Read me now: http://www.peoplematter.com/blog/griswolds-hr-vacation

Thanks for this post. Wanted to get your thoughts on the following write-up re: using social network analysis as a method for measuring/visualizing employee engagement.

http://www.keyhubs.com/blog.

Thanks!

Vikas

It’s always a pleasure to read you. I like your approach of digging into oldies to demonstrate that what is fashionable today is grounded on previous generations (the good and the bad). I also like the fact that you go to the essentials: trust. A topic discussed for centuries by political philosophy.

I will react today not specifically about your points but about the quotes you take from Gary Hamel. I have a huge respect for Gary Hamel as he was very inspirational to me with his works on learning in strategic partnerships, back in the early 90′.

That being said he gets down a road that Prof. Davenport takes too (http://bit.ly/8yQ4WH). A very bad one (http://bit.ly/7wdxpS). I mean the way he writes demonstrates a clear ability to ride a wave and to turn his back to his past at the very same time. A form a selfishness that only great people can afford with no arm.

Today it is very trendy to be anti-corporate. Corporate America reaches historical lows in public opinion, so it is easy to be nasty making strong assimilations that are morally unacceptable.

However, Prof. Hamel has been a pro-eminent influencer as a teacher and consultant and confident of those people who are today considered so poorly mannered: senior management.
So this would call for a more low profile strategy … particularly when you (and I) know that most of the ideas contained in its latest best seller actually were available here and there well before he published.

Taking such a road is not helpful for everyone.

Finally, the “in a world where customers wake up every morning asking, “what’s new, what’s different and what’s amazing?”” is to be a bit out-dated, particularly in a time where loads of people are unemployed and stuffed by over-consumption. The miracle is gone … that is the reason why companies need to build true and long term relations with customers (as Quality Management teaches) … and why social media is essential.

Now to get back to the essentials, Trust, there is one blind element that no one really addresses in the current crisis: the selfishness of senior management. Back in the 80’s politicians have deregulated the capital market by dis-intermediating it. Before when senior managers wanted to have money, for most of them, it was compulsory to visit bankers. Bankers were lending money at a certain rate, for a certain time, for a certain risk. Bankers are not perfect but they are providing middle / long term visibility. Since deregulation senior managers issue shares of the company they run (and bankers are forced to design junk products to make a living ). By doing so they transform their company in a commodity on a market and they face competition from all other listed companies, including those in more profitable industries. This creates a push toward relentless search for profitability. Either they align or they don’t get money, the shares drop and the company goes havoc. To make sure this does not happen, investors have incentivised senior management to deliver short term and high returns. They have denatured the role of management, that classically is there to secure the long term of corporations. To be successful senior management has set short term evaluation criteria, mostly on individual basis as this is the easiest ones to monitor. Some people buy it, some don’t and withdraw, demotivated by the absence of sense/long term vision. Either way this is the best way to kill collaboration or ‘engagement’, understood as an effective contribution to the company, the collective … This is precisely what social computing tackles, by connecting people and surfacing implicitly (i.e. making ‘publicly available’) their contributions. Smart social computing lets people be selfish (ego) yet deliver positive side effects for the group. As usual Technology is used to solve human and organisational issues. Because this goes against incentives systems and behavioural norms, it is a painful and time-consuming process to make ‘Enterprise 2.0′ happen (to get back to one strong line of the FFWD blog!) as long as we don’t fix the basics I mentioned above.

My 2 cents.
Stay well and enjoy the coming Olympics!

Olivier

Disclaimer: my opinion here about Prof. Hamel’s contribution may well be due to to your selection of quotes

My comment here is before having read your post.

From my perspective what I’ve written isn’t properly characterized as a rant. It’s rather (again, just my opinion) a reminder, based on Gary Hamel’s public assessment of a general set of conditions, and backed up by reputable survey data, that there are well-founded organizational development and effectiveness principles dating from 40 years ago and that evolved through the years since then. Those principles and practices are based on greater participation, inclusiveness, need for collaboration .. all characteristics, objectives or features of today’s (and tomorrow’s) networked workplace.

I don’t believe I ever suggested (above) turning “the keys to the kingdom” over to the peasantry, the rabble or whatever we choose to call the bulk of any organizational pyramid. In support of that assertion, I believe that you’ll find consistent reference throughout past writings on the critical need for intelligent, purpose-based hierarchy, and the need for execs and managers to be able to assess when centralized hierarchy is most effective and decentralized network dynamics are more effective, and the wisdom, experience, and permission, to choose one or the other or both, based on the objectives in front of a team.

Many professionals looking at or involved in Enterprise 2.0 initiatives have expressed concerns generally similar to what think you are asserting. And obviously there’s observable behaviour and experience to suggest that perspective is not naive. On the other hand, a lot of what happens in networked exchanges and flows will depend upon an organization’s clarity of purpose, climate, culture, and so on. I’m sure I don’t need to tell you that, really.

I’ll look forward to reading your blog post, and may be back to

But…

Jon’s rant seems to be to hand over “the keys to the kingdom” to employees, which is almost sure to turn out poorly.

I posted my objections to this on my own blog. http://sleve.wordpress.com/2010/01/13/employee-engagement-flaws/

Yes .. these issues existed long before collaborative platforms and social tools became available. It might be said that their advent has just highlighted or made (more) explicit the core issue(s).

Michael Schrage of MIT, a long-time thought leader in the collaboration / teamwork space, once said “Networks make organizational culture and politics explicit”

Thanks for sharing Hamel’s post and adding your thoughtful commentary. I also agree with Harold in that the problem is management, but like all-things-mayonnaise-like it’s not the only problem.

What I wonder is: in any situation where a manager is behaving in a way that decreases employee engagement, is she told about it? Is there a direct conversation – the kind that creates person to person accountability rather than general stats fed back corporately through survey results? I’m guessing the answer is no. So without feedback/consequences it’s no wonder we’re in this situation (yesterday I read this US article showing 22 year all time low: http://money.cnn.com/2010/01/05/news/economy/job_satisfaction_report/index.htm)

I propose adding this layer of feedback and accountability is an important part of addressing ‘the dirty little secret’, and I like your two suggestions on using participative social technologies and processes to help us create a new story on engagement at work.

Also, I would challenge anyone in the corporate world not to let the tools (or lack of access to them due to ultra conservative technology/risk departments) get in their way. Ultimately this is about a change in how we think about work, about employees, about management. e.g. Maybe you can’t have a wiki, but can you invite some end-users into the project right from the get-go to share their experience and be able to contribute?

Don’t let the non-access to these cool network promoting technologies be your excuse for your disengaged team. Read this if you need a little inspiration: http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2010/01/without-them.html

Thanks for the opportunity to share my thoughts
@AmandaFenton

Funny that .. seems to work in almost all realms of life’s activities. One wonders why it has not become more prevalent in the workplace .. maybe there are core assumptions about how people are motivated and behave in operation ?

Oh, wait .. haven’t we all heard about (in the past) Theory X and Theory Y management philosophies ?

And on goes the debate(s).

But in my opinion, you put your finger on the key issues, as I believe the Emery’s (and others) did some time ago.

The E 2.0 environment just makes some of the core issues more visible and present, no ?

How to increase the productivity and effectiveness of your employees/team:
– Treat them well
– Empower them
– Trust them

and they will probably surprise you and become more engaged automagically

You win that big plush beaver (you’re Canadian) over on the corner shelf