Enterprise 2.0 is the Same Old Same Old – Yet it is Drastically New
Feb 26, 2010 E2.0
I hear this comment all of the time, “This (Enterprise 2.0) is the same old same old repackaged.”
Yes and no. Saying it that way assumes that a) because it is basically the same, b) the outcomes are basically the same. Point A may be true, but because it is even ever so slightly different it totally changes the game and point B becomes null and void.
There was a post recently by someone who mentioned this fact and she had four great points:
1. Same old same old – There isn’t much new here – it is communication but on a supersonic level.
2. Responsibility – The greater the ability to communicate = the greater the responsibility to do so appropriately.
3. Fact Checking – Making sure information which is passed on could be considered ‘facts’.
4. Work Life Balance – There has been a boundry between social life and work life.
I agree with just about everything she said, yet we are missing a key element.
Tags: different, diffusion of innovations, E2.0, same old
Requirement to Social Learning Adoption #4 – Trialability
Feb 26, 2009 Adoption
“Trialability is the degree to which an innovation may be experimented with on a limited basis.” (Diffusion of Innovations, p. 16)
Isn’t this down economy great? Don’t get me wrong, just like the next guy I wish it wasn’t happening. We are all feeling the effects of it, some more than others. But it is making us step out of our comfort zone and try some new things. The easier it is to try these new things out, the better adoption we will have.
With each Twitter follower, I look at their profile and latest tweets. There was one person today, in particular, that followed me. Phil was just laid off of his work. He created a twitter account last April, updated it three times in the first two hours and then didn’t touch it. Until now.
Now he has a reason. Phil might be saying, “Hey, it can’t hurt. I might as well try it out – give it a shot.” Not only is the relative advantage higher than it was before, but he can try it out as an experiment. Pretty soon he sees that making a connection gets his name and situation on a blog read my millions of people (OK – WAY overstated), but now he has some loose connections that might help with the job search.
The first time you at sushi did you stuff the whole thing in your mouth? Not likely. You probably nibbled at it, like I did, and got a general taste of what this raw fish was going to bring to you. Then, if you liked it, you tried more and more until – possibly – you scarfed down the whole plate.
Why do you think razors are cheap but the blades cost a fortune? If the razors themselves are cheap enough, people can give it a trial run without losing much. Then the razor company hopes you love it and buy the blades once you are hooked.
Or the numerous “30 days free!” offers.
To gain adoption, try making social learning useful on a trial basis. Let people get their feet wet. Give them a reason to try and then make it easy, painless and costless. When they try it out they will understand – there is less uncertainty.
This is one of my main tasks for any critics and those who don’t know where to start: Try it out. Nibble a little. Learn about what you are afraid and uncertain of by doing it. Then it isn’t a mystery and you can decide if it works for you.
(BTW, Phil looks like he has some great experience. If you are looking for someone with good HR, learning and leadership experience, check out his LinkedIn profile.)
Tags: diffusion of innovations, LinkedIn, Phil Power, razor, trial, trialability, Twitter
Requirement to Social Learning Adoption #2 – Compatibility
Feb 24, 2009 Adoption
I know what you are thinking… “The tools must be compatible with the tools we have now.”
Nope. Not that you would be totally wrong if you thought that, but you would be missing a major piece of this.
“Compatibility is the degree to which an innovation is perceived as being consistent with the existing values, past experiences, and needs of potential adopters.” (Diffusion of Innovations, p. 15)
In other words, it must blend in with what you BELIEVE now and have EXPERIENCED in the past.
Let’s look at some examples where, in company’s culture…
- the company makes decisions by committee. Everyone in a particular group has an equal say and the power to derail any discussion. Personally, for the most part I see this as anarchy, but we all have been a part of these before. For this to happen they must have meetings. Introduce a wiki where they can discuss and make plans and refine, and it might work. However, if the reason they are going to the meeting is for ego purposes or to waste time, they will not likely want to use a wiki because it is not compatible with their goals and objectives. Sure, not many people think, “I want to go to this meeting to waste time and to position myself in a better spot,” but we all know it happens.
- the training department ‘knows’ what is best for the employees to learn. So they create curricula. In a meeting you bring up adding discussions to help with the meeting. They may welcome the idea and see it as an extension of their needs analysis and feedback which will help them hone the content to best serve them. Or, on the other hand, they may feel threatened that, with the economy already down, before you know it, everything in their class is discussed in the forums and there may not be a need for the class. Or they may think that so much interaction will just get in the way.
- the company has a strict, unwritten, policy that none of the employees should be ‘playing’ with social media while at work because “it is a waste of time and a productivity killer.” The idea comes up for creating a type of social networking, allowing people to connect with others around the globe with similar skills, responsibilities or projects and gain insights from each other. How do you think they will accept it? But if the culture encourages conversation already but has lacked the ability to really let them connect because of the distance, you can see how it might be adopted much easier.
- everyone creates content and most of it takes more than one person before it is finished. Because so much content is created, it is watched over very carefully and is ‘owned’ by particular departments or individuals. Archived data is also ‘owned.’ Introduce the openness of a wiki for collaboration which allows everyone to make changes and it might not be accepted very well. Make some tweaks to the wiki – like having communities around it, version history, etc., and they may think twice and find that it fits in with their values and practices of how to run their company.
Compatibility is SO much more than technical. In fact it is mostly individual and cultural. When creating a strategy you will need to think about these issues and come up with plans on how to introduce, implement and use any of these tools. The possibilities for Social Learning are HUGE and very exciting. But, remember to keep your focus on what they DO for the company, not what they ARE.
5 Requirements of Social Learning Adoption
Feb 23, 2009 Social Learning SIG
What follows is a short series of at least 5 posts. Each will focus on one aspect of what it takes to adopt social learning / media within an organization as well as with customers and prospects.
The information is taken from the book Diffusion of Innovations by Everett M. Rogers and then applied to social learning. This is one of THE books, in my estimation, which will help the most when trying to help others adopt anything – technology, a new culture, processes, even hybrid corn in Iowa. A fabulous read. If you don’t have it, get it.
The five principles of adoption are:
These posts talk about AFTER the sale and implementation. (Although these things should be taken into consideration BEFORE all of that.) These posts answer the question,
“Now that we have it there, how do we get them to use it?”
Because – trust me – just because it is there DOES NOT mean that it will be used.
Again, this question should be part of a strategy long before implementation and should be constantly re-examined during and after.
Tags: advantage, compatibility, complexity, diffusion of innovations, observability, trialability
