The members of the Advisory Board will participate in key actions concerning the survey and report:

• Help identify topics and questions for this year’s survey
• Provide guidance on language and formulation of the questions
• Pilot test the survey itself
• Contribute to the analysis and interpretation of the data around specific topics

Members of the Advisory Board may:

• Be involved in one or more of the activities listed above, depending on their availability and specific interests.
• Choose to be listed publicly as a member of the Board. If for organizational policy reasons this is not possible, they will be identified generically (e.g. “digital leader in a global healthcare company”).

Requirements for membership in the Board:

• Be an intranet/collaboration/digital practitioner inside an organization
• Be from any size and type of organization: public or public sector, association, NGO, etc.
• Have a minimum of approximately one hour of time to contribute, more if possible.

Vendors, agencies and solution providers have important perspectives on intranets and digital workplaces. I welcome and value their suggestions and comments about the survey and the report. However, the Advisory Board itself will be limited to practitioners.

Digital Workplace Trends 2013: from what to how

This year the focus is moving from “what” to “how”. I plan to explore:

• high-level trends in the intranet/digital workplace
• how they correspond to the big picture: new ways of management (“2.0″)
  
• how social collaboration is impacting organizational processes
• business value of social collaboration in the digital workplace and how it’s measured
• how the intranet/digital workplace services the customer-facing workforce
• how the intranet/digital workplace serves floor-field workforces*
• change facilitation initiatives and how they are conducted and measured
• how employee/workforce engagement is facilitated
• how organizations are dealing with demand for mobile access and services

 Help shape our understanding of the role of the intranet and digital workplace in our organizations.

If you would like to be involved, get in touch and give me an idea of how you would like to contribute. I’ll then send you a link to the online collaboration space we will be using over the course of the project.

- – -

* See point 4 in this post: http://netjmc.com/digital-workplace/digital-workplace-trends-2012-published-on-december-12th-2011

Share

Digital Workplace Trends 2012 differs from other intranet research for 3 reasons.

1. It covers the broad scope of the “digital workplace”: the managed, social collaborative and mobile dimensions.
2. It defines “leadership class” organizations and gives you facts and figures for your own strategies and business cases.
3. It deals with real, current challenges because the survey itself is developed in collaboration with the participating organizations.

1. The digital workplace scope: the reality of online work environments today

This broad, comprehensive scope corresponds to the reality of the eco-system of enterprise platforms and tools offered to today’s workforces in most organizations. It covers the managed, social collaborative and mobile dimensions of people’s online work environments.

2. The leadership class and what they do differently

Looking at what leadership class organizations are doing, the report provides facts and figures you can act on in your own strategies and business cases. The leadership class is made up of enterprises that have responded “yes” to one of the following 3 criteria:

1. The intranet or digital workplace is the “way of working” in the organization, that is to say “the essential place for accessing all or most of what people need to work”.
2. Internal social collaboration has become well-established enterprise-wide or well-established within some parts of the organization.
3. A fully functioning, high-level digital board makes strategic decisions for both internal and external digital channels ranging from the intranet to external web sites, and including collaboration and social networking.

3. Current challenges and tangible value

The report deals with current challenges; it delivers tangible value because it is based on on-going collaboration with organizations around the world. The survey and report started in 2006 with 100 organizations around the world. Since then, it has grown to include over 450 organizations, some of whom have participated since the beginning. Each year survey topics are selected interactively with the intranet practitioners themselves, as well as with experts around the world. This ensures that the report will deliver value based around current issues and challenges.

You can read more about Digital Workplace Trends 2012 on its own dedicated website including reviews and purchase information.

Share

Two fundamentally different models exist for a Digital Board, each with a unique approach to the “who” and the “how” of high-level governance.

This post describes the areas of responsibility in more detail, looks at the two models and offers guidance about which model best suits different contexts.

Areas of responsibility

1. Decision-making

The DB may make decisions or approve decisions. If the DB is at a very high level in the organization, there needs to be an operational board (middle level) that actually does the strategic thinking. This is represented by the “operational board” or the “dedicated team” in the two models.

Strategic decisions include:

• Vision and scope for the digital workplace
• What the digital workplace includes
• How the digital workplace is aligned to company and business strategies.
• …
• Fundamental principles
• Centralized or decentralized, for different aspects.
• Highly governed or entreprenurial approach.
• Access policies: who, where, how.
• …
• Entry point strategy
• Single or multiple?
• Customization?
• Owner(s).
• …

2. Coordinating

The DB must ensure that coordinating mechanisms or bodies are in place. The DB itself is a coordinating body at a high level, and similar mechanisms or communication linkages must be established at other levels in the organization.

