Digital hierarchies

by

IBM is holding a social business jam this week and lots of high profile people are attending. Check the special guest list. If you want to be part of the action you can sign up for free. To contribute you have to set up your profile and put yourself in one of the pre-selected categories like “Social Network Junkie” or “Baby Boomer”. That’s where I stopped. There was no “none of the above” to select and I didn’t like any of the choices. I am not a label.

Image: Jam by Sally

My first foray as a lurker to the jam showed that most of the conversations were around marketing. My idea of social business is working smarter through social learning. Marketing is merely the tip of the iceberg.

The more I thought about this jam, the more I felt that Jaron Lanier was right:

The people who are perhaps the most screwed by open culture are the middle classes of intellectual and cultural creation.  The freelance studio musician, the stringer selling reports to newspapers from warzones are both crucial contributors to culture. Each pays dues and devotes years to honing a craft. They used to live off the trickle down effects of the old system, and like the middle class at large, they are precious. They get nothing from the new system.

Are we all a bunch of TED wannabe’s looking for some exclusive opportunity to be special? The good news is: you are special. The bad news is: so is everyone else.

The open Web, without special sign-ons or walled gardens or exclusive clubs is where we can co-create the knowledge needed for the 21st century. It has to be open, transparent and easily reproduceable & linkable. If not, we’re just building digital versions of the hierarchies and silos of the 20th century.

Update:

Here’s the label where I stopped:

Leadership for Networks

by

It takes different leadership to increase collaboration and support social learning in the workplace. Leadership is the key, not technology. Most of our leadership practices come from a command and control military legacy that have been adopted by the business world for the past century. But hierarchies don’t help us manage in networks, whether they be social, value or organizational networks. Steve Denning explains:

Saying that hierarchies are needed is like arguing for smoking cigarettes. Hierarchies are a harmful habit that we need to break. We may be addicted to them, so that breaking the habit is hard, but the way forward is clear.

The reality is that there is another way. One can mesh the efforts of autonomous teams of knowledge workers who have the agility to innovate and meet the shifting needs of clients while also achieving disciplined execution. It requires a set of measures that might be called “dynamic linking”. The method began in automotive design in Japan and has been developed most fully in software development with approaches known as “Agile” or “Scrum”.

Jon Husband has succinctly described an organizational framework for networks. Some variation of wirearchy informs successful organizations (like Semco SA; Google; W.L. Gore, Zappos; etc):

In an increasingly interconnected world, a new organizing principle is emerging …

“Wirearchy is a dynamic two-way [multi-way] flow of power and authority based on:

  • knowledge,
  • trust,
  • credibility,
  • a focus on results

enabled by interconnected people and technology“ (Jon Husband, 1999)

Working smarter through social learning

by

This past week I had the opportunity to discuss social learning in the workplace with many people. Explaining a concept helps to understand it. It’s part of my active sense-making as a networked learner. I’ve mentioned before how Ross Dawson’s five ways to add value to information have influenced my networked learning framework:

  1. Filtering (separating signal from noise, based on some criteria)
  2. Validation (ensuring that information is reliable, current or supported by research)
  3. Synthesis (describing patterns, trends or flows in large amounts of information)
  4. Presentation (making information understandable through visualization or logical presentation)
  5. Customization (describing information in context)

This blog and the various presentations I do are attempts to add value (and context) to information so that I can later retrieve it and use it. By making this transparent I not only create value-added information for others but I clarify my own thinking.

Networked learning, or PKM, was a main topic of discussion this week, as many people asked how I had the time to do all of this reading, annotating and content creation. For me, it’s part of my work flow and it creates extremely valuable knowledge artifacts that I can re-use.

