainly production or transaction positions). And other uses, internal and external alike, will help increase worker productivity or HR process performance.<br />
<br />
In a global economy, though, my description of the revolution would not be complete if I did not consider the wider economic environment. To do so, I can use two concepts that I think describe well the economic and social risks and opportunities of this technological revolution:<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>First, the integration of HR technology into the wider enterprise architecture is part of a slow and silent transformation, that has been dubbed <a href="https://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/The_second_economy_2853" target="_blank">The Second Economy</a> by researcher W Brian Arthur, who writes that "u<em class="diigoHighlight id_0887619e3f3c6da44806af83fc812979 type_0 yellow" style="background-color: white; display: inline; font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 15px; font: inherit; position: relative; text-decoration: inherit; zoom: 1;">nderneath the physical economy, with its physical people and physical tasks, lies a second economy that is automatic and neurally intelligent, with no upper limit to its </em><em class="diigoHighlight id_0887619e3f3c6da44806af83fc812979 type_0 yellow" style="background-color: white; display: inline; font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 15px; font: inherit; position: relative; text-decoration: inherit; zoom: 1;">buildout". This Second Economy has brought us "prosperity and difficulties with jobs"; a similar argument has been developed by Andy McAffee in his book <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Race-Against-The-Machine-ebook/dp/B005WTR4ZI" target="_blank">Race Against the Machine</a>;</em></li>
<li><em class="diigoHighlight id_0887619e3f3c6da44806af83fc812979 type_0 yellow" style="background-color: white; display: inline; font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 15px; font: inherit; position: relative; text-decoration: inherit; zoom: 1;"><a href="http://www.boostzone.fr/decouvrir/fondateur/" target="_blank">Dominique Turcq</a>, from the Boostzone Institute, continuing with this line of thought argues that </em><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><em class="diigoHighlight id_0887619e3f3c6da44806af83fc812979 type_0 yellow" style="display: inline; font: inherit; position: relative; text-decoration: inherit; zoom: 1;">"a</em><em style="border: 0px; font: inherit; line-height: 13.600000381469727px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"> number of middle managers jobs will disappear, a number of intermediaries’ jobs will disappear, and a number of paid jobs will disappear because of the collaborative dimension of our society and of corporations". He call this the<a href="http://www.boostzone.fr/en/2012/06/the-third-economy-or-how-the-collaborative-culture-will-displace-jobs/" target="_blank"> Third Economy</a>.</em></span></span></li>
</ul>
<div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: 13.600000381469727px;">For HR, then, the social technologies revolution is not a simple opportunity. It holds the potential to build a dream or a nightmare. And, in my opinion, at least in the short term, the odds are pointing towards the nightmare as the most likely (because the most profitable on the short term) outcome. As Dominique argues once again, "<a href="http://www.boostzone.fr/2011/03/how-good-management-can-generate-unemployment/" target="_blank">good management can generate unemployment</a>".</span></div>
</div>
<br />
<h3 style="text-align: left;">
Become a different kind of HR leader</h3>
What can you do to master these technologies in a way that spurs innovation and manages productivity gains without incurring into huge employee casualties ? What can you do to expand your influence in the boardroom, by truly contributing to making your business a social business ?<br />
<br />
There is probably no other way out that becoming the social technology champion, and I can measure how difficult this is for HR. And yet, in social technologies, the key term is social. For that reason, HR, if it develops a real intimacy with this technology, if it works on its own technology skills (using, understanding, forecasting), is uniquely positioned to avoid that these technologies are only used for productivity. That would be short-sighted from a value-creation point of view, and very damaging from an employee well-being point of view.<br />
<br />
This is no easy task, and there are no short-cuts available. I have been experimenting these past few years with some initiatives that HR leaders can undertake in their quest to become Social Technology champions:<br />
<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>Improve your existing people development processes by <a href="http://luisalberolasblog.blogspot.fr/2011/11/leveraging-social-technologies-for.html" target="_blank">leveraging</a> social technologies;</li>
<li>Transform talent management into a s<a href="http://luisalberolasblog.blogspot.fr/2011/11/beyond-social-talent-management-as.html" target="_blank">trategy development engine</a>;</li>
<li><a href="http://luisalberolasblog.blogspot.fr/2012/07/hr-from-training-to-framing.html" target="_blank">Reinvent L&D</a> and forget about training;</li>
<li><a href="http://luisalberolasblog.blogspot.fr/2012/06/unleadership.html" target="_blank">Think again about leadership</a> ! Next generation leaders are not where you thought they were.</li>
<li>Master your technology vendors - meaning, be in charge and change the technology if it does not suit you.</li>
</ul>
<br />
And to do this, collaborate with all the departments that have the same issues as your own HR department. Start, for instance, by co-designing the future learning environment of your corporation with your IT and Communications peers. That should move you in the right direction.</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16372306084445941143noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9136937895094255325.post-33551377972948329382012-07-23T10:06:00.000+01:002012-07-23T10:06:23.586+01:00From social objects to business objects ?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<br />
<div class="p1">
<span style="background-color: white;">Moving from a document-centered work organization to a relationship-focused one is a long, difficult journey. Adapting some insights about social objects to the business world can help accelerate the pace.</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span></div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<h3 style="text-align: left;">
<span style="background-color: white;">Exception as hell</span></h3>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span style="background-color: white;">We are (hopefully) moving out of the expert / content focused world where we have lived for many years, out of this «push» environment where perfection was almost imperative before any given document would be distributed down the organization. And yet, when we move from concepts to everyday work, this is a topic on which conviction is not that easy.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">Comments such as the ones below may ring a bell to you:</span></div>
<ul>
<li class="li1"><span class="s1">we should work on that document again, it seems like people don’t understand it;</span></li>
<li class="li1"><span class="s1">that’s not our work, we need to have the product experts develop the training basics;</span></li>
<li class="li1"><span class="s1">we can’t move forward with that if marketing and communications do not take ownership of the communication material;</span></li>
<li class="li1"><span class="s1">we cannot make a video, that’s PR work;</span></li>
</ul>
<div class="p2">
<span style="background-color: white;">Or even worse :</span><span class="s1"></span></div>
<ul>
<li class="li1"><span class="s1">I can’t wait for my sales rep team to go to training, they are not up to the job (!!!)</span></li>
<li class="li1"><span class="s1">Sorry, the customer help desk is busy and I do not have permission on that page,</span></li>
<li class="li1"><span class="s1">...</span></li>
</ul>
<div class="p2">
<span style="background-color: white;">In all these examples the assumption is that, without access to the proper document or the proper expert, there is a risk of error or, even worse again, a risk of making the decision to deal with what is an exception without engaging in the proper process (product or functional). Let’s take an example: if, as a sales associate, I need a document allowing me to compare my services to those of my competition, I should be able to have that document quickly. In a regulated market, many companies will prefer to go through the proper process for compliance review to quickly adressing a sales opportunity. As a sales associate, I consider this crazy, all the more so in a social networked organization, in which I know and have access to the compliance officer !</span><span class="s1"></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1"><br /></span><br />
<span class="s1">Because it was not made to deal with it, exception is hell for the classic push focused organization. </span><br />
<span class="s1"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span></div>
<h3 style="text-align: left;">
<span style="background-color: white;">Exception as value</span></h3>
<div class="p2">
<span style="background-color: white;">The transition in corporate organization that we are going through (whether you call it from push to pull, from process-centered to people-centered, or moving to social business or Enterprise 2.0) entails a tectonic shift in how we treat exceptions (because exceptions will become the norm, and you can only face variety with variety), and therefore also in how we treat and manage expertise and how expertise is deployed throughout the organization and used to provide value for the client and society.</span><span class="s1"></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1"><br /></span><br />
<span class="s1">Exceptions can be thought of as those business cases that have not been foreseen by the corporation or those for which it has chosen not to provide a mechanical answer. In both cases, there is no process available to deal with such exception.</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1"><br /></span><br />
<span class="s1">In a world where the value is in relationships and not in economies of scale, an exception is an opportunity to build value, whether it is internally within the organization or even more importantly, with your clients. Think about the evolutions in call centers ...</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1"><br /></span><br />
<span class="s1">And therefore, the organization should be agile enough to respond to all exceptions, being then able to automatize this response (technologically or socially) if it so choses. Instead of needing to go back through the process or the hierarchy to start all the operations needed to treat the exceptions, our sales rep should be able to mobilize the whole corporate power to have his document ready, even if it means having the compliance officer move down to the field and spending two days of his time working in a document. Here we get to my main point, <b>documents</b>.</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1"><br /></span><br />
<span class="s1">In the classic, XXieth century corporation, if you consider documents as being a key component of a process (and namely, the vehicle by which expertise is transmitted), it is very understandable that «taking ownership» for producing or modifying a document was tightly controlled. And if you consider that value was in industrialization, then it is also understandable that our compliance officer would not go out of his way to solve an exception, but would instead work on industrializing ways of dealing with as many exceptions as possible (that would then enter the «standard» category).</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1"><br /></span><br />
<span class="s1">This is one of the problems we get when we try to move to the social business world. Value is in the interaction, but corporate officers roles, processes and documents have not been designed nor implemented for interaction but for industrialization.</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1"><br /></span><br />
<span class="s1">Have you ever been confronted to the communication syndrome when driving social business projects (or collaboration projects) ? </span></div>
<ul>
<li class="li1"><span class="s1">Let’s communicate about our community success, says the community manager;</span></li>
<li class="li1"><span class="s1">Sure, says the communication officer, just give me a couple of weeks ...</span></li>
</ul>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">In the social business environment, there is important work being done on roles (moving from function to role), there is work being done on processes (social enabling processes, even if I will have something to say about that one soon). But I had not yet seen a lot of conceptual work on documents that I could use operationally; I think the whole conversation about social objects provides an opportunity.</span><br />
<span class="s1"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span></div>
<h3 style="text-align: left;">
<span class="s1">From social objects to business objects.</span></h3>
<div class="p2">
