The Innovation Equation and Social Media Solution

I have a theory: The amount of Knowledge and quality of Collaboration a company is able to achieve directly effected by the level of Trust all parties have in the company.This is reflected in the potential value of the Innovation.

Collaboration
Image by yuan2003 via Flickr

(Knowledge x Collaboration) x Trust = Innovation

Knowledge is the raw materials businesses are built on today. All commodities are just that, commodities. Production became a commodity thanks to globalization and distribution became a commodity thanks to the Internet. The only thing that’s left is knowledge.

Knowledge is easy for individuals to gain. Knowledge is itself a commodity – for individuals. Knowledge is a scarcity for companies. The ability to mine the wealth of knowledge inside of the people employed by a company is harder. Add to that the need to mine knowledge from customers and partners and knowledge just became the scarcest mineral on the planet.

Why is knowledge so difficult to gain? Two factors: Retention and Trust.

Retention because we don’t stay at the same job as long as we used to, customers are rarely brand loyal anymore and partnerships are fleeting. None of this is going to change dramatically, which puts an increase on the need for trust.

Employees, Customers and Partners have an inherent lack of trust in corporations. This means they will only give up as much knowledge as they have to in order to gain something of value like a paycheck, a product or a contract.

In my last post I talked about the value of Trust. Let’s assume for a minute that you are actually able to gain enough trust to gather sufficient knowledge, now what? Now that you’ve mined that raw data you need to turn it into something. This is where collaboration comes in.

As companies continue to rely on remote and mobile workforces our ability to collaborate has been hampered and becomes expensive and difficult. This yields lower returns comparable to the level of investment. Which in turns causes companies to kill potential breakthrough innovations much sooner.

Social Media has huge payoffs in all of these areas. Social Media allows companies to open up and place trust in their employees and customers which in turn yields more trust. Social media allows for the gathering, storing and sharing of knowledge as well as facilitating communication and collaboration across multiple regions and stakeholders.

Among other benefits, this social media centric approach lowers the overall costs and increases the output making it easier to invest in, what in the short term seems like, smaller innovations but may actually have larger returns in the end.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Popularity: 2% [?]

Tagged with:
 

The Future of HR and Social Media: Facebook Connect?

A social network diagram
Image via Wikipedia

Social Media is not just for Marketers. This was half of my point almost 3 years ago when I started this blog. It is a communications and collaboration tool. Probably the most powerful tool we’ve ever seen.

Some new research is out looking at social media for employee communications.

Employers Increasing Use of Social Media to Reach Employees in Challenging

  • According to the Watson Wyatt 2009/2010 Communication ROI Study
  • 65% of companies plan to increase their use of social media in 2010
  • 78% of global respondents have increased their electronic communication in the last 24 months
  • 55% have increased face-to-face communication
  • 48% have decreased their print communication over the past 24 months.

“Today’s workers are looking for authentic, timely messages that address how business changes affect them personally. Social media engages employees in real time and on a variety of topics”

So what’s holding them back? Among employers that did not expand their use of social media:

  • 36% cited the lack of IT support or inadequate technical capability
  • 40% indicate limited knowledge of the topic
  • 45% of companies cite the lack of staff or resources

My big takeaway is that without the resources (education, experience and IT) HR is slower to adopt. The tools just aren’t there yet internally compared to what we have externally on sites like Facebook. Even with the great capabilities that tools like SocialText provides, without the interaction you get with on larger networks they tend to be ghost towns.

This will change in 2010 & 2011. The biggest driver of internal social media adoption will come about when companies learn to integrate with external social networks better.Intranets will be accessible via Facebook Connect.

The IT security people who read that just freaked out, but it will happen. Trust me here.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Popularity: 1% [?]

Sometimes less is more. Sometimes less is just less.

