Archive for September, 2009
by Paula Thornton
September 12, 2009 at 9:05 pm · Filed under
Collaboration, Culture, Disney, Enterprise 2.0
What was I thinking? Something I read this morning shocked me back into reality: I’d forgotten my roots. There’s something more fundamental to many things I’ve been sharing recently. It’s even related to my recent rant against requirements (although my take on the subject is far tamer than the 37 Signals version, which has been criticized by Don Norman). The words came from Frank Gehry in his introduction to the book Designing Disney. He celebrates the author, John Hench, who started with Disney in 1939:
“John is an Imagineer, among the brightest of a bright bunch who are responsible for designing everything that’s associated with Disney around the world. Whether it’s a hotel or a thrill ride, it’s the Imagineer’s job to dream it up, figure it out, and get it built. Doing work like this — making a movie or building a building — at this scale requires the collaboration of hundreds, sometimes thousands of people. They’re all trained, they’re all talented, and they get the job done. But there are certain people, and John is one of them, who bring a really special quality, one that’s almost indefinable, one that can take ‘good’ and make it ‘great.’ John’s ability to do this, I think, is rooted in his curiosity and his love of people. His curiosity has given him a vast body of knowledge that allows him to approach problems from unexpected viewpoints. Event when specialists have given up, John will come in and suggest a simple and elegant solution — one that has never even occurred to anyone else. And John’s love of people — this is the best part — drives him to create things that are better than good. John knows that people respond to design on a deep level. It isn’t that difficult to make a movie that simply entertains or a building that simply provides shelter. But when you’ve got a love for people, you want them to have experiences that make them think differently when they leave. The quest for ‘great’ transcends genre. Be it a themed restaurant, a state-of-the-art attraction, or a beautiful garden, a great design makes people think, it inspires them, it makes them use their imaginations. John pushes everyone to a higher standard, a standard of excellence.” [emphasis added]
At the root of it all, is the ability to design great experiences. Most business information technologies do not deliver great experiences.
In the mid-90s, in the most unlikely of places — a database conference — through the eyes of a geek-turned-Imagineer I learned the subtleties of a culture steeped in designing great experiences. This database guy was clearly surprised by how much Walt still influenced the culture long after he was gone. He shared many examples of subtle design that create the unique Disney experiences, especially Walt’s reliance on the use of color to influence emotion. But the classic story related, shared the challenges faced in the early 60’s as Disney looked to combine animation with human interaction when Dick Van Dyke danced with the penguins in Mary Poppins. Before blue screen technology, Dick was working under yellow sulfer lighting with a screen and a grid that he was being asked to choreograph his moves around. Trying to hit all of the marks while dancing was exhausting. Walt found out what was going on and put an end to it all insisting that it was not Dick’s job to work around the technology but that the technology (including the animation) needed to work around Dick.
Both Frank Gehry and the geek-turned-Imagineer shared a common message. While the results rely on the collaborative effort of a lot of people, the factor that changes the good to great are the insights of a visionary. Not someone who makes things grander, but someone who can see the simplicity. Someone who’s willing to challenge the momentum with new clarity. A similar story was recently shared by David Pogue after talking with Steve Jobs at the recent Apple event. Questioning whether or not there would be a lag in product releases due to Jobs’ 6-month absence, Steve said that most of what’s coming up next had been started before he’d left, but that he just needed to “polish” them a bit.
For those of use who don’t have a Walt, a John, or a Steve to bring clarity to our work, Enterprise 2.0 is a means by which to focus on simplicity: making it easier for the people doing the work, to provide a better experience for those for whom the work is being done. But only if…it includes design.
Postscript
Walt Disney was way ahead of his time as a businessman. He insisted on techniques that are just now being embraced as relevant to business. From Designing Disney:
“To design most effectively for our guests, we learned that we had to observe them up close, waiting in lines with them, going on rides with them, eating with them. Walt insisted on this by saying, ‘You guys get down there at least twice a month. For God’s sake, don’t eat off the lot. Stay there…lunch with the guests…talk to them.’ This was new to us; as filmmakers, we were used to sitting in our sweatboxes at the studio, passing judgment on our work without knowing how the public might actually respond to it. Going out into the park taught us how guests were being treated and how they responded to sensory information, what worked and what didn’t, what their needs were and how we could meet them in entertaining ways. We paid attention to guests’ patterns of movement and the ways in which they expressed their emotions. We got an idea of what was going on in their minds. Disney Imagineers prefer such an experiential process of gathering information from our guests to focus groups or surveys. When designers see guests in their natural states of behavior, they gain a better understand of the space and time guests need in a story environment.”
Moral: Consider work as an unfolding story.
by Jon Husband
September 10, 2009 at 1:00 pm · Filed under
Collaboration, Connected Enterprise, Enterprise 2.0, Enterprise Social Computing, Organizational Design, Social Computing, User Revolution, Wisdom of Crowds
McKinsey, a leading organizational consulting firm, has just released its most recent study regarding the usage of Web 2.0.