Here’s my latest version of putting together my thoughts on social learning in the enterprise. The storyline behind these slides goes like this:

Work is changing as we get more networked and people are not happy with the old structures, as 84% of workers in the US plan to change their jobs in 2011. We are seeing mass, decentralized and social movements that confront existing hierarchies, politically and in the workplace. Social media are the flagship of an inter-connected society, but every industrial discipline views them through their own filters, like blind monks examining an elephant. In this hyperlinked economy more of our work demands collaboration and we are seeing that work is learning. The need for social learning increases as higher-valued complex work requires passion, creativity and initiative. These skills are not taught in some training program, but shared socially through modelled behaviour and over many conversations. We need to understand complex adaptive systems and develop work structures that let us  focus our efforts on learning as we work in order to continuously develop next practices. The role of leadership becomes supportive rather than directive in this new knowledge-intensive and creative workplace. Artificial boundaries that limit collaboration and communication only serve to drag companies down and create opportunities for more agile competitors.

Working Smarter though Social Learning  


Instant private micro-sharing

by

As we were discussing social learning this week, several people asked, where do I start? Jay Cross was talking to Dan Pontefract this week in San Jose and one of the lessons learnt by Dan was that micro-sharing (e.g. Twitter) is probably the best place to start. I can understand. Blogging takes time and you have to write a coherent train of thought. Staring at a blank screen can be daunting. Wikis only work when you have a group of people with a common purpose and a need to collaborate. Micro-sharing is easy, especially since it’s limited to 140 characters. Who doesn’t have time to tap out 140 characters?

Of course, the big question from anyone in a medium to large organization is the need for privacy. The usual answer is to use Yammer, which limits access to people with the same e-mail address. This works for company stuff but how do you get people from several organizations to collaborate?

Status.net, based on open source software, offers a range of options, some free and some fee. I’ve just set up a private site which is invitation-only. It’s free for 25 members and then costs $1.00 per user per month beyond that. Not bad at all. You can also download the software for free and host it in-house.

I set up a private community site today. It took only a few minutes and I was able to customize it fairly quickly. This is a great way to pilot micro-sharing with very little risk.

Once the site is established, the admin can invite people to the community. It takes only a few minutes to create a profile. The “public timeline” shows everyone’s posts so there’s no need to follow people, particularly with a community of only 25 people. The site-wide notice for the administrator is handy, so that a semi-permanent message can be displayed for everyone.

Status.net – I like it; though I haven’t figured out the automatic URL shortening feature yet.

CCLD KSEN Workshop follow-up

by

We discussed social learning in the enterprise today with an interesting case study on social learning (without technology) by PwC. At the end of the day everyone was asked what pressing issue they would like to discuss for tomorrow. The questions were grouped into five areas, and I’ve added some resources for each:

PKM

Article on PKM and working smarter through networked learning

Beth Kanter: My Three Words for 2011: Seek, Sense, and Share

Sumeet Moghe: How I’m approaching PKM

Tools

Jane Hart’s Directory of Learning Tools 2011 (13 categories)

Jane Hart: Examples of the use of social media and learning (By technology and types of learning)

Jane Hart: 100+ Examples of  the Use of Social Media in Learning

Integration of KM and L&D

Social computing in knowledge-intensive workplaces

What would an integrated OD, HR, IT, KM, Marketing/Communications and L&D partnership look like? Partnerships & the Organization

Implementation and Case Studies

Jane Hart: Social Learning in the Workplace Examples

Measurement & KPI’s

Eric Davidove: The Business Case for Social Learning

Verifying Virtual Value

Informal learning and performance technology

Soft skills are foundational competencies

Other Resources:

The Shy Connector

The language of social business

by

The latest question from Michael Cook (Organizational Development Talks: OrgDevTalk) continues from our last one:

Wow, your response to my last question was a deep and wide one indeed. I think I may need to put some more definite boundaries around where my concerns lie. First, the line from your last response that captured my interest was this: “To stay engaged with interconnected markets, business must get more social.”  I am thinking about some of my clients and approaching them with the thought that they need to have their businesses become more social. Just to test my own understanding it seems to me that by using the term social, especially in view of the IBM quote you referenced, that you mean to say highly connective, many options for connectivity are now a must for the value proposition of any organization. I imagine you mean more than that but am I in the right ballpark?

