IT@Intel Blog

Previous Next
8

As the person responsible for driving social media within our enterprise, I have come to realize that the best darn enterprise social tools don’t magically turn your company into a social enterprise. There is a core foundation that must be present or else you cannot reach social enterprise utopia. There are realizations that must occur or else you will not succeed. There are (sometimes) painful things you must do.

Silos must come down like the Berlin Wall:
I bang into silos on a daily basis. Corporations love silos. I remember clearly one of my university professors stating that a threat to innovation is that people hoard knowledge. Knowledge is power. In order to become a social enterprise, sometimes a significant cultural shift has to occur. Power must shift from teams, groups, organizations, individuals to the masses. Knowledge needs to make the enterprise powerful versus silos within the enterprise. For example, I recently happened into 3 proposed silos in our marketing organization. One team wants to build a knowledge sharing and collaboration system to vet through innovative ideas.. Another team is budgeting to put in social networking software for all sales and marketing personnel, mainly for the field to “find experts”. And lastly, the marketing organization as a whole will have an exclusive best known method (BKM) sharing and networking solution that just marketing will use. If you are making the assumption that all the innovative ideas and expertise you will need is housed within one organization- then you are sorely mistaken. Applying a social tool over a silo doesn’t suddenly make you more innovative. Smashing down and not allowing any new silos serves innovation up to the company Social media routes around those silos and traditional boundaries. It connects people based on interest, not position in the hierarchy. True social enterprises apply social tools that allow wisdom of crowds and six degrees to prevail.

Consumerism affects what you do inside your four walls:
How people use technology to interact, collaborate and communicate outside of works DOES affect what they want to do inside work. There is a very clear bar that have been set by expectations because of the consumerism of social tools. For example, if your social networking tool isn’t as intuitive to use as external sites, employees won’t use it. This doesn’t mean employees want a “wall” to write on or widgets that allow you to throw pies at each other. They just want a similar ease of use and utilitarian enjoyment that we receive externally but appropriate for business. Read What Gen Y Teaches Us About Enterprise Social Networking for ah-ha’s out of a focus group with recent college graduates.

Understand that people will go down with the email ship:
We are not delusional and think that any of these social tools will replace email for people. We all know that email was never meant to be a collaborative tool, but somehow it is reality. Social tools need to be engrained into current business processes. For example, email alerts should occur when I am asked to join a community or someone comments on my blog post. My profile that I have in my social networking tool should be the unified profile that everyone sees in the company directory, email, instant messaging, blogs and wikis (to name a few). The Wiki should be incorporated into team workspaces and easily accessible. Implementing social tools in a disparate way or thinking that you can replace current knowledge management tools – will be a barrier to adoption.

If it takes a manual to use it – throw it out the door:
When was the last time you read a manual? Seriously. Does any software or computer even ship with one anymore? Can you even find an online manual with Digg, LinkedIn, Twitter or the like? If you answered no to these questions, then you will need to say “no” to manual required for pulling social capabilities inside the enterprise. It all comes down to usability. Ease of use has to be your #1 criteria. We are recommitting to user driven design. We have painfully realized that the complexity of our enterprise architecture has the capability to turn our social software into mush. Our users are guiding us to rise above the complexity and to focus on simplicity without sacrificing feature richness.

If IT doesn’t act now, then someone else will:
Social media tools can quickly “go wild”. Listening to your business customers and becoming keenly aware of what people are doing within external applications or what is housed on a server under someone’s desk, is critical to tame the wild beast within social tools. Just like instant messaging (IM) got into your enterprise, so will social tools. We have some taming to do…particularly with wikis. We are at the critical inflection point of deciding to pull in enterprise grade social networking. If we in IT don’t act swiftly, I guarantee you someone else will. It is a reality IT cannot run from.

So far my key learning comes down to the above. I fight these challenges daily. It all boils down to the fact that at the end of the day, social media isn’t about the tools….it’s about people.

Average User Rating
(0 ratings)


Add a comment Leave a comment on this blog post.
Jun 9, 2008 12:16 PM Reply Guest Gia Lyons

Excellent post! Adding to my list of "why social software won't work unless you address the cultural issues first" bag of goodies (baddies?).