• Identifying owners and roles for the different “pieces” or dimensions. The “pieces” include the managed, structured collaborative and social collaborative dimensions as shown here. Other key pieces are the company directory/rich profiles, search, mobile applications, evaluation tools, etc.
• Identifying ways to ensure coordination and ensuring that they are integrated into processes and job roles.

3. Leading the company into the future

This involves ensuring that evaluation techniques are used to monitor what people and the businesses need.

It also involves being aware of what other companies are doing, what new technologies can offer, and how the digital world is evolving in general. The DB should be at least “on step ahead” in their thinking about where the Digital Workplace should be.

How the models differ

The representative model – balance of power and buy-in

• The representative model is typical in organizations with strong business divisions and different activities. In organizations where the middle divisional level is as strong if not stronger than the top or corporate level, this model helps bring balance to the decision-making process. An advantage of this model is that no once can hide. If a powerful division is absent, it is visible to everyone.
• There are two major risks with this model:

1. Divisions pay lip service to decisions, at both operational and senior levels, then go ahead and do their own thing. There is no single final authority, so accountability is not clear.
2. Decision-making can be very slow. Representatives at the operational level need to check with their senior management at many points along the process. Apparent decisions get reversed when someone comes back reporting that their management does not agree.

• That said, assuming people play the game openly, this model can be very powerful during the project phase where it is essential to get everyone on board. Once launch has taken place, the company may decide to evolve to the designated model which is much more efficient, if the owner and dedicated team are good at their jobs and respected by others.

The dedicated model – faster decisions and greater accountability

• The designated model is recommended for organizations with an overly strong consensus-driven, decision-making culture.  “Decision by committee” rarely leads to excellence and usually ends up stalling. If this is your case, and decisions are put off month after month because the senior people cannot come to agreement, or because a key person is always missing from the meeting, you may well consider implementing the designated model.
• This model requires a strong CEO or equivalent, who may need to arbitrate when the owner makes decisions that other senior managers disagree with. If this happens often, it means the model is not working. That may be because true consultation is not taking place, or because of “invisible” political moves and bad faith somewhere in the process.
• The biggest risk in this model lies in the “owner” role.
• Ideally, the owner is someone high up in the organization, well-connected to the CEO or equivalent, respected by high-level stakeholders and middle management, and a good communicator. But what happens when that person moves on professionally?
• It’s safer, but may be less effective, to include this responsibility in an existing role such as CIO, CIO, or something similar.
• The dedicated, highly skilled team is one of the strengths of this model. This model also makes it easier to integrate external contractors into the team when specific skills are needed.
• The dedicated team must have a strong leader who works well with the owner. Ideally this person is comfortable with strategic and functional issues, and able to communication well with technical experts.

 What is your model and how is it working?

Please share your comments on these models and your own practices. You can leave comments here or drop me an email.

Share

This is the slide deck I used in my two workshops at CongresIntranet 2012 in Utrecht Holland.

Share

The “Management and stakeholders” angle has been further developed:

• “Business alignment” has been pulled out of “vision” and emphasized by making it a bullet point of its own
• “Integrating social into enterprise processes” has been strengthened by adding “business and support functions”
• “Aligning KPIs and DW” and “Management: active involvement” have been added

On the “Building blocks” a single but important item has been added:

• “Evaluation strategies and tools: metrics, indicators”

Many thanks to those who contributed ideas and comments.

Spontaneous momentum is outpacing controlled, linear projects

The speed of evolution of intranets has picked up. Companies I work with and many I observe are working faster than before. Change in workforce behavior is outpacing controlled, linear projects in many places. Project planners are taking into account the existence of multiple social initiatives throughout the company. Project managers need to build on this spontaneous momentum, work on several fronts simultaneously, and not be afraid of giving up some control.

Christy Hahn (Director of Creative Services at a very large financial services company) expresses it well (in the comments following the original post):

“This (post) is very timely, as we’re in ‘fast forward’ mode with the evolution of a digital workplace. Because of the pace, it’s essential that all three “buckets” are happening in tandem. I appreciate the way you’ve captured and categorized the key components of the digital workplace because they reflect how much effort goes into this type of transition…”

Share

What came out of a 45-minute round table discussion on “How to get from an information-based intranet to a social intranet”?

Read on to see lots of ideas, based on firsthand experiences from 18 passionate intranet people.

I led the group through a 5-minute brainstorm on major obstacles and we regrouped into the 3 categories below.  Then we went into 3 huddles to identify ways around the obstacles. This was fast work, all wrapped up in 45 minutes. The three obstacles:

1. Management resistance (top and middle, each with different concerns)
2. Culture and change resistance (which is a bigger question than the intranet itself)
3. Internal communicator resistance (uncomfortable losing control)

The rest of this post is in short note form. The ideas and approximate wording are from the participants themselves.

Obstacle 1: Management resistance

Top and middle do not the same concerns.

Top management is focused on numbers, outcomes, added value.