<span style="background-color: white;">The opportunity is to <b>consider documents as social business objects, or business objects</b>, instead of vehicles for expertise deployment and transmission.</span><span class="s1"></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1"><br /></span><br />
<span class="s1">I was first introduced to social objects through one of <a href="https://twitter.com/jobsworth"><span class="s2">JP Rangaswami</span></a>’s <a href="http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2010/05/14/thinking-about-social-objects-and-limbo-dancing/"><span class="s2">post</span></a>, and then went to see what <a href="https://twitter.com/gapingvoid"><span class="s2">Hugh MacLeod</span></a> had to say about it and finally read how the concept emerged in one of <a href="https://twitter.com/jyri"><span class="s2">Jyri Engestrom</span></a>’s <a href="http://www.zengestrom.com/blog/2005/04/why-some-social-network-services-work-and-others-dont-or-the-case-for-object-centered-sociality.html"><span class="s2">posts</span></a>. </span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1"><br /></span><br />
<span class="s1">They explain the concept of social object in great detail, but to paraphrase Hugh MacLeod, a social object «is the reason why two people are talking to each other, as opposed to talking to someone else». He goes further:</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span></div>
<div class="p3">
<span class="s1"><i><br /></i></span><br />
<span class="s1"><i>«The thing to remember is, Human beings do not socialize in a completely random way. There’s a tangible reason for us being together, that ties us together. Again, that reason is called the Social Object. <b>Social Networks form around Social Objects, not the other way around»</b></i></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1"><br /></span><br />
<span class="s1">Well, is there any reason for us being together in the corporation ? Might that be that we actually love what we do and that serving clients is what we do for a living, and even more than that, what we do because it’s how we contribute to society ? And then, what are the projects we work in if they are not Social Business Objects ? </span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1"><br /></span><br />
<span class="s1">Let’s push this line of thought. A video that relates a sales best practice is not important because it’s perfect, it’s important because it has been the reason why several people in the organization have worked together. It’s not the content that is important, it’s the relation that has been created. Of course, do not get me wrong, expertise is important. But access to expertise is not the same today as it was yesterday: l</span><span style="background-color: white;">et me use the words of JP Rangaswami:</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span></div>
<div class="p4">
<span class="s1"><i><br /></i></span><br />
<span class="s1"><i>«There was a time when “content” was created by a tiny minority of people, largely because the tools for making that content were elitist in nature. Scarce, expensive, needing specialist skills. To make matters worse, the techniques for distributing and sharing that “content” were also elitist in nature. So people who “owned” that “content” felt like kings.</i></span></div>
<div class="p4">
<span class="s1"><i><br /></i></span></div>
<div class="p4">
<span class="s1"><i>Now things have changed. There’s been some limbo-dancing. The barriers to entry for creating, publishing and distributing “content” are getting lower by the minute. Which means that the content kings are all dressed up with nowhere to go. And so the only option they think they have is to try and recreate the barriers they used to enjoy, in paradigms where they are technically and economically difficult to recreate»</i></span></div>
<div class="p4">
<span class="s1"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">The same conflict may exist in the corporation between the «content kings» (experts, function owners, process owners) and the rest of the corporation, and more precisely the sales associates or other client-facing staff. They know for a fact that the problems they face could be resolved quicker if only the content kings behaved differently. But nobody has told the content kings that their positions and power and influence did not rest on their content anymore (at least, not only).</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1"><br /></span><br />
<span class="s1">Considering our valued pieces of knowledge (documents, spreadsheets, presentations, videos, photos, and even, yes, intellectual property) not only as content but primarily as business objects, that allow the relationships between the different functions and projects and people of your organization to be enhanced, is a needed move.</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1"><br /></span><br />
<span class="s1">For any department, by the way, having a Business Objects strategy will prove very valuable, as they will work on their documents or videos not to provide the perfect document (even though they ultimately will) but to engage all the persons that can add value to that document. Or value to that business conversation. Value, in the end, to that business issue, that, if it is of any value to clients, will bring about an ever expanding number of exceptions. Only, they will not be considered as exceptions but opportunities for business conversations and innovation.</span><br />
<span class="s1"><br /></span><br />
<span class="s1">I think it is useful to consider the corporation as an ever evolving network of contextual networks, forming around the business objects that the clients want to talk about.</span></div>
</div>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16372306084445941143noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9136937895094255325.post-82100940774996305052012-07-10T17:49:00.000+01:002012-08-17T09:07:15.480+01:00Future of organizational development: framing for a learning experience<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<br />
<div class="p1">
<span style="background-color: white;">If HR is to assume a leading role in the next generation, social, organization, it should lead the way in framing the working & learning environment that will allow the emergence of meaningful learning and working patterns within this organization.</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1"><br /></span>
<span class="s1">This next generation, social, enterprise builds upon external trends, as it is now commonly admitted that the social web is opening new horizons for business organizations, from user experience (consumerization of IT) to new learning models (social learning). By understanding the inner workings of this social web and successfully adapting them to the specific goals and constraints of business organizations, HR has yet another opportunity to reinvent itself and the way it impacts organization and talent development.</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span></div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<h3 style="text-align: left;">
<span style="background-color: white;">Translating user experience within the business organization</span></h3>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span style="background-color: white;">A very useful way to understand the inner workings of the social web, is to take the «user perspective». This, in turn, helps understand possibilities for a new «employee perspective», that is in line with the potential offered by social technologies.</span><span class="s1"></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1"><br /></span>
<span class="s1">This <a href="http://www.dachisgroup.com/2012/07/own_the_experience/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+dachisgroup+%28Collaboratory+-+Dachis+Group%29"><span class="s2">post</span></a> by Peter Kim was very helpful in this respect, as it helped me picture the evolution from the first years of the internet and WWW to the social web and the impact of this evolution on user perspective. Beyond consuming information online (whether it was reading news or finding better pricing deals), like in the good old days of Web1.0, users are now having a complex and engaging web experience, in which they read, view, listen, share, contribute, speak, curate, in which they both more precisely relate to the real world (internet as a medium) and live in the virtual world, contributing to producing and then experiencing virtual goods, like music, videos, games, (the virtual world as a universe).</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1"><br /></span>
<span class="s1">In a similar fashion, in the organization, we are moving from a world where internet technology was just a medium to a world where social technology helps build a working and learning environment. We are moving from a world where technological tools allowed to communicate with each other (mail) and to produce and consume information (MS Office, systems of records) to a world where technological tools are growing, imbricating with each other to form a new working and learning environment (social technologies, social enabled <a href="http://www.dachisgroup.com/2011/06/moving-beyond-systems-of-record-to-systems-of-engagement/" target="_blank">systems of records</a>, apps ecosystems, persistent user experience from desktop to mobile, ...).</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1"><br /></span>
<span class="s1">In the web 1.0 days, the user perspective was enhanced access to information and facilitated transaction. Similarly, in the old eHR days, the employee perspective, as internet technology is concerned, was enhanced execution: as an employee, I would be able to better perform my HR-related activities</span></div>
<div class="p1">
</div>
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li><span style="background-color: white;">Better knowledge of my team member skills and experience, and facilitated access to assessment tools;</span></li>
<li><span style="background-color: white;">Improved learning experience through e-learning, improved training administration and expanded knowledge base;</span></li>
<li><span style="background-color: white;">Almost real-time access to open positions and improved mobility potential;</span></li>
<li><span style="background-color: white;">Better access to internal communications through the company intranet;</span></li>
<li><span style="background-color: white;">...</span></li>
</ul>
<br />
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">Today, the user perspective is an engaging, persistent, rich, social, mobile, collaborative, ... experience. For HR, there is a challenge in translating this user experience into an <b>«employee experience»</b>, that is not about «better performing HR tasks». It’s, at the very least, about learning, collaborating, cooperating and curating.</span><br />
<span class="s1"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span></div>
<h3 style="text-align: left;">
<span class="s1">From user experience platforms to learning & working environements (or learning organizations)</span></h3>
<div class="p2">
<span style="background-color: white;">To understand what this change of perspective entails for HR as a function, the post of Peter Kim is once again helpful, as it helps understand what the social web key players are up to.</span><span class="s1"></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1"><br /></span>
<span class="s1">When we move from Web 1 to Web 2, Peter basically states, key players are not focused on <i>"accelerating sales processes of brick and mortar stores"; ... ;"the key consideration this time around isn't user eyeballs - it's ownership of the user experience"</i>. </span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1"><br /></span>
<span class="s1">To own the client experience, key social web players are focused on creating user experience platforms leveraging and integrating <i>"browsers, operating systems, peer-to-peer messaging, mobile devices, inquiry data and personally identifiable information"</i>. It is likely that this framework will mature, but even in this first attempt, it provides a useful analogy to see how HR needs to change to be able to provide an internal platform that helps the company maintain their associates (employees, partners, ...) intellectually, emotionnally and physically connected to the corporation.</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1"><br /></span>
<span class="s1">And that is because, in the corporation, ownership of the user experience probably translates into <b>benefiting from the continued intellectual, emotional and physical focus of an employee on supporting the relationships that ultimately make the value of the business to its clients</b>.</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1"><br /></span>
<span class="s1">In my experience, HR use of technology has been focused on improving intermediation between supply and demand for talent and for knowledge. It was a focus on the productivity of existing HR activities. Now, what would it mean for HR to contribute to building an employee experience platform ? And, can it actually accomplish that ?</span><br />
<span class="s1"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span></div>
<h3 style="text-align: left;">
<span class="s1">Becoming the architect of the learning and working environment : the case for HR leadership in the organization</span></h3>
<div class="p2">
