The Paradox of “Enterprise 2.0″ December 17, 2009
Posted by greg2dot0 in Enteprise 2.0.3 comments
I’ve been involved with “Enterprise 2.0″ for what I believe has been most of my career, but probably before it was cool to be E2.0 or even called E2.0 for that fact. What amazes me is that this market is primarily driven by vendors and industry pundits. If you have been to any of the Enterprise 2.0 Conferences, you no doubt have seen that many of the panels are filled with vendors and consultants (many of them seeking opportunities), bloggers and self-proclaimed “experts”. While I don’t doubt their knowledge, I do wonder why they are able to drive this market.
During the last conference this past November, a group of us on the 2.0 Adoption Council were interviewed for the article by Steven Baker for the article Beware: Social Media Snake Oil. What was clear is that none of the my fellow council members were relying on consultants for implementing Enterprise 2.0 within their respective companies. Why? Because implementing these types of technology require a deep understanding of the behaviors, culture, politics, of your situation, not just the tools and technologies. I can’t speak for anyone else, but for me, it’s the fact that I’m living these that make me effective in the role to drive change and help shape these behaviors. It is the fact that I’m part of it that gives me credibility and success.
Now, don’t get me wrong, I’ve learned a lot from these experts. They are really smart people, but it does make me wonder how they can drive a market that really is by the people, for the people in a large company. Granted this is changing in just the last 18 months, we’ve gone from people being interested to people actually implementing to people documenting their successes, but we still have a long way to go.
Enterprise 2.0 Crock or Not? November 11, 2009
Posted by greg2dot0 in Enteprise 2.0.Tags: Consumerization, Crock, Enterprise 2.0
add a comment
After being at Enterprise 2.0 in San Francisco and being part of the panel that discussed Denis Howlett’s piece on Enterprise 2.0 a crock?, I had some time to reflect and think more about the argument. There were some things that I wanted to add during the panel discussion that I did not have time to contribute due to the time limit.
Fundamentally, what’s changed?
Enterprises as a whole are going through a transformation where productivity is required. There is an efficiency that the shareholders of large companies expect. We are no longer working in a single location, if in the office at all. Often, our teams are spread throughout the country or the world. No longer do we get casual knowledge when walking the halls of our company. I consider this a transformation, not a reinvention, it’s probably not worthy of a 1.0 or 2.0 or any .0 for that fact. It’s just a natural evolution. So to that point, perhaps Dennis is right.
What else has changed?
Let’s face it, the internet has impacted us all, and it has also impacted enterprises large and small. As has been talked about a lot (I talk about it internally on a regular basis). In enterprises, it used to be that the technology available was far better than the average user had at home. The users had very low expectations and often times were in awe of what they could use at work. But all of the tools and applications that people can now use at home are being expected in the enterprise and they have to be as easy to use as the tools they use at home too. This “Consumerization of the Enterprise” is what’s changed. That is an overnight phenomenon worthy of 2.0 because this has fundamentally changed what enterprises must do to make their employees productive and happy which can and does impact their bottom line.
I think the arguments and topic put on stage for debate was never able to be resolved thoroughly because both sides have valid points. But let’s face it one of the advantages that anything 2.0 offers is sensationalism, and while the focus at the Enterprise 2.0 Conference is gradually shifting from vendors and industry “experts” to “real users”, we aren’t quite driving the market…yet. Without the outrageous claims of 2.0 and a few cranky old bloggers to bring attention to it to sell software and services, we’re doing nothing more than implementing another wave of improvements for an ever evolving enterprise.
The importance of being positive October 4, 2009
Posted by greg2dot0 in Attitude.Tags: Attitude, Positive
add a comment
As a “technology guy”, I used to say, “All I need is a computer and a problem”. But over the years, I realize how wrong that was. It’s working with people that gives me the greatest energy and reward. But I realized something about myself. When I get frustrated, it becomes harder to keep a positive outlook on things. Staying positive takes a lot of energy.
I recently presented to a group of colleagues during a Professional Development Conference in Naperville, IL. During this presentation, it was easy to be positive, as I was talking a lot about Enterprise 2.0 and collaboration, both of which I am passionate about and feel are vitally important to the success of our company.
At the same time, I also deal with a lot of critics. I found myself drafting e-mails with a certain “edginess” to them. Chances are, if I sent that e-mail, it would have been taken poorly. Fortunately, after many years of failures with this approach, I had the foresight to take a step back and try to think about how my e-mail would be received. I went back to one of my Key Takeaways from the presentation I had given:
Stay positive, even when dealing with Jerks
Now, I won’t say that this particular correspondent was being a jerk, I did find myself remembering to practice what I preach. And while being in person gives the recipient the added benefit of engaging all 5 senses, on-line communication only gives you words, not emotions, no body language, no visual clues whatsoever.
With that, I took some time, went back and deleted the draft (yes, deleted, no editing) and started again. This time, focusing on making sure that I was looking to maintain my positive attitude. I felt much better about the correspondence and even received a much better response than I expected. This stuff works.
I have somewhat of a reputation of being a “Corporate Pot Stirrer”. While this clearly makes some people feel uncomfortable, I try to raise issues in a way that is respectful, and ultimately what is best for our company. With this approach, I am able to get my points across, raise some eyebrows, but get people to engage in the discussions. That is the most important thing for me, as this is how I learn, how I teach and shape (and sometimes change) opinion on any give issue. If I was negative, flaming, condescending, etc. I know I would probably be engaged in many different discussions (possibly even with HR).
While this all may seem like common sense, I felt that writing this might help remind us all of the importance of being positive, no matter what.