• Therefore, show them good practices, success stories, direct benefits so that they say “yes, it makes sense”.

Middle management fears lack of control, don’t fully understanding what’s happening, wonder who is working if everyone is using social media.

• Therefore, show value added but on a more granular level.
• Work with them to develop guidelines (for IT, for HR) so they feel involved and “safer”.
• Have people on your team they can talk to if they need support for their processes.
• Provide on-hands training for them so they understand how to use the different tools from the beginning.

Find KPIs that relate to business.

Help them make social collaboration part of the KPIs but not by saying “please micro blog, discuss in a forum, etc.”. You need to speak about business:  “Maybe you want to raise client satisfaction with your team. How can social media be used to do this?

It’s OK to make it “cool”.

If you can make the use of social media “cool factor” it might help. Imagine your CEO sitting in the business lounge at an airport and saying to a peer: “Look at my iPhone. I have 50,000 followers on my internal blog.”

Obstacle 2: Culture and change resistance

It’s about something bigger than the intranet.

Because this is about people, change and culture, we’re talking about something bigger than the intranet. Your intranet is not going to change everything.

Therefore…

• Whatever you do, it has to serve peoples’ needs.
• You have to be out there listening to people.
• There’s no point in delivering something you have not involved the employees with.
• Otherwise why would they use it? Of course they will be resistant to change if we have not listened to them.

Start early with the people who will cause the biggest headaches

Involve work councils and other people who will cause the biggest headaches because once you get them on board, they are the ones who will  help drive the culture change and drive change in their departments.

Figure out why they are resisting. Identify the problems they see. Fear? Lack of clarity or understanding?

The culture change needs to be around “it’s OK to make mistakes”

You can call someone up and say – “Oh sorry I didn’t mean that, or I didn’t get that.” That’s OK verbally but the minute you write that in a discussion or comment, it becomes more of a threat.

It’s around enabling innovation and change through “It’s OK to make mistakes. Put those ideas out there. They might get knocked down but they may also be really good!”

Obstacle 3: Internal communicators

Internal communicators often resist this change, saying “We own this part of the company, this process, the intranet itself.” They have a traditional way of doing things. They push information out and are not used to the social approach.

Therefore…

Find a top level sponsor early on.

• We need to find a top level sponsor from the outset.

• Then we can go on an individual level to the internal communicators, offline, in one-on-one conversations to try to educate them, to reassure them.
• The need to understand it does not mean the end of their jobs, the end of control, the end of validated information.

Bring other voices into the steering committee.

Bring in people from the business, HR and other departments so that there are other voices besides just the internal communications.

Try to get a balance so that all these people can decide on a high level road map together.

There can be a happy coexistence.

• Social media can also help them reach their goals.
• It is complementary with what they already do.

Start small. Think how things fit together.

It’s not easy to agree on what the intranet is.

• Is it just the corporate communications stream?
• Is it the portal with all the systems people use to communicate internally?
• All of these things can happily co-exist. There still remains a very traditional, validated corporate communication stream that can be improved and made better by social features.

There also needs to be some full tilt social aspects and systems that exist along side the corporate stream. It’s a question of complementary co-existence.

Share

The digital workplace from three complementary angles: management & stakeholders, people and “building blocks”

This diagram is work in progress with three of my clients who have asked me to help them evolve their “intranet+collaboration+social” online environments to a more coherent digital workplace. The slide has also evolved gradually thanks to input from workshops in Washington DC and Stockholm with  participants in organizations with different cultures, and a range of experience  from a few “well on the way” to most “just starting” the digital workplace journey.

I’ll be talking on my blog about these “building blocks” over the next few weeks, but wanted to already publish the slide, hopefully to get some feedback.

Start where you can. Avoid a linear approach.

One of the biggest questions people ask is “Where do we start?”. My answer is “You start where you can, the nearer the top the better, but not exclusively from the top.”

Many of the items on the chart can be done in parallel. Most of them take a fair bit of time. The one thing you do not want to do is to be linear in your approach. Ideally, you have a number of teams and people in different “pockets’” of the organization working on projects simultaneously that all help move the enterprise and the culture towards a collaborative digital workplace concept.

If you’re in a position to locate these projects and work with the project leaders to bring people together with a collaborative digital workplace vision and strategy, that’s great. But even if you can’t yet do that, there are plenty of positive actions you can carry out.

How about your experience?

What has your experience been? What is missing on the chart? What would you change?

Share

Frameworks and mechanisms for the new socially-driven digital workplace (Washington DC)

Moving towards a social, collaborative digital workplace (Stockholm)

Globally recognized thought-leader on intranet and digital workplace strategies and governance.

Share

February

January

Globally recognized thought-leader on intranet and digital workplace strategies and governance.