<span style="background-color: white;">With social business or E2.0 projects, organizations are designing, building and getting ready to continuously adapt the learning and working environment that will allow their employees to deliver a meaningful experience to their clients. These environments are (or should be) <b>centered on people, organized around social objects and focused on delivering meaningful relationships</b>.</span><span class="s1"></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1"><br /></span>
<span class="s1">The sheer complexity of these projects can be daunting. And the risk is that the central objective be lost. The central objective, of course, is providing a platform in which the «employee experience» emerges and continuously evolves in the best interest of the company’s clients. To avoid this risk, there is a need to have an employee experience champion. </span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1"><br /></span>
<span class="s1">HR should be best suited to become this champion, but only if it evolves in four dimensions: </span></div>
<div class="p1">
</div>
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li><span style="background-color: white;">what it learns;</span><span style="background-color: white;"> </span></li>
<li><span style="background-color: white;">how it transforms its existing responsibilities;</span><span style="background-color: white;"> </span></li>
<li><span style="background-color: white;">how it collaborates with other functions.</span></li>
</ul>
<br />
<div class="p2">
<span style="background-color: white;">HR needs to become the social technology champion. That is the evolution that is needed in what HR learns, as a corporate function. Up to this day, HR expertise has mainly been in organizational and talent development, personnal development, HR administration and labor relations. Technology was considered as another tool, and as a tool it was used, but not really understood. This evolution is key, as it is unlikely that HR can become the employee experience champion without developing a strong intimacy with the technology, both by living within it and by understanding its potential, from a strategic and transformational point of view.</span><span class="s1"></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1"><br /></span>
<span class="s1">The second evolution I see for HR concerns its existing responsibilities. It is a tough transformation, and will take a significant amount of time. Here are some questions that provide a starting point :</span></div>
<div class="p1">
</div>
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li><span style="background-color: white;">Should HR still be the owner of the people development processes ? Should it keep its intermediation position (by managing processes and owning competency frameworks) ? Or should it concentrate on strategic leadership positions and drive an R&D approach for development of all other populations (including future leaders) ?</span></li>
<li><span style="background-color: white;">Should HR still manage training budgets and operations ? Or should it concentrate on facilitating interaction between talents and on the job learning ?</span><span style="background-color: white;"> </span></li>
<li><span style="background-color: white;">Should HR only work on the professional profile aspect or the corporate social network ? Or should it drive an ambitious strategy, focusing on context, <a href="http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2010/10/10/thinking-about-social-objects/" target="_blank">social objects</a> and people ?</span></li>
<li><span style="background-color: white;">What do the changes at hand mean for job-definition and job grading ? Should HR be governed by old, industrial principles, or could drive a differentiated strategy, depending on the nature of the work at hand (automated, social, creative) ?</span></li>
</ul>
<br />
<div class="p2">
<span style="background-color: white;">Finally, HR needs to work hand in hand with IT and communication (at the very least). How it collaborates with these two functions is key, for they also can pretend to be employee experience champion. I will explore that in a future post.</span><span class="s1"></span></div>
</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16372306084445941143noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9136937895094255325.post-3402311038902592172012-06-29T10:02:00.000+01:002012-06-29T10:05:22.363+01:00Unleadership<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
If we are serious and ambitious in our drive to transform our organizations into next generation social enterprises (or social businesses), we need to unlearn most of what we think we knew about leadership, and focus our R&D efforts on next generation leadership.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a>Working on the trenches of the social business transformation, I have had the opportunity to see how different people impacted these programs, either from a positive or a negative point of view. My focus being on talent management and leadership, I wanted to take the time to reflect on the ones that provided energy, thought leadership, problem-solving skills, engagement, passion, time, ... and that strongly contributed to accelerating the transformation. I wanted to take the time to reflect on<b> the ones that contributed unexpectedly and the ones that unexpectedly did not contribute</b> to the deep transformation.<br />
<br />
<h3 style="text-align: left;">
The issue with emerging leadership</h3>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="background-color: white;">A </span><a href="http://www.jarche.com/2012/05/leadership-is-an-emergent-property-of-a-balanced-network/" style="background-color: white;" target="_blank">post</a><span style="background-color: white;"> by Harold Jarche, defining leadership as "an emergent property of a balanced network", finally got me thinking on this, as talent emergence is what I find most rewarding in the projects I lead with my clients.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="background-color: white;">There were, to my mind, two key terms in this sentence: "emergent" and "balanced" (or "in balance", following Harold). My experience actually confirms that, for a social business transformation to work, you need to be able to foster "leadership emergence", that is, the emergence of people that are not leaders such as defined by the conventional corporate wisdom (or by the HR practices and frameworks), but that will </span><span style="background-color: white;">nonetheless</span><span style="background-color: white;"> take responsibility for the key conversations, relationship building, activities and tasks that will ultimately drive the transformation. But I would say that is not yet a real emergence, as these people have to be identified and developed by project owners.</span></div>
<br />
The term balanced is less clear to me. In all the projects I have been involved in, the network is not balanced. More often than not, the social network is not even there, it is also emergent. One could argue that networks progress accross different "balance degrees" (I assume this is what Harold argues with the term "in balance"), but at the very beginning of a social business project, the corporate social network is not big enough and, more importantly, not complex enough to have any emergent properties. That is why fostering new talents is a key responsibility for the project owners. I will explore in a future post how to foster these talents in an environment in which it is both possible to recognize them without developing them along existing talent management practices.<br />
<br />
And then, what are, in the first stages of a corporate social network implementation, the people that emerge, that take center stage ? In my opinion, what emerges is much more social leadership than business leadership, and that can be a threat to your project. Let me be clear : social leadership is key in any organization, and it is also key for the success of your social business project (as are, in this context, technological leadership and thought leadership). But what we are looking forward is transforming the business, pushing it to the next level, and to do that, you need next level business leadership.<br />
<br />
<br />
<h3>
A vision for the social network : from technological infrastructure to business infrastructure</h3>
<br />
To really have a feeling of what, in my opinion, we should be looking for when we speak about leadership within a social enterprise context, it is important to clearly define what we drive to build when we engage in corporate social network projects.<br />
<br />
And we all know today that, far from being only a technological platform that allows employees to be connected and to build relationships (like they would, for instance, on Facebook or Linkedin), <b>the corporate social network must become the new business infrastructure of the corporation. </b> This entails changing the deep structure of the organization, changing, if you wish, its <a href="http://www.talent-club.net/talent-club/un-os-social-pour-lentreprise-du-social-graph-au-business-graph/" target="_blank">OS</a>.<br />
<br />
This business infrastructure allows both collaboration and cooperation of all the business associates (partners, employees, associates, clients, ...), conveniently linked through an ever-evolving ecosystem of social technologies (that have embeded the existing <a href="http://www.dachisgroup.com/2011/06/moving-beyond-systems-of-record-to-systems-of-engagement/" target="_blank">systems of records</a>). This infrastructure is a <a href="http://luisalberolasblog.blogspot.fr/2012/03/towards-app-powered-culture.html" target="_blank">matrix for culture evolution</a>, and is built by all its members, <a href="http://luisalberolasblog.blogspot.fr/2009/12/beyond-enterprise-20-age-of-builders.html" target="_blank">considered as builders</a>.<br />
<br />
This vision of a corporate social network is not yet a reality for most corporations I know, as they adapt to the <a href="http://www.johnseelybrown.com/bigshiftwhyitmatters.pdf" target="_blank">Big Shift</a>. And so the question remains, how do you identify and foster a kind of leadership that is not yet (or not entirely) the official leadership ? And then, how do you recognize it, reward it, how do you develop these <b>unleaders</b>, being as they are, at least in the beginning, revolutionaries, contrarian thinkers or unassuming managers ?<br />
<br />
<h3 style="text-align: left;">
The need for unleaders.</h3>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgshRisiD0vTn9TLspBc1ryE-JL9hspMs6iV6-C1OmwEuCif141RRD7mYIHuMONVoZLwvbbvgqtgHMSy6uJ-O1FHeZxTZw8Nb8mQcFLkuGQbu72TmuXP2dpb38XQOTukReLue9cXtgua-4/s1600/Fotolia_2477835_XS.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="130" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgshRisiD0vTn9TLspBc1ryE-JL9hspMs6iV6-C1OmwEuCif141RRD7mYIHuMONVoZLwvbbvgqtgHMSy6uJ-O1FHeZxTZw8Nb8mQcFLkuGQbu72TmuXP2dpb38XQOTukReLue9cXtgua-4/s200/Fotolia_2477835_XS.jpg" width="200" /></a></div>
Let me explain the use of the term <b>unleaders.</b> It comes from unconferences. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconference" target="_blank">Unconferences</a> or participant-driven meetings, have emerged as an answer to the <b>need</b> to invent new ways for how knowledge is communicated, exchanged, challenged, deepened in mass meetings. And I think there is a <b>need</b> to challenge the ways in which leaders (unleaders) are identified, singled out, nurtured, developed, recognized and in the end, rewarded. This is really important during the transformation phase of a social enterprise transformation as, when the balanced network is a reality, leadership will indeed be an emerging property.<br />
<br />
If your remember, in conferences, the most valuable knowledge used to be exchanged in the lobbies and unconferences emerged precisely to have the lobby conversations take center stage. In my experience of corporate social networks, it is often the unrecognized community member, curator, middle manager or front line employee that goes the extra-mile and therefore helps establish the relationship, pushes for real trust building, leverages external talent or identifies the innovation potential, that will in the end win the day for the project owners.<br />
<br />
With unleaders, I am trying to have the work of these pionneers recognized, even while they do not belong in the existing leadership or management categories. It is a key success factor. And by recognition, I certainly do not mean a "social badge" or a community dinner. I am talking about compensation and business responsibilities.<br />
<br />
In the first phases of a social business or enteprise 2.0 (or any management innovation project), the responsibility for identifying, coaching and promoting these unleaders ultimately rests with the project sponsors and owners. I would go as far as saying that a social business transformation boils down to experimenting new types of unleadership, and progressively letting go of the responsibility of choosing next generation unleaders, a responsibility that should eventually rest with the social network. Then we would have leadership as an emergent property.<br />
<br />
