On Friday we did a webcast with AIIM about Enterprise 2.0
The slides are on slideshare:
We did a quick poll half way through on which web tools people use (just from a sample)… the pic below shows the result:
We covered web 2.0 and some of the differences to Enterprise 2.0 and how to lay the foundation for a successful implementation. There was some really good interaction and some great questions that I’ve paraphrased:
- “email is like crack cocaine in some organisations”… how do you get people to stop overusing it?
- participation needs reward as an incentive, not always monetary… in the world of web 2.0 (consumer technologies) this could be with ‘kudos’ and reputation. Do you think that works within the Enterprise, maybe there needs to be a combination of financial and “social capital”
- What about some individuals that monopolise the social network? Does this “drown out” other people that also want to be heard?
I’ll give my opinion but I’m really interested in the opinions of others…
On the email front, I think that people need a compelling alternative to email. If the tool that you are trying to get them to use is more difficult than using email then they’ll still use email. If the tool that they use helps them to reduce their email overload, and it’s easier than email, maybe that’s a good start to weaning people off email. I don’t think email should be eliminated… but BAD use of email should be eliminated. In my work at blueKiwi I never use email to send information to multiple people, only 1:1 when it’s appropriate (like forwarding an external mail to someone internally). This has reduced my email to less than 15 per day.
Inside an enterprise, I think that reward could be linked to objectives, but could be getting into dangerous territory if there is a direct $$$ incentive such as $$$ bonus for x% contribution. It also needs to be as “ungameable” as possible (which is why manual voting/ranking doesn’t work inside orgs even if it works quite well on the web.)
even though there is a danger of someone becoming “overactive” in a social network, this is a great problem to have. The value of the content needs to be implicit rather than explicit for this to not be a problem. For example, a persons contribution is interesting if other people bookmark it and share it with others, rather than rely on a 5-star manual rating.
In general, I think enterprise social networks provide the less rowdy employees to actually have a voice and have their contributions valued, because of the transparency that a social network offers. This also stops people’s ideas from being “stolen” because they are out in the open from the beginning… so everyone contributes to that idea rather than tries to claim it as their own.
Let me know what you think… have you got some good ideas on how these issues can be tackled?