Jun 9, 2008 1:35 PM Reply Guest WebBizIdeas

Hi Laurie,

That is an excellent post. It is great to listen to what a corporate social networking software should have from you. Our company is in the process of researching this and this will point out team in the right direction.

Great post!

Jun 10, 2008 4:17 AM Reply Guest Jon Mell

Agree with Gia - great post - the last three words sum it up perfectly. Showing people how to get things done that they can't do on email is key to getting adoption right.

Jun 10, 2008 8:54 AM Reply Guest Kathryn Everest

To me though - while I run into these issues daily implementing social software, there is a comfort in these realities. I've often told organizations that you can just "buy" becoming collaborative. It is a true competitive advantage that can only be realized if you live it. Otherwise, everyone would just go out and "buy it" with the advantage going to those with the deepest pockets. This way - it keeps everyone on their toes. This isn't a tool, it is a way of doing business. The more benefits you expect to realize - the more true this statement becomes.

That said, social software can help fill the gap created by the rhetoric of "we need to be more innovative, collaborative, etc". If this is a genuine business need, social software can do some great things. The question to ask though is "When you say you need to be more innovative, collaborative, etc ... do companies understand what that means?".

Jun 10, 2008 12:56 PM Reply Guest Theodore Omtzigt

Social networking, blogs, and wikis to improve productivity is clearly on many people's mind. In this regard, I came across a statistic that the majority of blogs in the consumer space are read by exactly one person: the writer. I attribute this to the 'ad hoc' nature of the consumer internet. There is not a whole lot of added value if there isn't a purpose behind the activity. In business, I think you'll initiative being taken if IT doesn't and most of these wikis, blogs, or sites will quickly deteriorate because of the lack of purpose AND the lack of an editor. What people for get is that newspapers, magazines, and any writing in general is driven by editors. Most IT departments, nor groups that are asking for social networking tools, have internalized that requirement. Without the editor, any collection of writing that needs to further the business's purpose will quickly become useless and do exactly the opposite of what is sought.

The second problem with wiki management is data quality, and we only need to look at Wikipedia to understand that problem.

In general information management is a hard problem and in all organizations I have seen it is under-staffed and under-resourced.

Jun 12, 2008 9:35 AM Reply Click to view Laurie Buczek's profile Laurie Buczek in response to: Kathryn Everest

@Kathryn- You are spot on. Corporations do need to answer the question "What do you need to be more innovative, collaborative, etc.". It will help solidfy the business need & value that social tools can address. I am attending Enterprise 2.0 in Boston this week and a key theme I am hearing from fellow attendees is that senior mgt buy-in and vision is key.

Jun 18, 2008 4:08 AM Reply Click to view Nathan Zeldes's profile Nathan Zeldes

"If IT doesn’t act now, then someone else will" - very true!

My way of putting it (ever since I led the battle to get the web adopted widely in the company) was to tell management they can't stop the new tools and practices - they can either fight them and lose, or support them early on and earn the right to influence how they will be adopted and used.

Jul 11, 2008 12:39 PM Reply Click to view ChadClemons's profile ChadClemons

Excellent points, Laurie!

Regarding silos within Intel specifically, it seems like we have always struggled with the ability to consistently "recall" good, quality data and best practices. We're not too bad about creating good content, but by thinking in terms of silos (and then stuffing good content into silo'd systems) we deny ourselves the ability to dig up the information when we most need it. Conversely, I don't think we'll ever get to the point where a single (or even a few) systems or tools meets the needs of everyone, especially in a big behemoth like Intel.

That said, my own team has been experimenting with using a wiki for collecting best practices, processes and even the "tribal knowledge" of everyone on the team. We are using the wiki capability of IT's MOSS (Sharepoint V3) service. It's by no means the best wiki tool out there, BUT it's simple and as you highlighted, EASY to edit. No manual required! We've been slow to start, as much of the spirit of the format requires a mindset change.

Getting back to silos, I wanted to share that my teammates and I had a very interesting discussion regarding who should be making contributions and changes to the wiki. At first, we started with the standard corporate stance, "well, only our team should be adding content because we are the experts." Problem is, we are a small group of program and project managers, and EVERY project we do, we leverage team members from MANY different groups within IT and beyond. The REALLY good content usually comes from them! So after a brief yet heated discussion, we opened our wiki to everyone at Intel for adding and editing content. That's one silo down!