But only if we have taken the time to design the adapted compensation and recognition systems (and not adapting the existing structures).<br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: white;">As a conclusion, I do not think Chief People Officers should focus on nurturing leaders. Leaders will emerge whenever an organization can help build its people</span><span style="background-color: white;"> </span><a href="http://edgeperspectives.typepad.com/edge_perspectives/2012/05/exploring-passion-what-kind-of-passion-do-you-have.html" target="_blank">passion</a><span style="background-color: white;"> </span><span style="background-color: white;">to work, collaborate, cooperate on a company's mission. Instead, in an ever faster-paced economic environment, the Talent Management teams should focus on identifying the leader types that will push their organizations to the next level.</span><span style="background-color: white;"> </span><br />
<b><br /></b><br />
<b>The past and future of any leader should be unleadership.</b><br />
<br />
In the next few days, I will be writing about my experience experimenting unleadership and about interesting emerging leadership (or unleadership) types.</div>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16372306084445941143noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9136937895094255325.post-31525110596818281222012-05-16T16:41:00.000+01:002012-05-16T16:42:06.639+01:00Managers beware : Is there a Corporate Jasmine Revolution lurking out there?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<b>Something is at work deep down our corporations, that pushes employees to resist and opose the ideas of those managers that wouldn't change or accept the new social reality.</b><br />
<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a>I have just started witnessing something strange: employees refusing to reorganize, to follow the instructions that managers would give them when they work on aligning their organization to the new scheme. Not the majority, far from that, but an interesting trend in the making, to my mind.<br />
<br />
At most corporations, executives periodically spend long hours (sometimes with consultants) trying to design new schemes to solve the problems their organizations face. The classic question is whether to build functional or operational silos, and then functional or operational transversalities. And more often than not, using the same command and control mindset in both. Some people argue that the only reason why corporations get reorganized so often is to renew the relationships that people develop within those silos. By changing silos, employees are exposed to other co-workers and they can still leverage the relationships that were built before. It's how its always been done.<br />
<br />
Why would then an employee refuse to fill in the new position that has just been created for her/him ? Why would he refuse to understand the "wisdom" of the new design, and how synergies will ultimately be good for the clients, the company and for him/herself ?<br />
<br />
I wrote in my French blog that the corporate wars were changing, that we were <a href="http://www.talent-club.net/talent-club/la-guerre-du-talent-aura-t-elle-lieu/" target="_blank">moving from a war of positions to world of guerrillas</a>. I thought that people in the social business environment would choose guerrilla to push their ideas further and impose social business in their existing organizations. Well, it seems that it will be line employees engaging in guerrillas.<br />
<br />
Social business initiatives are creating a <b>parallel reality</b> to the one that is based mainly in the organizational chart, old management practices and existing corporate mindset. In this reality, positions are confronted with short-term or part-time roles; management is confronted with autonomous employees, whose worldview is better adapted to new behaviours; static and closed silos are confronted with moving people-centered networks; close corporate cultures are confronted with outside trends breaking in trough the walls.<br />
<br />
This new corporate reality gives employees options that were yesterday closed, because corporate inefficiencies are so visible. The inefficiencies of ailing organizations or designs are laid bare. The suboptimal decision making processes get publicized. Objectives that seemed impossible to reach without middle management support are now two steps away through a corporate social network. And through these networks, <b>many</b> employees are maturing quickly in their understanding of the organization.<br />
<br />
Social business is giving employees the means of doing things they did not dream off some years ago. Executive management is not opposing these employees, that actually solve problems or innovate, without the support of their middle management (sometimes against it).<br />
<br />
Middle management would do well to adapt. Such examples as I am seeing might soon be too many to be ignored, and management positions would not hold against social guerrillas.</div>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16372306084445941143noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9136937895094255325.post-45396445357875076222012-03-29T17:40:00.002+01:002012-03-29T22:38:42.044+01:00Towards an app-powered culture<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Beyond Enterprise 2.0 and Social Business, there's the dream of something resembling corporate democracy - apps could help get you there. If, that is, you have the right kind of leadership.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<h3 style="text-align: left;">
</h3>
<h3 style="text-align: left;">
</h3>
<h3 style="text-align: left;">
When beta is not enough</h3>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br />
There are some amongst the pioneers in Social Business these days <a href="http://www.elsua.net/2012/03/21/why-social-business-keeps-failing-to-deliver/" target="_blank">shouting</a> that the whole matter is trickier than first expected and that personal responsibility is primarely involved if this transformation is ever going to happen. They are shouting, probably, that it would be too easy to just puting our values and beliefs in one technology or another. Shouting that deep change, and so I believe, happens one person at a time.</div>
<br />
In the social business field, we ponder whether one or the other technology will prove more adapted to such or such business or functional goal. It seems important to investigate what the maturity level of the organization is, and how it will adapt to and adopt these technologies. It seems important to engage first movers, to expand the contributor base, to socially impact existing processes. Often, we pursue these activities in an experimental mode.<br />
<br />
I am a believer in agile thinking and agile project management, in beta modes, prototyping or design thinking. And I have been leading these social business experimental projects for five years, always thinking that leadership would catch up in due time. But I found some resonance in <a href="http://www.elsua.net/about/" target="_blank">Luis</a>' post: this is not about pioneers or first movers anymore. This is about the future deep structure and culture of our corporations, and it's important for leaders to be able to make a statement about what they envision.<br />
<br />
Because <b>how these technologies are understood at leadership level and then used socially and politically (more than in a business sense) is what is critical for deep transformation</b>. And c-suite people, in my experience, see Social Technologies either as a new opportunity (more or less important) to improve management of the organization and increase its performance along the same axes as usual; or they see them as the technologies that make the infrastructure of what is already a different society, made of <a href="http://www.thesupporteconomy.com/" target="_blank">more autonomous individuals with new needs and dreams</a>, a society with which the organisation needs to establish totally new relationships and in which it needs to reinvent its mission and its role.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<br />
<b>Reinvention cannot be incremental. It cannot rely solely on adopting another set of new technologies. It cannot be measured by ROI. It must be led by vision and co-developed by the whole social body of the organization.</b><br />
<br />
<h3 style="text-align: left;">
Choosing your future</h3>
<br />
Vision, I think, cannot be articulated by any leader without a strong intimacy with technology and a precise understanding of how this technology and the enhanced relationships and life experiences it supports are building new dimensions into our reality.<br />
<br />
By that, I do not mean that leaders need to become software developers (even though development skills could help), but that they need to be able to make a decision about technology that transcends "choosing a tool for business execution". Let's take an example: lately, there has been this conversation going on about whether apps or HTML5 hold a key to our better common future (<a href="http://www.wired.com/magazine/2010/08/ff_webrip/all/1" target="_blank">here</a> and <a href="http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2012/Future-of-Apps-and-Web.aspx" target="_blank">here</a>). The conversation, as I understand it, is not about technology, but about the underlying values of an open web vs a more controlled proprietary apps ecosystem. <br />
<br />
I contend that technology limitations actually prevent some c-suite guys from understanding the social revolution that we are going through, and therefore how their corporation could play a role in this revolution. Without that understanding, there is no possibility to start choosing your future, that is, to start building it.<br />
<br />
What's more, without that understanding, there is probably fear of letting collective intelligence emerge in any way that is not hierarchically governed, there is fear of seing any kind of real collective decision making emerge. Revolution cannot be controlled through classic management tools, and it is therefore avoided.<br />
<br />
And yet, I think there is a methodology for this business revolution, that demands a renewed kind of leadership and engages the whole social body.<br />
<br />
<h3 style="text-align: left;">
</h3>
<h3 style="text-align: left;">
</h3>
<h3 style="text-align: left;">
There's an app for that</h3>
<br />
I first wrote about the need to move beyond Enterprise 2.0 in 2009, and pondered how we could move from an age of users to an age of contributors to an <a href="http://luisalberolasblog.blogspot.fr/2009/12/beyond-enterprise-20-age-of-builders.html" target="_blank">age of builders</a>. I really think that we have now firmly left the age of users, and that firms that remain there have not understood that their <a href="http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2012/03/25/why-its-over/" target="_blank">time is over</a>.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgRS7VOKTCX1F-iQtVgBL4qPsZE_0FEl_R9JqMnqLOFznh3k0IxmqGsJvb-e75KEdP89BQi9hGuDrafVgSogACG3tdeGMyXln8eYE2M6xTEZ5NgtaXwuuJwWP9b_y0sCaSPaE5b11z4NLY/s1600/Fotolia_39775288_XS.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="155" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgRS7VOKTCX1F-iQtVgBL4qPsZE_0FEl_R9JqMnqLOFznh3k0IxmqGsJvb-e75KEdP89BQi9hGuDrafVgSogACG3tdeGMyXln8eYE2M6xTEZ5NgtaXwuuJwWP9b_y0sCaSPaE5b11z4NLY/s200/Fotolia_39775288_XS.jpg" width="200" /></a></div>
For leaders that grasp where technology innovation allows us to go, there is now a way to allow transformation of everyone in her/his corporation into a contributor, or a builder, or both. <b>It's called an app ecosystem.</b><br />
<br />
What that is seems rather simple to understand : a huge number of apps, consistently developed and intelligently related, that are developed and used on a need basis, and where that need is defined at the individual level. These apps are made to solve business problems, to enhance internal or external relationships, mainly, and as such they are thought of as perishable. What should not perish, though, is the ecosystem.<br />
<br />
If understanding the app ecosystem idea is straightforward, getting there is much more complicated. Not from a development point of view, as a matter of fact, there are real life examples, but from a management point of view. Because getting to this app ecosystem entails<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>Building a new IT infrastructure;</li>
<li>Reinventing support functions.</li>
</ul>
How technology is evolving or should evolve is being much discussed by the experts, for instance <a href="http://www.zdnet.com/blog/hinchcliffe/the-big-five-it-trends-of-the-next-half-decade-mobile-social-cloud-consumerization-and-big-data/1811" target="_blank">here</a>. I am more interested in how the support functions must be reinvented.<br />
<br />
<h3 style="text-align: left;">
An app is not enough : from support to frame</h3>
<br />
When envisioning an organization whose culture has grown through and with an app ecosystem, there are implicit assumptions about the employees (or should I say citizens ?) of that organization:<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>They are able to identify and choose the applications they need, they are able to use them, and they use them primarily in a social way;</li>
<li>Many of them not only use the apps, but build them. They build them following strict rules but allowing for creativity that takes into account (or precedes) other members needs and wants;</li>
<li>Succes is measured by usage, as quality is assumed as a given;</li>
<li>Value is shared between those who build, those who use and those who provide the platform;</li>
<li>Members are free to come and go, and if they stay and contribute it's because of the social and usage value that they find in the ecosystem. </li>
</ul>