The HUMAN Resource album cover
Image via Wikipedia

There’s an article in BusinessWeek that talks about the growing trend that some companies have been taking (my former employer included). Instead of cutting staff they are cutting salaries, and bonuses and benefits.I always feel a little callus when I talk about job loss because I don’t come across as very sympathetic. If I do, I don’t mean to. I just think layoffs are the result of bad decision making on the part of the employer and/or the employee.

Cutting Salaries Instead of Jobs – BusinessWeek

Traditionally, criticism of pay cuts has focused on the impact they have on morale and productivity.

Rationally this makes sense. And having gone through it I can tell you that employees will *say* they agree with the approach. Better cut our pay than see our fellow workers (or ourselves) loose their jobs. And for the most part they mean it.

The problem I have with this is that usually they are just avoiding the inevitable. While I was at HP I went through multiple rounds of layoffs and ultimately saw our salaries cut. When companies cut salaries they are told that management thinks the worst is behind them. That they think they won’t have to cut again. If they didn’t they would be cutting jobs not salaries, because you can’t go back to that well again.

Last week I heard HP was cutting more jobs, as are many other companies. This has to be demoralizing to the employees that are left. They layoffs are slowing and the amount of jobs that are being cut are less but the approach is wrong, in my opinion.

The BusinessWeek article quotes several HR experts who call this managerial cowardice because they should just cut jobs. Employees will remember these cuts. Top performers know they can always find a job. I was never afraid for my job at HP. I knew they wouldn’t cut me. I was fortunate enough to have a rare skill set and set of experiences. Even if they did cut me I knew I’d not have any difficulty finding a job or starting a company.

I also disagree with the BusinessWeek article. At this point companies should not be cutting jobs or salaries. Large companies need to be cutting business groups. The first couple rounds of layoffs at companies got rid of under-performers. As I’ve said before these employees were not bad, probably just complacent or in the wrong position. At this point companies need to salvage the top 10% that’s left. Move them into critical businesses and cut under-preforming businesses.

The media world could especially learn from this.

The problem is that cutting businesses is even harder than cutting people. That business might be bringing in money. Or companies have invested a lot of money into that business.

These may be true but what if you focused on your core businesses cut everything else and then gave your remaining employees raises? How hard would those employees work? How likely would you be to succeed and gain market share in that business?

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Popularity: 1% [?]

Tagged with:
 

The only thing you should be doing

I originally wrote this post several months ago and it’s taken me this long to remove the excess emotion and get it to a point I thought it was ready to post. I still don’t know if it’s ready but I feel it needs to be said.

The only thing you should be doing

I don’t care if you hate your job! I don’t care if you lost your job!

I don’t care if the stock market drops to 60! (Probably should but I don’t)

I really don’t care what some reporter thinks of the market. (I quit watching the news)

I only care about what YOU & I are going to do about it! (Because let me tell you a secret, we are the only ones that can fix this mess.)

The only thing you can do is shut up and innovate. If whining about it makes you feel better then fine. Whine, but keep it to yourself and when you’re done get back to innovating.

Your new job is to innovate in *every* aspect of your life. Don’t do things better (because the things we’ve been doing don’t work anymore) do them differently.

Unemployed? Innovate in your desired field and create a company that employs others.

Still employed? Don’t put your head down and do your job better because better isn’t enough.

Don’t wait for your boss to give you permission. Innovate now!

Don’t wait for the budget (there is none). Innovation is free.

Have the next great idea but don’t have the time? Innovate around time management.

Have the next great idea but don’t have the money? Innovate how to do it with little/no money. (You don’t even have to innovate there lots of people have done it before.)

If at any point you read something in this post that made you think about how this didn’t apply to you or because you have some special circumstance, you can’t be innovative, start over from the top and read it slower this time.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Popularity: 1% [?]

Tagged with:
 

Do social media professionals work harder than their peers?

Do social media professionals work harder than their peers?

Here’s some scary stats:

* 29% of employees are fully engaged with work
* 52% are not fully engaged
* 19% are disengaged

Cube farm workers

Len Kendal asked on Twitter “I wonder how much poor performance got disguised as “a result of the economy” this year?”