Share

The purpose of this diagram is to trigger thoughtful and actionable conversations among senior management and digital managers. It is designed to make it easier for people to talk about the digital workplace, come to agreements about high-level governance and define business strategies.

Although every organization is different, five fundamentals are relevant for everyone.  We are in an area where technology, organizational politics and business objectives converge, and sometimes collide. Clarifying what you are talking about is the first step to coming to agreements.

The five fundamentals are:

1. The digital workplace stretches across three worlds: internal, semi-internal and public.

2. Different  dimensions within the digital workplace serve different purposes and have different “rules of the road”.

3. The three dimensions overlap and intertwine as the organization becomes more “enterprise 2.0″ enabled.

4. The digital workplace requires a holistic approach at the highest management level.

5. The digital workplace is driven by people-oriented strategies.

Continue reading to see facts and figures around these five fundamentals.

1. The digital workplace stretches across three worlds: internal, semi-internal and public.

The traditional internal-external distinction blurred long ago. The “semi-internal” world of internal plus partners/clients has long existed through project collaboration and sharing of extended enterprise processes.

What’s new today are the information flows between the center and the edge, i.e. between the workforce and the external public. External social networking, teleworking and mobile devices are all relatively new factors that have strongly shaped this evolution. IT and Internal Communication managers can no longer “contain” the flows and toolsets as they could until fairly recently.

2. Different  dimensions within the digital workplace serve different purposes and have different “rules of the road”.

• The managed dimension includes business applications and validated, authoritative, reference content. It is primarily internal but extends partially into the client-partner sphere for inter-enterprise projects and processes.
• The structured collaborative dimension involves teamwork on projects with specific goals, deliverables and timelines. It overlaps with both social collaboration and the managed dimension.
• The social collaborative dimension is self-organizing. It includes social networking, micro blogging, community-building and other social features such as UGC (user-generated content). This dimension  stretches the furthest into the public world and is deliberately drawn off the chart because it is the biggest unknown today and triggers the most apprehension in management.

3. The three dimensions overlap and intertwine as the organization becomes more “enterprise 2.0″ enabled.

The managed dimension becomes socially enabled as business processes begin to include social features. A simple starting point is letting people comment on official articles published on the intranet by management.

A more advanced example is when the structured collaboration dimension intertwines with the social collaboration through networking and what Andrew McAfee calls “Enterprise Q&A“.  Additional research reported on Why Project Networks Beat Project Teams on MIT Sloan Management Review compared the results of different project teams working with goals, deliverables and deadlines. They concluded: “After controlling for project characteristics, size of core project team and other factors related to participation, the number of noncore contributors was a positive and significant predictor of success.” In other words, the most effective teams were able to easily reach out to their own networks around them to obtain information, tap into knowledge and get feedback at different points along their project timeline. (Subscription required to read full article or pay 6.50 US$ for pdf)

4. The digital workplace requires a holistic approach at the highest management level.

Traditionally, enterprises have many different IT, digital, collaboration, Sharepoint, etc. steering groups, each with its own scope. One of the fundamental challenges in governance anywhere is that different well-meaning groups across an organization make conflicting decisions, and implement strategies that do not fit together. There are power struggles and land grabs in the enterprise digital workplace. I’ve recently seen a lot of struggles between Communication and IT when Communication “owns” the intranet and IT “controls” collaboration. I’ve seen many organizations where the buzz around social has created competition and infighting between departments over who “owns” social.

A key way to ease the conflict and optimize the energy is to create a Digital Board whose mission is to make (or at least coordinate) strategic decisions across the different dimensions and channels, internal and external combined.

“Digital Workplace Trends 2012” reports that 17 percent of the 456 participating organizations in the survey have “fully functioning” Digital Boards that coordinate strategy across all digital channels. Another 34 percent have them “in theory but not in practice”. The first group of 17 percent have a much higher participation from business functions than the second group of 34 percent where the traditional support functions are the primary ones present.

5. The digital workplace is driven by people-oriented strategies.

It is commonly accepted that employee engagement is a key factor in business performance. Back in 2009,  I took the list of the Global Intranet Trends survey participants and identified all of those whose companies were on one of the Best Places to Work lists from many countries. I then looked at the degree of use of the intranet and social tools in the “best places to work” companies and compared them to the survey average. Some examples:

• Social media “spaces” existed in 39 percent of the “best places to work” participants but in only 17 percent for the survey average.
• Social networking was self-assessed to be “optimized” in 12 percent of the “best places to work” compared to the survey average of 4 percent.
• Online internal communities existed in 65 percent of the “best places to work” compared to the survey average of 45 percent.

 Building blocks for the digital workplace

I will soon be writing about digital workplace building blocks, but in the meantime I’d love comments, questions and challenges about the five fundamentals.

Reminder: Digital Workplace Trends 2012 report is available for purchase at a reduced price this year. Purchase information.

Share