Internal communication 2.0: A cultural challenge

Internal Communication 2.0: A Cultural Challenge _______________________________________________________________________________"In clear, simple and enthusiastic terms, Alejandro Formanchuk defines an actionable new worldinto internal communication in organisations can evolve. Combining "version 2.0" realities withtraditional frameworks, his book is a manifesto for those seeking to move their organisationsforward into an approach that is more authentic, respectful, and democratic. Ultimately, its anapproach which adds and liberates more value. Well done!"Mike Klein - Co-Founder at CommScrum - Dennmark“Alejandro Formanchuk makes the critical point that 2.0 Communication is about culture, and notabout technology. In Formanchuks company of the present-future, the talent at the base of theorganizational pyramid finally gains its voice as rigid corporate hierarchies are abandoned in favorof a public square model characterized by peer-to-peer dialogue, honesty and transparentcommunication. Only then, Formanchuk points out, can the tools that we associate with the 2.0world fully demonstrate their value.”William Trout - SVP and Director of Internal Communications at BBVA Compass - USA"Alejandro Formanchuk does one simple but most important thing: breaking down the complexissue of necessary cultural and organizational changes into some easy to read but neverthelesspowerful and demanding commandments. From now own no communicator engaging in "InternalCommunication 2.0" will have the right to say: I had no clue about how demanding my job wouldbecome."Carsten Rossi - CEO at Kuhn, Kammann & Kuhn AG - Germany Alejandro Formanchuk 2

Internal Communication 2.0: A Cultural Challenge_______________________________________________________________________________ Alejandro Formanchuk. He was born in Buenos Aires in 1977, and is based there today.He has a Bachelor´s degree in Social Communication and an Honors Diploma granted by the University of Buenos Aires (UBA). He teaches at UBA and taught in more than 20 universities in the region. Alejandro specializes in organizational communication. He is the President of the Argentinean Association of Internal Communication, and he is the CEO of Formanchuk & Asociados, a communication consulting company. He has led projects for more than 250 organizations in Latin America. Alejandro is an international speaker and has given conferences in Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru and Uruguay. He is the producer and host of “Conversaciones TV”, on-line show on corporate communication. He has been a playwright since he was 20 years old. He loves photography and traveling. • Web: www.formanchuk.com.ar • Blog: www.formanchuk.com.ar/todosignifica • E-mail: alejandro@formanchuk.com.ar • Twitter: @formanchukFormanchuk, Alejandro.Original title: Comunicación interna 2.0: un desafío cultural. 1ª ed. – Buenos Aires: Edición Formanchuk & Asociados,2010.© 2010 Alejandro FormanchukThe deposit provided for by Act 11723 has been made.This e-book may be reproduced and circulated by any means provided the authors are mentioned. You must notmake any commercial use of this publication and you must not modify it in any form. You must give notice to theauthors of how you will use the information contained in this book.Thanks to:Daniel Daza Prado, Luciana Tenreyro, Victoria Ruival, Patricia Goldschmid, John Clifford,William Trout, Mike Klein, Carsten Rossi, Guillermo Dufranc, Josep Loria, Hipólito Francisco andLuis Ferreira. Alejandro Formanchuk 3

Internal Communication 2.0: A Cultural Challenge_______________________________________________________________________________Contents1. Starting to Think and to Rethink 52. Organizational Culture 2.0 63. Organizations Here and Now 94. Internal Communication 2.0 145. Courses of action 216. Questions to keep moving forward 29 Alejandro Formanchuk 4