I wonder how much of that poor performance was because of the 71% of employees who were not fully engaged? Re-orgs and layoffs (or even the rumor of layoffs) have a crippling effect on employees. I would wager that the number of disengaged employees sky rockets during those times.  However I don’t think the number of fully engaged employees changes all that much. Why? Because those 29% are the ones that love their job. They love the work they are doing, they love where they work or, probably, both.

Justin Foster sent out this link via Twitter:

What Should I Do With My Life? | Fast Company

The previous era of business was defined by the question, Where’s the opportunity? I’m convinced that business success in the future starts with the question, What should I do with my life? Yes, that’s right. The most obvious and universal question on our plates as human beings is the most urgent and pragmatic approach to sustainable success in our organizations.

What would our economy be like if everyone loved what they did? That’s probably impossible since I doubt some people will never love any type of work but imagine if even the difference between fully engaged and partially engaged flipped. That would be huge.

I personally think that we have largely become a lazy nation. In just about every way. People don’t want to do more than they have to. People don’t want to do more than the other guy.

If people only understood how little extra effort it really takes to be a leader. Seriously even putting in a full 8 hours a day moves you to the top 29%.

I think that’s why I love social media professionals (not to be confused with some of the 71% that are killing time on social networks). The social media professionals I know regularly put in 15-20 hours a day of hard work. We love what we do. We work as hard as we do not because we have to, but because we get to. I don’t know if it’s a result of the industry we are in or a result of the people. I tend to think it’s the later. I think if social media didn’t exist, or when it’s really gone main stream and isn’t as exiting we’ll have move on to the next thing and be equally passionate about that.

Please note that A) I am seriously biased here and B) I am not saying there aren’t those among my peers that don’t work just as hard if nt harder than me. However in my experience there seems to be a larger amount of the 29% crowd in social media than there is in the more traditional areas of business.

What do you think? Do social media professional work harder than our peers? Do we do it because social media brings that out in people or because of the type of people we are? Or have I drank too much of my own punch?

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Popularity: 1% [?]

Tagged with:
 

The burden of employment has shifted – It’s all on you now

Brain Drain album coverImage via Wikipedia

It’s amazing how quickly things changed at the end of 2008. Companies went from being worried about the “Baby Boomer brain drain” that was coming as Boomers retired and there weren’t enough Xers to fill the gap left by their physical presence and their on the job knowledge.

Now companies aren’t concerned about filling jobs as much as they are trying to figure out how to do without. Companies are still concerned about filling the expertise gap, but they’ll always have that challenge to deal with. I believe that the only employees that are safe in this job market are those that are the best at what they do.

Jeremiah Owyang has a very thought provoking post about deciding what your career mission is.

What’s Your Career Mission?

During this rough economic time you should be doing some soul searching, the market has changed and you need to evaluate how you’ll position yourself –even if you’re still employed. Scrutiny abound, you should start to think about what your long term goal is, beyond filling in your weekly status report.

I’m not a believer in the “any port in a storm” mentality. Personally I believe that you should always strive to take jobs/work/employment that you are passionate about, that you can be the in the top 10% (preferably even 1%) in your field and simultaneously challenge you to constantly grow and learn.

My personal career mission has always been to help businesses apply new communication tools and techniques to maximize the communication value with all their stakeholders.

Zemanta recommended the Ramones album cover and I couldn’t resist.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Popularity: 5% [?]

Tagged with:
 

The Reality of the Corporation

Contrasting yesterday’s post, I would like to discuss the realities of the corporation as I see them. I would first like to preface this that I am not an economist. I’m merely a slightly jaded Gen X (aka Slacker) with an MBA. I’ve owned my own businesses and have been, and currently am, an “employee”  (although I wear that label very, very loosely).

