Saturday, May 31, 2008
Friday, May 30, 2008
Not too long ago a post was written about the next step in social media. It is titled: 'Why Filtering is the Next Step for Social Media'. The beginning of the post was hard to follow, to be honest. But I like the line of thought and agree with the last section:
Filters are rapidly becoming a pertinent issue for developers of social media services. As a result, social aggregation platforms are in the perfect position to lead the pack. While this is no easy task and one that cannot be solved in its entirety, it would help resolve another issue social media users are facing: courtesy.As one commenter (nr. 7) wrote: filtering is not new, it's old. That's true. But now we need more user-friendly and social filtering. And that's pretty new.
Instead of being able to freely add whatever service you wish, some users like myself are taking into account what others may consider noise on certain services as a courtesy to members. In essence, you are becoming our own filter. You may refrain from important other services for fear of being labeled as "noisy". With better filtering options, users can use these services to their fullest extent without becoming a nuisance to others or missing the benefits of aggregating all of their accounts.
Thursday, May 29, 2008
This is the list of questions I/we use to talk about our and get information about other's intranet.
- Global overview of intranet: what does it look like?
- Vision on the future of the intranet (e.g. personalization, wikify intranet, will intranet become your extranet?)
- Vision on security: which information is open to all/not open to all?
- Search (which technology, any finetuning?)
- Relation global and local intranets
- Performance indicators of the intranet: do you have them/use them?
- What is the most used content and application?
- Governance of the intranet (local and global), ownership
- Platform/Underlying technology, architecture
- Who’s in the core intranet team? And how many are in that team?
- Workflow to use the intranet by users/authors/… (who are the authors, training?, readwrite intranet)
- What does the intranet project look like (implementation, roll out, improvement, change management)
- Performance (measurement, how do you make sure it performs?)
- collaboration tooling and experiences
- how do you maintain user satisfaction? Do you survey users regularly?
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
After another week of about 30 mails Luis remarks that lots of these emails are related to scheduling. He writes:
Yes, indeed, I am talking about e-mails that are related to scheduling, setting up and participating in conference events, customer meetings / workshops, specially when it is to show my own experiences on this new reality itself. I am thinking that if I would be able to find a way to reduce those I would be getting my number of incoming e-mails down to 15 to 20 a week. If not less! Yes! As massive as that!!!This triggered me. This implies (logically) that his list of email per week should also include information about the time he has to spend on an email. If you get 30 mails you can delete after just accepting the meeting request for instance. This is totally different from 30 emails to which you have to reply by typing in several lines of text. Nobody thinks 30 of the first kind are a real problem. It would therefore be insightful if Luis could provide this info in his next overview(s).
Saturday, May 17, 2008
"Faster - Why Constant Stress is Part of Our Future".
Friday, May 16, 2008
Thursday, May 15, 2008
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
The consequence [of current business education and specialization] is that people master the "what", sometimes the "how" but hardly the "why". They don't capture the reason why these processes are put in place, how they relate to corporate strategy and how the organisation relates to its environment. The result is straightforward: in organisations, people focus on their own limited sphere of responsibility. (...)I'm very surprised this blog post didn't get more comments. It reminds me of Etienne Wenger's work on social worlds theory and communities of practice and Seely Brown/Duguid's book, 'The social life of information'. They too, a.o., also stressed 'social', 'complexity', 'living systems'. For some reason we read this and carry on with our lives. I agree that social computing brings back these difficult but intriguing topics into the light. And you can see in practice that IT projects that are run from a zoo-perspective give better results than from a museum one.
Another consequence is that this favours software over consulting. The reason why managers love products is because they make things simple. Products offer an answer to a very limited problem against some money. A problem that is inline with the limited sphere of responsibility and budget of the manager. (...)
As a result, fleeing complexity is trans-generational. (...)
The trick is that the organisation by definition is organic and complex. It is not a Museum; it is a Zoo. (...)
And currently this is what enterprise social computing consulting offers. It is a rare opportunity window to think and manage complexity. It is at the junction of behaviours (social) and processes (computing). (...)
The current beauty of the enterprise social computing market lies in the fact that there is no product. It is a consulting, not a software market: the value is to build processes from basic tools. (...)
These tools consequently require translation because they are unfinished products for the organisation. They offer room for intelligence and exploration as they need to be contextualised, mixed and tweaked to be organisationally relevant and compliant. (...)
Enterprise 2.0 is not only the mere implementation of social computing behind the firewall (what and how) but more fundamentally the introduction of employee participation on managing the organisation (why). (...)
The consequence is that we move away from the mechanistic and hierarchic models of organisation (systematic management adepts have favoured, mostly by misunderstanding). (...)
What social computing offers is collaboration tools, but also tools to map relations. Social computing contributes in making the web a - if not the - platform. In doing so it has paved the way for social networks. (...)
Enterprise social computing therefore helps organisations recover their real identity and evolve more easily. (...)
A widespread form of management is based on a very simple assumption: "Employees are dummies". This is a very negative conception of mankind. Result is that only happy-fews are invited to think. Management have a tendency to exclude people who are to be affected by decisions. People are not called in to suggest or craft, they are informed - eventually trained - when things are done. (...)
The figure of the Manager needs reinvention, not on paper but in daily life. (...)
Groups need leaders. So what is relevant is to rethink the organisational hierarchy in a way that managers proactively listen their employees, not replacing management by self-governance. Social computing offers the tools for this dialogue. We also have to get rid off the idea that technology changes society. Andrew McAfee seems to support this idea. (...)
[S]ociety changes technology. (...)
It is by favouring personal initiatives and driving them carefully and respectfully, each of us, at our own limited level, that we'll find ways for collective wealth and happiness. (...)
Thanks Luis for pointing me/us to this. And thanks Oliver for sharing your thoughts with us!
Monday, May 12, 2008
Thursday, May 8, 2008
I also like the social part of Translate: you may suggest a better translation if you like.
Wednesday, May 7, 2008
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
I think these four purposes are well chosen. However, without wanting to be picky, I think 'content' in itself is not a purpose. Shouldn't it be something like: 'sharing content centrally'? I would call 'Content' an essential building block, but not a goal.
The same goes for 'collaboration'. I wouldn't call this a 'purpose'. For me the purpose of an intranet would be 'to encourage and support collaboration'.
If my slight changes to these purposes are correct, then 'activity' is something inherent to the redefined purposes. Content, communication and collaboration are indeed nothing without activity!