Such an organization, gifted with such people (employees, members, citizens, clients, ...), is ready to contribute to building some better future (<b>it is naturally focused on innovation, not efficiency</b>). Such an organization does not grow entirely by accident. I think politics are important in human history, and also that a very liberal, Darwinian view of the world, is reaching its limits today. So, with that in mind, the question is, how do you get your employees to move from their existing business culture to a culture defined by all or some of the assumptions above ?<br />
<br />
So here it goes: you need to allow for experimentation, you have to expect "1000 flowers blossoming", but you need to care for your garden. And I think the organizational garden, today, can be gardened through three main functions: HR, Communications and IT. Not in their classic form, though, and here is where new leadership can help: by changing the mindset of these three classic, controlling functions, for instance along the following lines:<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li><b>Framing</b> to allow organic grow more than<b> structuring</b> an organization for execution;</li>
<li><b>Expecting and challenging</b> initiatives instead of <b>directing</b> execution,</li>
<li><b>Growing</b> people first and before (if ever) <b>stretching</b> them.</li>
</ul>
I think these three functions should go by the name of <b>framing functions instead of support functions</b>. And I think framing is a needed leadership skill today. Framing, that is, whenever the leaders feel able to design the frame with strong technology evolution awareness.<br />
<br />
Do you think that would be useful to move from Social Business projects to social enterprises ?</div>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16372306084445941143noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9136937895094255325.post-80661268927448070162012-01-18T10:42:00.002+00:002012-05-16T16:43:16.469+01:00Social business in 2012 : the threats from within<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<br />
I have been going through some of the predictions for the 2012 Social Business Year (for instance, <a href="http://www.dachisgroup.com/2011/12/social-business-predictions-for-2012/" target="_blank">here</a>, <a href="http://www.charleneli.com/2012/01/predictions2012-organization/" target="_blank">here</a>). It is clear from these and other predictions that the potential of Social Business to transform our corporations has been widely covered, so I thought I would concentrate on the two or three threats that I see lurking over social business delivering all its promises<br />
<br />
<b></b><br />
<a name='more'></a><b>What is social Business ?</b><br />
<br />
I am sure that there are countless definitions of social businesses, and it is important, in this post, to state what I understand by that : continuous (and with increased speed) adoption by corporations of new social trends (individualized consumption describes it well, in The Support Economy), through new social technologies and, slowly, emergence of a new social role for the corporation, this impacting and transforming its nature as a joint stock, limited liability, profit focused institution.<br />
<br />
<b>The threats from within, 1: too much power</b><br />
<br />
I have seen the guys leading E2.0 initiatives become very popular within their own company and even more outside it. This is a dangerous position, because corporations are still political beings, and there will be adversaries arising from other functions or corporate initiatives and working to have the E2.0 guys brought back to their initial influence level.<br />
<br />
Remember, if you are to succeed, and before the CEO becomes the explicit sponsor of your drive to transform into a social business, you need some political clout and much seniority in the team. Because initial success you will have, and followers you will breed ! Established structures (middle management, other leaders, some functions) will see you as their particular enemy and will try to bring you down.<br />
<br />
My point here is not "they are wrong, you are right so go on with it". My point is, social business and E2.0 is all very well, but you'd better prove some business benefits quickly. And not, let's be clear, by bringing in some intelligent slideware from consultants (I am a consultant, disclaimer), but by achieving results trough some of the key assets that social business is supposed to build in a corporation, like renewed engagement, improved business intelligence, market influence, and, someday, increased consumer benefit.<br />
<br />
It might happen that you'll have to work strongly to defend your own ideas of what "customer benefit" is though ...<br />
<br />
<b>The threats from within, 2: the new normal</b><br />
<br />
What happens if you avoid the political trap ? There is this very normal trend of some teams that manage social business or enterprise 2.0. within their company, when they start to reach success : we are the ones who know about this stuff, so you should now adopt the new ways ! Enterprise 2.0 is the new normal !<br />
<br />
That is human nature ! For folks that have been battling to see their beliefs adopted by their companies, basking in their own success and popularity, when they reach it, should be seen as normal.<br />
<br />
Well, it isn't. Social Business is about adopting permanent change as the new normal (see how Fast Company describes the <a href="http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/162/generation-flux-future-of-business" target="_blank">Generation Flux</a>). It is why, after the principles and practices of Social Business for a particular company are strong enough (<u>meaning that they are effectively adopted</u>), I would suggest having the team prepare to move on to operations and let another team reinterpret what the former one did, and bring in its new ideas, views on technology and on strategy.<br />
<br />
The key question is, how is the team in place going to bring in the next ones ? Well, it might just have to reinvent some HR practices, like L&D or talent management, and also go into tough personal mindset evolution. Now, that would be something</div>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16372306084445941143noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9136937895094255325.post-44174068228821535982011-12-17T21:42:00.000+00:002012-06-15T15:09:46.315+01:00Beyond Social: Talent Management as Strategy<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhbu_HilE3KEt4aTaZFAVAYZt7iW4YoKS4JQIQKnZkna89kC1eS90SHpvbjwm66K4g55xMUhUDaqMgXbPT0yfcNuBctNlQbdPXhcc-VrspImBvkh04oXXX9izrsKynvj-BpUg_OGfyH1Eg/s1600/Fotolia_33752950_XS.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; display: inline !important; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em; text-align: center;"><br /></a><br />
If strategy is designed and executed at the fringes of the organization, talent management is strategy.<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhbu_HilE3KEt4aTaZFAVAYZt7iW4YoKS4JQIQKnZkna89kC1eS90SHpvbjwm66K4g55xMUhUDaqMgXbPT0yfcNuBctNlQbdPXhcc-VrspImBvkh04oXXX9izrsKynvj-BpUg_OGfyH1Eg/s1600/Fotolia_33752950_XS.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; display: inline !important; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em; text-align: center;"><img border="0" height="186" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhbu_HilE3KEt4aTaZFAVAYZt7iW4YoKS4JQIQKnZkna89kC1eS90SHpvbjwm66K4g55xMUhUDaqMgXbPT0yfcNuBctNlQbdPXhcc-VrspImBvkh04oXXX9izrsKynvj-BpUg_OGfyH1Eg/s200/Fotolia_33752950_XS.jpg" width="200" /></a></div>
My friends at <a href="http://www.successfactors.com/" target="_blank">SuccessFactors</a> just became part of SAP ... So, after Oracle, it's SAP. And, as Michael Fauscette <a href="http://www.mfauscette.com/software_technology_partn/2011/12/sap-successfactors-and-the-cloud.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+MichaelFauscette+%28Michael+Fauscette%29" target="_blank">says</a>, it might soon be Microsoft: Leading enterprise software vendors seem to have started consolidating the cloud specialists. This, after all, is just capitalism ... I am more worried that, in so doing, it is also <b>the process specialists consolidating the social specialists</b>. If so, it is both a huge threat to innovation and transformation but also an opportunity for the best managed and led companies: <b>for companies that understand that the future organization will succeed or fail at the individual level.</b><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;">The moment of choice</span><br />
<br />
Beyond established vendors consolidating cloud specialists, what I see in the SAP move is an incumbent buying a small player that was just beginning to understand how to complement process with social. The incumbent, by the way, has made its business by helping improve its clients' control over their processes (I did not say improve process performance nor overall performance, though).<br />
<br />
The trends seem rather strong. It's the "social enabling" of processes or the "context-aware computing" that Salesforce.com, Qontext or <a href="http://www.forrester.com/ER/Glossary/Item/1,2425,678,00.html?Alpha=C" target="_blank">Forrester</a> are talking about. It's the vision that, if we are to find any ROI in E2.0, social business or social technology, why not start where the ROI is best calculated ? If I say "social enabling" processes, the social business sale became easier, all of a sudden...<br />
<br />
Is it the vision, if I push the logic to the end, that social technologies should integrate the corporation framework as it stands today ? Should being collaborative mean being collaborative within the existing organization, not touching at its deep structure ? Not touching accounting, finance, key processes, organization design nor the command and control mindset ?<br />
<br />
Well, this is definitely an option, but it's not the most engaging one. I had been thinking, all these years, that social technologies had the potential to dramatically improve the corporate organization by bringing the individual person at the center of it ... It's what I understood by the much heralded "people-centered" corporation vision ... If "people-centered corporation" boils down to putting my social profile in my process work ...<br />
<br />
And yet, the vision above is not the only option. There is another option, another path, which is a bit more frightening for it is less trodden ... In this alternative option, social technologies are adopted, but not to reinforce the existing organization, they are adopted as a means for the corporation to engage its clients, partners and other stakeholders in creative conversations, distributed design projects and social value oriented production ventures. In their book <a href="http://www.thesupporteconomy.com/" target="_blank">"The Support Economy"</a>, Soshana Zuboff and James Maxmin talk about moving the focus of collaboration from the organization space to the individual space.<br />
<br />
This is a time of choice, because depending on how they are adopted, social technologies will reinforce the current structure of the organization, or they will allow a reinvention of this structure, which I think is needed to answer the unmet social and individual needs around us.<br />
<br />
As many authors and bloggers have been writing about lately, there seem to be a need for corporations to change their focus from stuff to better (borrowing an idea from <a href="http://blogs.hbr.org/haque/" target="_blank">Umar Haque</a>) or from things to individuation (as Zuboff and Maxmin argue). There is definitely a demand for "better", for "value", for "meaning", which for instance appears in the #ows movements, the Arab Spring or the Moscow riots ... It also appears in green consumption, anti-consumption or other alternative, sustainable consumption movements. These, by the way, can take some lessons from historical precedents, like the <a href="http://www.masshist.org/revolution/non_importation.php" target="_blank">anti-consumption movement</a> that brought about the American Revolution.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;">Time of talent</span><br />
<br />
How do you get from building things intended for mass consumption to contributing to the improvement of the individual life of your clients ? And how do social technologies come into play ?<br />
<br />
My experience today is that many individual employees are ready to drive the change that is needed here. Still, employees have little power in corporations, they belong within their BUs and processes and just contribute to the organization. Goals and strategies are built at executive level and driven by the market pressure. And existing processes are made to deliver on those goals and strategies. It is why I think, if "social enabling" of processes just means bringing social into processes without fundamentally challenging the business goal and vision, no real innovation will come of it. Individual employees will have no autonomy to develop new approaches to their client demand even though they might have been able to do it in another context.<br />
<br />