The fairytale Corporate America that I talked about yesterday operated in an American capitalist ecosystem. The “global market” didn’t really exist yet and technology had not enabled the rules of capitalism to play out world wide…yet.

Sometime during the ’80’s that changed. This is while most Gen Xers were just starting college or still in high school.  First we watched this new discipline, “Information Technology” hold the promise of the corporate fountain of youth. Then we watched as Europe unified (kind of) under a common financial agreement. We watched Japan go through a major generational shift that enabled a younger more business savvy generation show us what capitalism was capable of. More recently we’ve watched China and India catch their own strain of capitalism – the full effects of this are still far from being fully realized.

During these titanic shifts corporations had a decision to make: Follow the rules of capitalism and take advantages of the wealth of lower cost resources – computer and human – or try to hang on to their fairy tale existences.

It is at that point that corporations realized that employees were just another resource on the spreadsheet. Once that happened “labor” fell under the same effects of capitalism that all resources are subject to. Companies began shifting those resources and a new wave of innovation swept through the country sweeping away the obsolete and propelling the prepared to new heights.

Today, thanks to the Internet and technology there are very few jobs in America that can’t be done somewhere else for nearly as good, just as good, or often times better by someone overseas or by a computer/machinery. And if you think your job is safe, wait and hold that fairytale close to your pillow at night.

There are only two American jobs that are safe in the future. Those done by a true specialized, expert or those that don’t exist yet.

This reality is not necessarily better (although many of us think it is) or worse (although many people do) it’s just different. But it’s the reality that we live in.

Because of these huge changes, everything that I mentioned in my previous post about work in the fairytale version of Corporate America is radically different.

Information flows through a company faster than it is capable of capturing it, and that which it can capture is so huge that we haven’t figured out how to digest it effectively yet. Large global companies are not capable of housing all of their employees in one location, and because all but a very few companies that don’t compete globally (I would argue there are none) most small businesses aren’t housed all in the same location.

A company is only as loyal to their employees as long as their position (not necessarily them) can add value to the organization, and likewise an employee is only as loyal to the company as long as it is providing the most value to them (although sadly not every employee grasps this yet).

Employees are mobile and transient. Most corporate jobs are now classified as “knowledge workers.” Knowledge workers do not learn their job their manager. They do not move up in the company. They usually move diagonally, or to another company to move up. I have heard many a manager confess that, in some companies, it is easier to move up within ones own company if they leave to another company and then come back years later. This is the employment equivalent of corporate parkour (see video).

With so much transient information, both in the form of people and data, the need for the collaboration and the simultaneous capture of knowledge is proving to be one of the last true competitive advantages companies have. With knowledge and collaboration comes innovation.

It is also important to note that something else happened during these huge shifts. People were turned into line items on a spreadsheet, you were either a customer or an employee and either way you represented a certain dollar amount. Once CEO’s took the faces away from the people they relied on, they became greedy and were able to rationalize all kinds of things (I believe a very similar thing happened with the government years before).

Corporations violated (and still do) the publics trust time and time again. Even the Media (which is just another group of corporations) fell victim to this greed.

People no longer trusted the Government
People no longer trusted Corporate America
People no longer trusted the Media.

What’s even more important beyone the loss of trust is that people no longer rely on these groups for the things they used to (the one arguable exception is the Government, but like I said, that’s arguable).

The solution to these problems lies in the, yet to be fully realized, power of Social Media. Moving forward I will use the metaphor of Capitalism to show how government agencies and politicians, companies and even local and national media outlets can use the tools and trends driving the social media revolution to earn back trust and gain substantial competitive advantages by better capturing knowledge and enabling innovation.

Technorati Tags: ,,,,,

This post is part of my ongoing effort to blog the book I’ve been working on for too long before the end of the year. These are all rough first drafts that have not been edited or even proofread. Comments and patients are requested. You can follow the whole series through the category “The Book“.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Popularity: 8% [?]

Tagged with:
 

Bad Behavior has blocked 6161 access attempts in the last 7 days.