From a read of the announcement, it appears that collectively we are still on the path towards social computing becoming a fixture in the knowledge-based workplace … hardly a surprise.
I (and many others) have said here, and elsewhere, that the ubiquitous presence of the Web, the growing ease-of-use of tools and services, and the growing understanding of productivity in a networked era, are leading inexorably to a fundamental re-think of the way(s) knowledge work is carried out and the type(s) of organizational culture necessary to support that productivity.
.
Across all categories, the use of Web 2.0 technologies by employees for internal purposes has increased from 53% in 2007 to 65% of respondents in 2009.
The largest components of growth have come from using Web 2.0 to develop new products / services internally, to manage internal knowledge and to reinforce the company culture via tools such as internal social networking applications.
The companies who have embedded these tools in their day-to-day activities and processes have seen the largest impact by improving communication across silos to reduce duplicate work and leverage experts in other areas.
.
The report notes that enterprise use of Web 2.0 technologies to connect and interact with business partners and suppliers has slowed down or stagnated … again, not much of a surprise given the often transactional nature of those relationships and the fact that electronic connections between those parties have existed in one form or another for quite some time now.
The final statement of this most recent McKinsey report offers, in my opinion, some clear writing on a big wall … “expertise in the use of Web 2.0 technologies is becoming a required skill for all enterprises.”
When will your organization adopt, or grow its capabilities and culture with respect to, collaboration platforms and Enterprise 2.0 expertise and dynamics ?
.
The momentum we see in the growth of Web 2.0 technologies implies we will see higher penetration in 2010 for using these technologies for employees to collaborate and to facilitate interactions with customers.
To drive increased usage for managing interactions with suppliers and partners, companies will need to find ways use these technologies to augment the formal relationships between business entities and not substitute formal interactions with more ad hoc ones.
Nonetheless, it is clear that expertise in the use of Web 2.0 technologies is becoming a required skill for all enterprises.
.
Powered by Qumana
by Bill Ives
September 10, 2009 at 3:33 am · Filed under
Event Announcements
I am conducting a series of interviews with Samuel Driessen, Information Architect at Océ, about their Enterprise 2.0 implementation and adoption experiences. In this post I will cover their experiences with wikis and lessons learned. Earlier, I wrote out their micro-messaging experiences. Océ is a leading international provider of digital document management technology and services. Samuel is located in the Netherlands and his responsibilities include both the information architecture for structured information in applications such as PLMS and SAP and the unstructured information in places such as email and knowledge management programs.
As I mentioned before, I really like this dual role. It makes so much sense to have these two information sources under the same architectural leadership. Usually knowledge management and IT data management are siloed, limiting the effectiveness of both. This is the first time I have seen this and I commend the vision of Océ. This excellent concept could be a separate blog post but the story today is about their wiki experiences.
Samuel said that part of his role is looking for opportunities for taking Web 2.0 social media inside the organization. He also supports efforts started by others. In the case of wikis, a software engineering manager began the first effort. This manager wanted to create an internal version of the Wikipedia to share best practices and refine processes in their R&D group. He wanted a method to collect, make accessible, and keep current their R&D practices.
This effort was a big success. Lots of people in the R&D group use it, if only to read the content. Samuel said this application is a great way to introduce wikis into an enterprise. He said that the use of a wiki with open editing privileges assumes that everyone in the enterprise is smart and can make intelligent contributions to the firm. Working together people can refine and improve processes in a bottom up way that creates a greater sense of engagement. This all happens? at Océ.
People assumed responsibility for their areas of expertise. They often followed updates to their entries. When there was change by someone else, it usually started a conversation over best practices. Sometimes management was brought into these conversations to get support and offer guidance. Any differences have been resolved without edit wars. Some people put in original content and others are good at cleaning up the format and language of contributions by others.
Samuel said that the open platform of the wiki has trigged a sense of empowerment by employees. He also said that it works better as resource for this purposes as you can see content immediately and do not have to open documents that may or may not be what you need.
At the same time, Samuel said that wikis are not the solution to everything. They have not been as useful for file sharing but that may, in part, be a limitation of the tool they are using. Samuel said that since they have other tools for activities such as file sharing and blogging, this makes the wiki better as it is only used for what it does best. He feels it is not a good practice to stretch wikis to tasks they are not designed for.
There are three types of wikis at Océ now. The first one was the R&D wiki just described. More recently, a corporate wiki has been established to provide wiki functionality across the enterprise. It has four main sections: expertise wikis, department wikis, product wikis and project wikis. The expertise wiki includes a subsection that indexes abbreviations used in the firm. This index was the responsibility of one person who felt it was better to crowd source the task through the wiki. It has been successful and is a good example of an ideal task for a wiki.
The product and project wikis were moved out the R&D wikis to provide greater access. One project wiki is used to collect materials for learning purposes and for exploring how a wiki can be used for this goal.
The third type of wiki at Océ is used to share information outside the enterprise. For example, Samuel set up a section here to share information within the Dutch knowledge management group. It contains people from large Dutch-based international organizations such as Shell, Heineken, and Unilever. They set up meeting agendas and share presentations in this wiki.