Context. I think that is the promise of social technologies. If, instead of bringing social into processes, social technologies are adopted in such a way that every individual has access to all human and organizational assets of the corporation, he is in a position to make contextualized decisions that answer to the needs of his clients. Let's take an example : if I am an associate at a P&C insurer, managing a claim, I will certainly have the opportunity to engage in a conversation about insurance with this client, because this is precisely the context where he is the most open to listening about insurance covers and about risks. Such a conversation is relevant to my client and will drive its engagement. It all boils down to how I, as a claim associate, manage this contextual situation.<br />
<br />
In this conversation, I might learn that my client is indeed an interesting client, that he belongs in a small community that has a very precise insurance need. And I might want to cover that insurance need by engaging my own product teams in the conversation.<br />
<br />
As a claims professional, what do I need to be able to do this ? At least three things : I need the systems to give me all relevant information about the client; I need to have been developed so as to be able to lead an adapted conversation and make educated decisions; and then, I need to be recognized and rewarded for the activities I just performed, meaning claim management, client relation and product development. Waouh ! But that's not possible in an insurance company ! Or is it ?<br />
<br />
From a systems point of view, it is possible to imagine that I have access to all relevant information given through both <a href="http://www.dachisgroup.com/2011/06/moving-beyond-systems-of-record-to-systems-of-engagement/" target="_blank">systems of records and systems of engagement</a>. In fact, our problem about adopting social technologies is not a systems problem. It's a mindset problem.<br />
<br />
From a Learning & Development point of view, I need to have been developed so as to be able to make decisions:<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>based on the vision, mission and social engagement of my company,</li>
<li>"augmented" by the company assets and people I have access to</li>
<li>depending on the context of my client</li>
<li>willing to respond to my client implicit demand, regardless of the product or services that I am used to selling</li>
</ul>
That is a huge development program that I need to have gone through. In fact, as far as I know, it is a program that most likely turns conventional training wisdom upside down.<br />
<br />
Let's get to the most important point of view, the organizational one. The company needs to manage me (recognize, reward, connect) in such a way that I can move accross what today would be perceived as functional or hierarchical silos. How managers are developed and how their missions are set needs to take into account this new autonomy from the claims professional; in fact, managers should become organizational facilitators of this autonomy. At the same time, key organizational design basics and people processes must evolve (how positions are described, how power and information flows - look at how <a href="https://plus.google.com/109625980732883634488/posts" target="_blank">my friend Jon</a> describes <a href="http://www.wirearchy.com/" target="_blank">wirearchy</a> - how people are recognized and rewarded).<br />
<br />
From this organizational point of view, we are looking at deep structural change.<br />
<br />
<b>I think this is where talent management comes into play</b>. The changes that corporations have to undergo are deep changes. Otherwise, they will not be able to take advantage of the huge business (and social) opportunity that is presented to them, this business opportunity that consists in answering individual aspirations for a better life.<br />
<br />
The sheer complexity of the changes at hand makes it imposible to drive classic transformation projects (executives design and decide and managers and associates execute). These projects need to be undertaken as if the final goal had been reached. They will rely on the individual wisdom, skill, sense of responsibility and effort of the people involved. It's deep experimentation taken place within the corporate walls.<br />
<br />
Talent management professional should take the risk of launching these new organizational experiments. It will give them a new position in the strategy process of the organization. And no wonder: in an ever faster evolving economy strategy can only be conceived of at the fringes of the organization.<br />
<br /></div>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16372306084445941143noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9136937895094255325.post-43154180598367746992011-11-29T09:49:00.001+00:002012-06-15T15:05:39.735+01:00Leveraging social technologies for talent management<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
HR should adopt social technologies to reinvent itself. Only in so doing can it reinvent talent management and build it into a strategic capability<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<b>Reminder: talent management still the key strategic enabler.</b><br />
As the economy accelerates and decision-making needs to be pushed at the front-line, mostly all managerial (and, increasingly, non-managerial) positions are acquiring strategic importance. At the same time, competition for talent keeps high in most marketplaces.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiwPyndLfVid3YPrLNr8vQ1WDccfmRc2C3Vm1-yKAka186_f4c7PCtvUMmvqW5_tZgQbALW0qiz6I0TgVGgltd_J8HN_WiBkTkR69rVEumCGkKewizEPXpbm43TeRlQRgUOKdjOZh0ALP8/s1600/esextant.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiwPyndLfVid3YPrLNr8vQ1WDccfmRc2C3Vm1-yKAka186_f4c7PCtvUMmvqW5_tZgQbALW0qiz6I0TgVGgltd_J8HN_WiBkTkR69rVEumCGkKewizEPXpbm43TeRlQRgUOKdjOZh0ALP8/s1600/esextant.png" /></a></div>
It is therefore not enough to have a professional and engaged HR team to succeed in attracting, developing, retaining, compensating and, most importantly, engaging the men and women that will drive success of your organization.<br />
<br />
The key success factor is to develop a talent management culture that is as stronger (or stronger) than your financial culture. Only when all managers are as experts with HR practices as they are with financial KPIs, and when they are as engaged in driving HR strategy as they are in reaching financial targets, will you have a competitive advantage on the talent market.<br />
<br />
This can translate as making talent management your core organizational capability. To start with, a company needs<br />
<ul>
<li>a strong alignment of your HR strategic goals with your corporate strategic goals;</li>
<li>a data-based, almost scientific approach to talent management.</li>
</ul>
These are reached by being able to consider all talent management practices as an integrated corporate process, which means being able to identify actors, activities, work in progress and finished products. It is only on top of very well handled process that you can bring human value add.<br />
<br />
Working on identifying processes, actors and activities is something the HR team should do. In my experience, it is a great learning opportunity for HR professionals, and it gives a sense of ownership over their own function.<br />
<br />
When a clear vision about the HR processes is reached, it is important to engage management in how to improve these HR processes. This is the moment when you engage in talent management skills development in your management team. Even though you might think that most of your managers have their "own" HR expertise, it is important to recognize that success will come from consistency. Otherwise, success will come from chance or over-investment.<br />
<br />
<b>Leveraging the social in technologies</b><br />
In the present times, it is a good idea to lead this project (engaging management on talent management practices) with a community mindset or using social technologies. It quickens the pace of the project and opens new horizons that usually bring important innovations and operational improvements.<br />
<br />
Even more importantly, as we see social technologies ROI appearing more clearly (in social enabling processes and in accelerating good practice sharing), such a talent management initiative is also an opportunity to make HR processes more human by social enabling them. There are two dimensions to this "social enabling"<br />
<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>First dimension, bring HR team members and managers closer by implementing either a social network or purposefully built communities;</li>
<li>Second dimension, there is a huge opportunity to innovate on some key HR practices (like recognition or engagement) by professionnally adopting some popular practices in the social media field (or in the web 2.0 environment). For instance, gamification or a badging strategy are helpful to start a project on reinventing engagement and recognition.</li>
</ul>
<br />
<br />
The key point here is that these initiatives will deliver their value if they are undertaken within a comprehensive HR strategy. Otherwise, as their potential for disruption is high, the odds are high that these initiatives will be "killed" by HR management.<br />
<br />
As I have been thinking lately, 2012 should see the return of strategy (for those teams that have understood social technologies).</div>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16372306084445941143noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9136937895094255325.post-21134278872113010392011-10-26T09:06:00.003+01:002011-10-26T09:07:27.642+01:00OccupyWallStreet and the social/business revolution<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Ten days ago, as I had the opportunity to share some time with people at Liberty Square and assist to one GA, I was inspired by some conversations that defended the following general idea; "we are not here to be violent, we are here to collaborate, to participate in building something different. If the guys leading our banks and financial institutions do not want to participate, fine, we'll change them". As well as by these ideas, I was also struck by the collaborative, participative, shouted model, that has been developed in the GAs. Coming out of the <a href="http://web2.0expo/">Web2.0Expo</a>, and participating to all these conversations about social media, I found the real life aspect of OccupyWallStreet amazing (<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odFygPMwbIM">videos</a>). And I also found their professionalism, so to speak, very impressive, whether it is in the websites that have been developed and that show quite a mastery of social technologies or the "Direct Democracy & Facilitation Trainings" that are being developed by OccupyTogether.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiC9kJXR9-d_JVNbz5U-KOKWGmjHfV2nGT2el7OG4_WtGS8PYeA4GunhP4WyVa2S0MeIVHgjKIxzRhgolcsUiINuq4wTogPUVrJ2FIq-m2OZOSuhyphenhyphen1DJsZkEanQQ3fvURNzBAIVZ_lpQOg/s1600/occupy-wallstreetposter.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiC9kJXR9-d_JVNbz5U-KOKWGmjHfV2nGT2el7OG4_WtGS8PYeA4GunhP4WyVa2S0MeIVHgjKIxzRhgolcsUiINuq4wTogPUVrJ2FIq-m2OZOSuhyphenhyphen1DJsZkEanQQ3fvURNzBAIVZ_lpQOg/s320/occupy-wallstreetposter.jpg" width="211" /></a></div>
In Europe, <a href="http://occupywallst.org/">Occupy Wall Street</a> is not getting the attention it deserves. Elsewhere, there has been some analysis of this movement, most of what I have read, by the way, pointing at its shortcomings (here is some <a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesmarshallcrotty/2011/10/18/before-occupy-wall-street-i-too-was-a-revolutionary/">perspective</a> by <a href="http://blogs.forbes.com/people/jamesmarshallcrotty/">James Marshall Crotty</a>).<br />
<br />
From my perspective, this movement is new in the level of internal and external collaboration it shows, and it obviously links to the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunisian_revolution">Jasmine Revolution</a> and the ones that followed. My perspective is that its success or failure will not rest with the protesters ability to make a long stand; this stand needs to be taken into account by leaders, giving way to change in mindsets, and eventually to a transformation of leadership. A leader: someone that leads ... Today, the where and the how are just not clear enough<br />
<br />
<b><a href="http://occupywallst.org/">Occupy Wall Street</a> is a major business, social and political reinvention opportunity.</b> Why is that ? 1. The economy is not providing the kind of prosperity people aspire to and seem ready to build. There is opportunity for a new kind of leadership. 2. The social or web2.0 technologies now deploying across the economy bring with them a mindset that allows fresh economic and business thinking and therefore the achievement of that new prosperity. There is an opportunity for this new leadership to reach its goals.<br />
<br />
Optimistic view? Let me explain.<br />
<br />
<b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: large;">1. </span></b>The economy, it can be argued, at least in the Western world, seems poised to grow slowly, at best, in the next two to five years. Jobs have been lost, and if you follow W Brian Arthur in this McKinsey Quaterly <a href="https://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/The_second_economy_2853">article</a>, they will not come back. There might be some assets in savings, yes, but where there are savings (like in Europe), it seems that people are not willing to spend what's needed to generate growth.<br />
<br />
As for businesses, most of them are unable to provide the products or services that would spur a new surge in growth. That's understandable, at least in the BtoC arena: consumers, hard hit by the debt tornado, do not have a real need for the stuff that's available. I would argue they are waiting for what could be called a new prosperity: improved public services, health care, education, environmental savvy products, people-development activities, ...<br />