What I think I need is some language that creates a new context for the term social because I am afraid my clients will consider the remark naive. ‘Business is business and social is social.’ This would be their natural response, thinking that “social” means not results focused. I know you are using the term in a context that may be transparent to you but I can assure you that my clients do not share the same transparency.

What I need to do is be able to connect your conversation to the critical relationship between companies and customers and show how social media plays an important part in sustaining these relationships into the future. Can you give me a couple of concrete examples where this connection was made using social media that I might be able to share?

Secondly, when I read through your response to my last question I notice that you did not directly address the last part of my question where I asked about the right time to bring a technical expert into a conversation with a client. I suspect it is at the level of strategic value because I know most of my clients would not have an extensive interest in the technology itself but more the outcomes it might leverage. Again, am I on the right track here?

Does social mean highly connective? It’s much more than that. Social means human. It is an understanding that relationships and networks are complex. Our industrial management models are based on a belief that our structures are merely complicated. Here’s an explanation from Noop.nl

The main difference between predictable systems and complex systems is our approach to understanding them. We can understand simple and complicated systems by taking them apart and analyzing the details. However, we cannot understand complex systems by applying the same strategy of reductionism. But we can achieve some understanding by watching and studying how the whole system operates.

What’s important for managers is that this also works the other way around. We create complicated systems by first designing the parts, and then putting them together. This works well for mechanical things, like buildings, watches and Quattro Stagioni pizzas. But it doesn’t work for complex systems, like brains, software development teams, and the local pizzeria. We cannot build a system from scratch and expect it to become complex in the way that we intended. Complex systems defy attempts to be created in an engineering effort.

Social means the bonds that keep us together. Much of it is about trust. If I trust you, I might ask you for advice, so trust is essential for collaboration. We lose it if we try to micro-manage knowledge work. A framework like wirearchy is much better for complex environments than our traditional models of command & control, functional management and enforced adoption of work practices. Wirearchy: a dynamic multi-way flow of power and authority based on information, knowledge, trust and credibility, enabled by interconnected people and technology.

The argument that ‘business is business and social is social’ makes little sense today. Business is social because it involves people. Business must be more social the more complex the work and the greater the need for collaboration. We foster innovation through social interactions. The idea that a lone person working in a lab can come up with a brilliant idea is largely unfounded. Connections between people drive innovation, says Tim Kastelle; “Connecting ideas is the core of innovation, but without connecting ideas to people, there is no innovation at all.”

How does social media connect companies and customers? There are many case studies on social media for marketing and customer service available online . However, as my colleague Jane Hart writes:

There are many examples of how enterprises/organisations (profits and non-profits) are using social media for EXTERNAL marketing, customer support, etc, but few real-life case studies of strategic approaches to its use INTERNALLY for social and collaborative learning and/or performance and productivity improvement.

Making organizations more effective is what really interests me.

When working with clients, I would bring in technical expertise as late as possible. Technology is more often a business constraint than an enabler, especially internal IT departments. They will tell you what you can’t do. Determine the business requirements first and make sure they’re clear. Then figure out how to enable them with technology. Don’t let the IT tail wag the business dog. As Steve Woodruff writes, social media is not a business strategy. That also means that a self-proclaimed “social media strategist” should not be developing your business strategy.

Mass, decentralized and social

by

How did the word get out for Tunisians to initiate large-scale protests? Social networks; though not necessarily all technology-mediated. The same happened in Egypt. If social media were not a threat, it is unlikely the government would have shut down almost all web access. Jeremy Littau says the Egyptian uprising “movement is mass, decentralized, and social. Sound like anything we know?” It’s also very human.

China is blocking searches on Twitter related to Egypt, as it too fears the power of social networks. Social networks, and the learning that happens as a result, are a threat to all hierarchical structures. Social networks accelerate the spread of new ideas and lay bare systemic injustices. This is powerful stuff and it scares people. Anyone in a position of power and authority is losing some of that due to the growing power of social networks – doctors, teachers, managers, politicians, etc. Seb Paquet calls it “ridiculously easy group-forming”. Hugh Macleod says that the network is more powerful than the node.