Internal Communication 2.0: A Cultural Challenge_______________________________________________________________________________1. Starting to Think and to RethinkToday many companies use 2.0 tools to manage both their internal and external communications.Is this a revolutionary practice?Wait a minute. Don’t answer right now.Let me tell you that many European monarchies as well as the Vatican and dozens ofultraconservative political parties around the world use Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, Wordpressand Flickr.What’s your opinion now?First conclusion:Any organization which is a little bit less formal than the British Crown should dare to be presentin the social media. After all, if a queen or the Pope sign up on Twitter or create a blog, whyshould the director of a company be afraid to do so?Now I pose a new question which is a little bit more challenging:Why are these traditional institutions ready to use something which is supposedly so innovative?The answer is simple: because the fact of having “2.0 tools” doesn’t make them “2.0organizations”. To put it in a proverb:The suit does not make the man.Therefore, organizations may use social media (that is to say, they may use technology) both forinternal and external communications without having to modify their culture.Is this any good? Not so much. Cosmetic changes are only superficial.Where shall we start, then? By what is central to organizations: their culture. Alejandro Formanchuk 5

Internal Communication 2.0: A Cultural Challenge_______________________________________________________________________________2. Organizational Culture 2.0I want to talk to you about what I know, about my work experience and about what I have foundout (and I find out every day), about rights and wrongs. Companies from Latin America have beenhiring us for years to strengthen their internal communication and to help them to design“internal communication 2.0” strategies.But what does this mean? What do they really want when they ask for “internal communication2.0”? Basically what they want is “technological tools”: they want us to create blogs, to openTwitter accounts, to design wikis, etc.I’ll be honest with you. Those are the easiest things to sell.But those are the things I never sell (or at least I never sell them at the beginning).Because, to me, the universe 2.0 is the following: A cultural platform rather than a collection of technologies in “perpetual beta” A model which challenges classic ways of methods, participation and organization rather than a new harmless tool of communication One of the most important (and also irreversible?) decisions which a head of communications may take in a company rather than an insignificant decision Alejandro Formanchuk 6

Internal Communication 2.0: A Cultural Challenge_______________________________________________________________________________Then, what is my approach?Culture. Culture. Culture.First, we analyze the organizational culture and its practices. Second or third, we plan the mediaand tools which should be used.Although many companies have an idea of what they want from their internal communications,they do not necessarily know what they need. Thats where I come in. I want to sleep well atnight, knowing that I am adding sustainable medium- and long-term value, helping companies togenuinely transform themselves by harnessing the loyalty and creativity of their workforcesInternal communication 2.0 calls for a culture 2.0!Therefore, we should distance ourselves from the “techno-centered” viewpoint focused on themedia. Or think about these questions:• Do companies do “internal communication” when they publish an “internal magazine”?• Do companies have more communications when their magazine has more pages?• Do companies have a better communication if the magazine is in color instead of in black and while?• Do leaders communicate better when they meet more often with their team?• Do companies update their communications when they use social media?Let’s use the culture as a “Platform to launch communications”. People express themselvesaccording to their personality. The same happens with companies, but instead of talking aboutpersonality we use the word culture.Culture is communication in motion.I love this phrase! Alejandro Formanchuk 7

Internal Communication 2.0: A Cultural Challenge_______________________________________________________________________________ CULTURE: FROM 1.0 TO 2.0 1.0 2.0 Employee Collaborator Internal public internal and external actor Human resource Person Struggle for power Shifting influences Centralize Decentralize Giant structure Movable units Competition Cooperation Information Dialogue Boss and subordinates Different levels of partnership Linear structure Community Director Facilitator Focus on hierarchy Focus on talent Respect gained due to position Merit based on ability and action People are herded People are attracted Work hard Work smarter Bureaucratic conglomerate Obstacle-free organisational flow Engraved in stone Open to challenge Leader knows the most Leaders make best use of those who know best Hobbes Rousseau Keep Create and recreate Don’t fail Learn from mistakes and try again Administrators Entrepreneurs Employees repeat tasks People are nonconformists and creative Always give orders Build alliances Linear and alphabetic logic Mental maps and imagination Yes, Sir! Have you considered these options? Obsession with reducing expenses Passion for creating value Alejandro Formanchuk 8