<br />
Where are the leaders ? How are they responding to these aspirations ? It really surprises me that few business leaders, so far, have started answering the yarn for a new kind of prosperity by offering new services, new products that are in line with what people are voicing (yes, there are real demands, appart from "let the bankers go"). Offering jobs and offering value.<br />
<br />
In one of the conversations at the Web2.0Expo, moderated by <a href="http://cindygallop.com/">Cindy Gallop</a>, we stressed how leaders were, in short, lost and frightened. Lost for lack of understanding of what is happening (and you have to admit it is a complex movement, that can only be understood as arising from a perfect storm made of social aspirations, technological progress, democracy progress, ...). Frightened at letting other people take the lead, whether it is for selfish reasons (those exist) or from very legitimate reasons (as a leader, it is difficult to let go when you are not sure that your are making the right decision).<br />
<br />
And yet, opportunities are waiting for leaders to discover them. Let me underline some of them that I know well :<br />
<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>There is a need to transform transportation, to cope with a growing complexity of cities and a threatening environmental risk.</li>
<li>There is a a need to transform insurance, to take into account new risks coming from the new fabrics of society (anyone said subprimes ?). The same could be said about banking.</li>
<li>There is a need to make government and public services more agile, so that they provide real value in real time. </li>
<li>There is a huge need to rethink education, and transform it, leveraging the assets of existing systems but also using new ways and technologies.</li>
<li>...</li>
</ul>
<br />
All those, and many others, are opportunities for growth ! Demand is there, whether it is explicit or not. Financing is definitely there, just waiting for a real opportunity. Talent is there ! There are real expectations for meaning, for a sense of self-esteem that would come from the work we do, that could become something more than just "what I do for a living".<br />
<br />
Leaders should take these opportunities. It would help navigate and going out of the coming recession; it would engage talent. It would allow them to gain legitimacy and honor in the eyes of society.<br />
<br />
The good news is, almost all assets and skills needed to reach goals that were not imaginable yesterday are there to be used. Or read <a href="http://www.carlotaperez.org/">Carlota Perez</a>, if you do not trust me.<br />
<br />
<br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: large;"><b>2.</b></span> I mentioned in my last <a href="http://luisalberolasblog.blogspot.com/2011/10/about-w2e-technology-to-change-world.html">post</a> that social technology was ready to help in changing the world. Technology is important, but most important still is the new mindset that is deploying with it. Just as it took some years for most business leaders to understand the benefits of mass production, it might take some years for this new mindset to reach a tipping point.<br />
<br />
This is where I think some work needs to be done by those today operating in the social business / E2.0 / Web2.0 / ... arena. I have been reading these past few months how social technologies were going to help in improving existing processes by "social enabling them". And, behold, we found the ROI that we had been looking for so long ! Right and true. But that is certainly not enough and it is terribly short-sighted !<br />
<br />
If used within the current optimization mindset, these technologies will help business at the expense of the individual and therefore society. It is important to remember that corporations are still widely viewed as vehicles for value creation through efficiency. Innovation, in most of them, is just appearing as an alternative for this value creation.<br />
<br />
Efficiency is tightly linked, in an established management mindset, to a taylorist view of the world. Do more with less. And, believe me, social technologies have the potential to push us (managers, employees, leaders) where we do not want to go. To the point where every activity in our life can be linked to our work activity, to the point where there is always something else for me to do. CRM ? Not good enough, now we can link salespeople every single minute of the day, so they can "leverage" the "collective intelligence" to make yet another sale ... even though this "collective intelligence member" might be having dinner with her kids ! This probably rings a bell, right ? What I say for sales departments stands true for any other dimension of the corporation, if social technologies are used within existing processes, mindsets, organizations.<br />
<br />
It is my belief, that we need to push for corporate transformation. And therefore, yes, as I said in my introduction "the social or web2.0 technologies now deploying across the economy bring with them a mindset that allows fresh economic and business thinking and therefore the achievement of that new prosperity. There is an opportunity for this new leadership to reach its goals. " There is an opportunity for growth ! <b>But, and it is a huge but,</b> it will need thinking twice about growth and the value growth creates, probably going in the direction pointed by <a href="http://hbr.org/2011/01/the-big-idea-creating-shared-value">Michael Porter</a> or <a href="http://hbr.org/product/the-new-capitalist-manifesto-building-a-disruptive/an/12794-HBK-ENG?N=4294841678&Ntt=umair">Umair Haque</a>. And once some ideas about value evolve, there is a need to think about how to share the value that is created, probably using existing models such as Wikipedia, the open web, or so many others. Then, we just might need to reinvent strategy, so that the environment, society, people at large, are not considered as externalities. <b>That thinking made strategy much too easy. It's time to grow up.</b></div>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16372306084445941143noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9136937895094255325.post-21628904618556228882011-10-14T15:35:00.000+01:002011-10-15T12:43:46.398+01:00About W2e : the technology to change the world ?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<br />
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The <a href="http://web2.0expo/">Web2.0Expo</a> is a wrap. And as I start to look back on the speakers, start-ups and attendees I met, it strikes me that, for all the great announcements, innovations and ideas, technology is taking back-stage. </span></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Do not get me wrong: <b>technology was impressive all along, but the real focus was on using it to change the world. </b></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="s1"></span></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhtzvYtwO-PEPA1trN5DTNIwIsuAP9Q9-TthkVhGaDUA0tEoCkJGnfNpWducQ_Q-Vda5nqVZ9F-eIRFHTaowonQogSHx2ENH9cbGcdP5JRtOZoHbLpJLvqfpE6CYB1Lm3ZURbz9zamuf-w/s1600/Fotolia_28127528_XS.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><img border="0" height="213" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhtzvYtwO-PEPA1trN5DTNIwIsuAP9Q9-TthkVhGaDUA0tEoCkJGnfNpWducQ_Q-Vda5nqVZ9F-eIRFHTaowonQogSHx2ENH9cbGcdP5JRtOZoHbLpJLvqfpE6CYB1Lm3ZURbz9zamuf-w/s320/Fotolia_28127528_XS.jpg" width="320" /></span></a></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: left;">
<span class="s1"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: large;">Changing corporations</span></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The IBM <a href="http://www-935.ibm.com/services/us/gbs/thoughtleadership/ibv-cmo-prestudy.html">survey</a> of CMOs and <a href="http://www.web2expo.com/webexny2011/public/schedule/speaker/123487">Melissa Parrish</a> from Forrester pointed out that corporations are not ready for these new social technologies. CMOs (and leaders at large, it would seem) are yet to develop their awareness of the changes that have taken place and understand what the new technological (and social) environment, and mainly social technologies and data imply for their corporation. And let me be specific : what it implies for their organization, for their value chains and for their strategies. </span></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="s1"></span></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">That view, though, is only the higher, hierarchy-focused view. Because in listening to the speakers and practicioners, you get the notion that social technology is mainstream now as are the practices to adopt it and make the most of it. It was interesting to hear <a href="http://www.web2expo.com/webexny2011/public/schedule/speaker/31925">Peter Kim</a> present what he calls social media mythbusters : </span></span></div>
<div class="p1">
</div>
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Consumers in control ? No ! Consumers are not in control, you, as a company, set the stage for their experience of your company’s services, and you should take responsibility for it. This idea of responsibility kept coming back during the conference. I loved the way in which <a href="http://www.web2expo.com/webexny2011/public/schedule/speaker/122296">Siobhann Quinn</a> closed her speach about the five Laws of Engagement: "with those laws come responsibility, do not cheat on us, try to make us better people, better consumers, better contributors".</span></li>
<li><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Social Media as obvious ? No ! Social media is not straightforward, you do need a strategy and even an advanced social media architecture as <a href="http://www.web2expo.com/webexny2011/public/schedule/speaker/10135">Joshua Ross</a> defended. Seen from my prospective as a practitioner, indeed there is such a thing as a social media architecture, and I would argue that each corporation needs to design its own , adapted social media architecture. Indeed, your social media architecture won’t reach its potential if you haven't developed you own internal Collaborative Way. And you should know that, in developing your collaborative way and then building your social media architecture, the focus should not be on conceiving a great system but on engaging your managers and your employees to iteratively build it with you. Or, in the way <a href="http://www.web2expo.com/webexny2011/public/schedule/speaker/72919">Phin Barnes</a> elegantly puts it, you need to design your organization for design</span></li>
</ul>
<br />
<div class="p2">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Face your responsibility, develop your collaborative way and your social media architecture ... but also, of course, learn and keep learning about each platform inner workings. There were great presentations about Facebook from <a href="http://www.web2expo.com/webexny2011/public/schedule/speaker/6169">Michael Lazerow</a> and <a href="http://www.web2expo.com/webexny2011/public/schedule/speaker/73544">Ruben Quinones</a>, and about Google+ from <a href="http://www.web2expo.com/webexny2011/public/schedule/speaker/87577">Adria Richards</a>. It was even more interesting to listen about other platforms such as YouTube or Blip.tv from </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.web2expo.com/webexny2011/public/schedule/speaker/61710">Dina Kaplan</a> and their potential impact on internal communications.</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Last of these speakers about the impact of social technologies and evolving mindsets on the corporations, <a href="http://www.web2expo.com/webexny2011/public/schedule/speaker/64042">Christina Gagner</a> gave an overview of where the regulation is going. Self-regulation was the key word, as regulators are still playing catch-up and not necessarely from the most adapted viewpoint. Europe, a regulatory leader, would have some lessons for America.</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Summary about the corporations then: the technology, the strategy, the managerial practices that are needed by our corporations have already been developed. The race is on to adopt them, and, believe me, no one will talk about a mere nice to have new social media.</span></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: large;"><span class="s1"></span>Changing the Economy & Society</span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Social technology is also making its way towards changing society. </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">One of the showcased start-ups, <a href="http://fresh.oc.ra.cy/">Fresh.oc.ra.cy</a>, aims at helping Newyorkers learn to eat again ! So it’s technology, yes, but used to diminish waste, to save time, and to learn old and forgotten key social and family traditions like the family dinner. </span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Great presentation also from <a href="http://www.web2expo.com/webexny2011/public/schedule/speaker/120767">Nora Abousteit</a> about how technology can change fashion and community, but also, most interestingly, about how all the achievements in technology should bring us reconsider the educational power of making.</span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.web2expo.com/webexny2011/public/schedule/speaker/62088">Shelley Bernstein</a> talked about how technology helped her engage the Brooklyn Museum visitors, and, as a result, collectively transform their experience of the Museum.</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="s1"></span></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></span><br />