Social networks speed access to knowledge and accelerate learning. An Egyptian blogger, Ma3t, learned via social media this week:

They hit us bad. They shot tear gas at us, I saw ppl running and screaming, and all i can remember is the tweeted instructions ” Do not rub ur eyes” I tried, I really tried, but my eyes were on fire, I didn’t rub them though but ended up walking blindly into a wall.

It’s all social as we become more connected and observe the emerging network effects. The year 2011 will be interesting and 2012 will be even more interesting. Hang on.

No best practices, but some strong indicators

by

It’s been a busy week, mostly on-site with a new and exciting client project. I’m still trying to get a flight home (hopefully this evening) but at least I’m able to get out my weekly Friday’s Finds. Here’s what I learned via Twitter this week.

QUOTES

@jackvinson “I did blogging in my KM class a few years ago. “forced blogging” = flogging :-)”

@zenmoments “Freedom is not worth having if it does not involve the freedom to make mistakes. ~ Gandhi”

—

Performance Measurement “a Complete Waste of Time” – via @julienllanas

So, why do companies spend so much time and money on trying to come up with new rating systems and fancy pay for performance plans? Actually, I have no idea. I’m hoping someone out there can help me on that one. But, this week is a milestone week in my career – I’ve officially decided to do something about it – I’ve propsed to my executive team that we eliminate our performance rating system and ditch this whole pay for performance idea.

@stevedenning: Coordination: From hierarchical bureaucracy to dynamic linking via @RessHum

2. The team reports to the client, not the manager: The shift in the organization’s goal from producing goods and services to delighting clients means that the team effectively reports to the client, rather than the manager. The manager’s role is to give the team a clear line of sight to the client. Work is presented to the client or customer proxy at the end of the process of iterations, so that the team doing the work can experience the reaction. Progress is measured not by whether the boss is satisfied but rather whether value is delivered to clients. Instead of reliance on progress reports, progress is measured by only in terms of finished work—work that actually delivers value to clients at the end of a work cycle.

Un-Manage Your Employees by @DHH  Getting rid of distractions and co-managing so workers can get things done. – via @dhinchcliffe

When you hire people who do nothing but manage, you implicitly say to the rest of your employees, “Don’t worry about the coordination or structure of your work—all these concerns now belong to the manager.” When people don’t have to think about the totality of their work environment, because that’s now the manager’s job, they’re less engaged, less motivated and less efficient.

The Net Work of Leadership: Create the Space by @panklam

What he [Rangaswami] says is (and I agree) is that it makes no sense to give smart people tasks, but to “expose them to problem domains and then giving them the resources and tools to solve these problems.”  When a problem domain is large, it takes a network, more than just a team, and the vision of a leader who can create the spaces within which people will make the right choices about what tasks they must select to work toward the solution of the problem.

Going Social – Chief Learning Officer, Solutions for Enterprise Productivity via @fdomon

You may be saying to yourself: “Echols, this tale of hats and cattle is all well and good, but what’s the bottom line? I need best practices to convince my management.” Well, right now there are no best practices to emulate, but there are lots of experiments going on to define solutions. I repeat, these are experiments, and to succeed, your organization needs to have a culture of experimentation. Experiments produce failures most of the time. Acceptance of failure and disciplined learning from those failures is key because the winners in this arena will be the organizations that learn the fastest, and you can’t learn if you don’t try.

A case for social learning in business

by

This is a first draft of putting together the case for social learning and social business. Comments and suggestions for improvement are welcome. This was not rehearsed, so I know that the narration can be tightened up. I’m interested in seeing what other points could or should be added and especially if the central theme makes sense.

Happy Monday

by

I’m on the road this week. We’re working with an interesting client and I’m doing what I love: designing new ways to work and learn more effectively. Life is good :)

When you work for yourself, it doesn’t feel like work, just an opportunity to do better.