In the future, Samuel wants to explore ways to use semantic analysis to get a richer understanding of the wiki content. The content is all now within one wiki platform. At first, there had been separate wikis. When these wikis were integrated they discovered a number of teams working on similar efforts that were not fully aware of this. These teams were able to share useful information and learn from each other. Samuel would like to be able to explore relationships between content on an ongoing basis for similar results.
Samuel is also continuing to explore the relationship between wikis and other more formal tools in the enterprise. He wants to maintain a balanced approach where each tool is only used for the tasks is best designed for. At the same time, he would like the tools to better integrate and share content. For example, wikis are often used for collaborative editing of a document. Then the final version is placed into a more formal tool.
Océ has a traditional corporate intranet and Samuel is on the steering committee. The committee agreed that about 80-90% of the content of their intranet should be on the wiki or other platforms than the intranet. He feels it is process information and should easily be changed by the crowd. Samuel has suggested that they make a list of these pages and migrate them to the wiki or other platforms. At the same time he does not want to limit migration to the wiki. Samuel wants to tell intranet authors especially, and employees in general, what the options are for information sharing as he explained in this blog post, Where Do I Share and Store My Information? He wants to tell authors about wiki’s, blogs, file sharing, etc. Then they can start to think about options and choose the best place for their information.
Samuel has also proposed an innovation wiki, together with a colleague. This proposal is still waiting for formal approval, but seems likely to be approved. Many managers support it and want to give it a try. He is waiting for formal approval, but could set this up in a minute. Because of the Océ culture Samuel wants formal approval first and commitment from the R&D board. He wants them to commit to actually pick up the good ideas that will be generated on the wiki, provide resources, so the ideas can realized.
Wikis have been successful at Océ because they were implemented in a thoughtful way that aligned with business needs, company culture, and the capabilities within wikis. They are not seen as a be-all cure but one more tool with specific capabilities that is added to the total mix of tools.
by Joe McKendrick
September 9, 2009 at 3:11 pm · Filed under
Facebook, Social Networking, Twitter, YouTube
My colleague over at Insurance Networking, Pat Speer, has just published an account of a major health insurance company that is employing social networking to communicate with its members/customers.
For starters, Pat reports that Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield in Wisconsin is piloting a program which employs Twitter to “identify members who may have questions or concerns about their health benefits.” The use of Twitter enables the insurer “to communicate and stay connected through the exchange of quick, real-time conversation, and respond to each tweet about Anthem.”
Anthem is also using its Twitter channel to help members with healthy lifestyle choices such as weight loss programs. If that isn’t enough, Pat reports that Anthem has also formed a Facebook channel and a YouTube channel to promote wellness and member interaction.
As Kate Quinn, VP of corporate marketing for Anthem, puts it: “Social media provide a great opportunity for us to engage our members, listen to them and be more responsive.”
At a time when the viability and future direction of the health insurance industry is under debate, social networking is providing a means for insurance companies to reach on on a very personal level to their customers. The perception of “big, bad, greedy insurance companies,” however rightly or wrongly earned, has been part of the discourse for years, and came about because of the sense of impersonalization that created a very high wall between the companies and their constituents. Social networking may be just the right tool to tear down this wall.
by Joe McKendrick
September 9, 2009 at 10:14 am · Filed under
Social Networking
The insurance industry, a very conservative bunch, is not known for being on the bleeding or leading edge of new business technology.
However, social networking appears to be catching on as a tool for some insurers. According to a recent report, CSC, a consulting and integration firm that services the industry, launched an online service called “WikonnecT,”
a business-to-business social networking site for the property & casualty” sector, and has been seeing impressive growth since its launch last fall.
At last report, WikonnecT now has 8,000 users from nearly 700 insurance companies interacting across more than 100 communities. The site is now being extended to its life insurance and annuity clients. Unfortunately, the community is only open to CSC clients.
So if an industry as technically conservative as insurance starts embracing social networking, you know the trend has legs. Social networking may even help take some of the “boring” aspect out of insurance products, another industry observer states.
Chad Mitchell, senior analyst with Forrester Research Inc., recently penned a report titled “Crafting an Insurance Social Media Strategy,” in which he comes right out and states that “property/casualty and life insurers market some of the most boring consumer products and brands.”
However, Mitchell adds, emerging direct brands such as Esurance and traditional agent-based insurers such as Liberty Mutual Insurance are developing their social media strategies, and trying to change brand perceptions. Here are some examples:
“Auto and life insurance customers continue to flock online to research and buy insurance. And insurance agents use social networks for training and recruiting. Insurance eBusiness executives should build a social strategy that addresses customers’ and agents’ problems, prepares for risks, and measures what matters.”
The impact on internal operations should also be interesting to watch as social networking permeates the industry. Insurance organizations are full of silos and separate departments. Boosting collaboration between claims processing and field agents, for example, could go a long way toward better expediting claims, resolving disputes, and ultimately in boosting customer satisfaction.
« Previous entries ·
Next entries »