<span class="s1"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">It was <a href="http://www.web2expo.com/webexny2011/public/schedule/speaker/122711">Carlota Perez</a> that helped us make sense of these social ventures. We are in the fifth industrial revolution (after the first one, the second with the steam engine, the third with heavy industry and the fourth with mass production) and we are entering the deployment phase of this information revolution. Today, "what's good for IT is good for the world, and what's good for the world is good for IT". A very interesting perspective on why leaders are lost as they look on the existing conditions with their common sense (read what <a href="http://www.web2expo.com/webexny2011/public/schedule/speaker/101725">Duncan Watts </a>has to say about the myth of common sense) and a call to action for all those that, as the examples above show, having understood technology are out and using it to change the world.</span></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="s1"></span></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="s1"></span></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span></span><br />
<span class="s1"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: large;">Changing democracy ?</span></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="s1"></span></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">But my ah-ha moment came during the Start-up showcase, when the founders of <a href="http://www.electnext.com/">ElectNext</a> introduced me to their beta version. ElectNext later became one of the two choices of the Expo for most interesting start-ups. How these choices were made says a lot about the organizers own sense of responsibility. It was not about winners and loosers, it was about starting the most meaningful conversations. And their two choices were start-ups that are transformational to society and to democracy.</span></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="s1"></span></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">But let me come back to ElectNext: using basic social technology and business model (online dating) to improve the voting experience. When I think about it, is it not a great way to educate voters, that usually have no time to delve into how the candidates voted (and not only what they have to say) and most often rely on their common sense when participating to political choices ?</span></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">I have been arguing these past few years that social technologies were an opportunity for corporations to reinvent their social value, their role in society. </span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Would you not say that mastering these three dimensions are key milestones on a roadmap to renewed leadership ?</span></div>
</div>Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16372306084445941143noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9136937895094255325.post-16315865822468482052011-10-06T11:45:00.000+01:002011-10-06T11:58:58.586+01:00What leadership programs will not achieve - thoughts about Steve Jobs<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
I was trying to put together a few ideas about the future of training and leadership in this connected world, when I learned about the death of Steve Jobs. So I thought I would pay a tribute to someone that co-created and built a company I started understanding and admire only ten years ago.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi7GnQZrGo7y2BRYqGnWmMuo1ASLUiXiHAOaHiKFEvg4AqMresdql2kq662LwGrmzDyXmovP_Sl67n-KmATaa0yxeJih1qw2reuKg8rfmLii6eSLm2ESklWuh3imi6VVlY2hIjwwd0sEp8/s1600/Steve.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="181" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi7GnQZrGo7y2BRYqGnWmMuo1ASLUiXiHAOaHiKFEvg4AqMresdql2kq662LwGrmzDyXmovP_Sl67n-KmATaa0yxeJih1qw2reuKg8rfmLii6eSLm2ESklWuh3imi6VVlY2hIjwwd0sEp8/s200/Steve.png" width="200" /></a></div>
<br />
Even though I started working with a Mac, I was really converted to using Apple products by <a href="http://www.claudebbg.com/">Claude</a>, one of my good friends and partners. Convincing me would take time as I was all about building Talent Club into a software company at that time, and managing costs (I thought) was key. So Claude did convince me on the "cost" side - yes, Apple products are really cheaper than you would know, but you need to understand some things like value in a different way. Following, he started a slow (maybe painful for him) process of giving me some insights into Apple ways. And his main lesson, that I have made mine in my consulting activity today was : "Well, if that's what you need, why don't you just do it ?". Apple products are built so that you can easily do everything that they promise - no more, no less.<br />
<br />
There are two other things I remember about learning the Apple ways. First, the importance of being true to its own principles. If I understand correctly, most of the success of Apple today rests on it having built a community of developpers on this very foundation (software development principles in this case, but you could argue the same about design principles and industrial principles).<br />
<br />
Second, the ability that Apple has (or Steve Jobs had) of inventing the product you could not even dream about but, deep inside, unconsciously, you were ready for. It is how I translate my experience each time I discover a new product or a new evolution : I would certainly not have thought about it, but I was actually waiting for it to push my own professional practice further. I have really had these experiences each time I change my Mac or upgrade OSX.<br />
<br />
All will be said about Steve Jobs these days, by people who knew him, so I had better stop here. I would just add that the the impact of people like Steve Jobs would not be predicted nor made possible by any educational, leadership or management program. And that is a very humbling thought for someone who has tried understanding how improving individual and collective ways of working can help advance our corporations<br />
<br />
I've had the intuition for a long way that leadership practices we so carefully develop are only a way for corporations to face the shortage of truly exceptional people.<br />
<br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">At the high end of the ladder, it's all about believing in yourself (<span class="Apple-style-span" style="line-height: 20px;">“You know, I’ve got a plan that could rescue Apple. I can’t say any more than that it’s the perfect product and the perfect strategy for Apple. But nobody there will listen to me.”)</span> and showing strong character (<span class="Apple-style-span" style="line-height: 20px;">“My job is to not be easy on people. My job is to make them better.”) - quotes from <a href="http://www.macstories.net/roundups/inspirational-steve-jobs-quotes/">Macstories</a></span></span></div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16372306084445941143noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9136937895094255325.post-62840551225647387502011-09-28T10:02:00.001+01:002011-09-28T10:02:09.180+01:00Against Facebook SOS - the danger with analogies<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: left;">
The number of conversations around social operating systems has been increasing lately. Ben Elowitz even argues that Facebook has "boldly annexed the web" and become the central social operating (SOS) system of the social web (<a href="http://digitalquarters.net/2011/09/facebook-boldly-annexes-the-web-how-open-graph-creates-a-rosetta-stone-for-the-semantic-web/">here</a>). <br />
<br />
I have written myself about social and corporate operating systems (<a href="http://luisalberolasblog.blogspot.com/2010/01/has-web-changed-way-your-corporation.html">here</a> and <a href="http://www.talent-club.net/talent-club/un-os-social-pour-lentreprise-du-social-graph-au-business-graph/">here</a>), and I am quite worried about what I see appearing. There are three reasons why I am worried:<br />
<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>To begin with, analogies are useful as explanation tools, but they carry with them an empoverishment of meaning. That implies responsibility from anyone using an analogy;</li>
<li>Secondly, considering Facebook (or any other social platform, for that matter) as a SOS demands that you ask some tough questions about resources, applications, hardware, users and, most importantly, ownership and meaning;</li>
<li>And finally, there is the corporate wave of social technology adoption. One of its impacts is the generalisation of "generally accepted social usages" (GASU) within corporate firewalls. A corporation may master these GASU without any need for deep reinvention. The corporate OS is just an OS, such as the SOS is just an SOS. It will certainly give corporations unheard of power. The question about meaning and intent again needs to be asked.</li>
</ul>
<div>
What can you do when given acces to a powerful OS ? So many wonderful things and the more powerful the OS, the more astounding your achievements. But there are no intrinsic ethics in achievement. And therefore the key issue is responsibility, both corporate and personal. In this post, I will concentrate on the social sphere and will write about corporate OS in a future post.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgVAECls32zli-XVRtwic15pDHexIdu-LbtwvQH4qym2K2EtQbNWkw08l9gBiTOMpkPV8OMPg5WZaz5N1nWuuVUfwb_O5f3lTNzQBm-sQ04Fdum93vHy3Nxr6lF6LlhkRzdtI6DDXqMWgg/s1600/Fotolia_28419374_XS.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="256" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgVAECls32zli-XVRtwic15pDHexIdu-LbtwvQH4qym2K2EtQbNWkw08l9gBiTOMpkPV8OMPg5WZaz5N1nWuuVUfwb_O5f3lTNzQBm-sQ04Fdum93vHy3Nxr6lF6LlhkRzdtI6DDXqMWgg/s320/Fotolia_28419374_XS.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: large;">What does it mean for Facebook or any other to be a social OS ?</span><br />
<br />
What does the OS provide its users with ?<br />
<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>Easy access to ressources - in this case, ressources are Facebook algorythms and our own personal data - welcome <a href="http://www.facebook.com/about/timeline">Timeline</a> !</li>
<li>The possibility to build applications that accelerate the leverage of these ressources,</li>
<li>The potential to achieve the user's goals (personal or profesional) faster and deeper.</li>
</ul>
<br />
Now, who are the users ? Obviously, ourselves, anyone who has a Facebook account and plans to use it to make Facebook friends, share information with friends and family, keep track of relatives whereabouts, and engage in new social interactions. Keep in mind the potential of the system to develop new social interactions as an effect of developers creativity ...<br />
<br />
There are other users : organizations, and today these are mainly marketing, media and PR companies as well as the members of Facebook business ecosystem.<br />
<br />
Who is the owner of this system ? Facebook. What is Facebook ? A joint-stock, limited liability corporation. What is its goal ? To make a profit from serving its clients. Who are its clients ? Well, Facebook clients are the second category of users : Marketers. PR firms. New media ventures. Application developers.<br />
<br />
These firms will pay Facebook for the right to use our data to better serve us. Us, the final beneficiaries of the whole system. This is just a business relationship, governed by the principles that have brought us where we are in terms of wealth, but also in terms of risks. And, given the sheer size of Facebook, and the amazing and growing speed with which the whole business ecosystem operates, it is key to loudly ask the tough question : where is the regulation that ensures that no entrepreneur turns to the dark side ? That no firm uses data patterns and intrusive technology to steer our consumption habits, play with ingrained fears or wants, in short, make a profit out of an unbalanced relationship ?<br />
<br />
We are entering a whole new social dimension, and we come from a time when corporations (or the capitalist system, you might say) has been able to transform almost all human activities into economic activities. Lack of farsighted regulation has got us into financial trouble these days. I would argue this is nothing compared with the potential for trouble now building in front of us.<br />
<br />
Facebook is a social utility, or at least it goes by that denomination. There are other utilities : transportation companies, water companies, ... They manage some of our key natural or urban ressources. Facebook manages part of what will become one of our key ressources in the future, the data and the knowledge that results from our interactions.<br />
<br />
I do not question Facebook ethics nor its right to pursue its own corporate objectives. But i think it trades in a ressource which will prove key in building the future of our relationships, of the products and services we develop and consume, of the collective knowledge and intelligence we produce.<br />
<br />
Its potential for profit being what it is, this is too important a business field to be left to the "invisible hand" to govern. </div>
</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16372306084445941143noreply@blogger.com0