Internal Communication 2.0: A Cultural Challenge_______________________________________________________________________________3. Organizations Here and NowCulture 2.0 is not futurism. Organizations change. HERE AND NOW.I would like to tell you a story. One day I was teaching Corporate Communication at theUniversity of Buenos Aires. I was explaining the different media of communications which may beused in a traditional company. At one point, a student raised his hand and told me that what Iwas explaining might not work for his company because:• He works for a “hybrid company”: two European companies merged two business units and created a third company.• The first day he got to work he had to pick up his laptop himself to start working. Literally, he approached a window, introduced himself, provided his personal information and got his computer.• He doesn’t have an office. The company occupies four floors and he can connect his computer wherever he wants. What’s more: he is encouraged to move constantly to meet new co-workers.• His boss works in Brazil and he has never seen him personally. They contact every day through MSN, Skype, e-mail or phone. But they have never shaken hands.• He takes part in many global projects simultaneously. Every project has a leader. Therefore, perhaps one month he has to report to 4 different people who are spread all over the world and he has to take part in several virtual teams. Alejandro Formanchuk 9

Internal Communication 2.0: A Cultural Challenge_______________________________________________________________________________• 600 people work in the Buenos Aires office. Only 200 have been hired directly by the company. The rest are employed by recruitment agencies so they are outsourced.• Five people work in his area. His boss, who is in Brazil, is the only person who has been hired directly by the company. He and his co-workers come from four different human resources companies.• 30% of the staff are foreigners. Some of them stay in our country for 3 days and then leave for other countries, others stay for 3 months, some others stay a little bit longer. People come and go all the time. Some Argentineans also leave and lead projects in different countries for the whole year, staying in one country per month, on average.• To counteract the “Babel” effect, the company has decided that absolutely all internal communications should be written in English. The employees should write their e- mails in that language even if the recipient is Argentinean. Spanish or the local language is only allowed for informal communications.This is not a company of the year 2020. Nor is it located in California orTokyo. It is located in Argentina in the year 2010. HERE ANDNOWIt provides a great opportunity to play in speculative scenarios and to practice and to exercise thebrain, which, up to now, is the only organ which can perceive the future.Now let’s think what it would be like to manage the internal communications in a company of thepresent-future where: Alejandro Formanchuk 10

Internal Communication 2.0: A Cultural Challenge_______________________________________________________________________________• The people don’t have a fixed office and never meet in the same place.• They have never seen their boss.• They report to different leaders who are in different parts of the planet.• They take part in global teams which are formed and dissolved easily.• They may lead projects and be in charge of somebody who was their “boss” up to yesterday.• They have temporary responsibilities and hierarchies.• They have as many coworkers as projects they are involved in.• They have 2 kinds of co-workers: those who they see personally and those they have never seen before.• They communicate more digitally than personally.• Meetings are something of an anachronism.• They don’t collect information because it’s impossible and unintelligent to do so.• They think that they’ll stay in the company for no more than 18 months.• They consider themselves “individual companies” which provide services.Are we talking about futurism?No. We are talking about HERE AND NOW.Can we understand this?This is the point of view of an old man who is 33 (my age at the time I amwriting this book). Alejandro Formanchuk 11

Internal Communication 2.0: A Cultural Challenge_______________________________________________________________________________This is me as a child.First difference: I was fair-haired.Then my hair turned brown. (My mom’s Italian genesbeat my dad’s Polish genes.) But the differences don’tend there:• I was a fan of “Mazinger Z” and I could only get to see it at tea time and on only one medium: the tv.• I used to read “Anteojito”, a children’s magazine, which I used as the only source to do my homework. I used to “cut and paste” literally, with scissors and glue.• My mom also used to read “Anteojito” when she was a child.• I had to pay for all the information I got or make a trip to the library. Encyclopedias were very expensive.• My grand-mother used to borrow a neighbor’s phone to make phone calls.• In 1986 I was given a Commodore 128 computer. At that time, people were amazed by computers because of their capacity to process data.• The same year my dad bought a CD player which he used for many years. This technology dominated recorded music for at least 20 years.• I had only one category of friends: the ones I knew personally.Learning from those who can teach us about change should be a pleasure, but it is also a need.These days, I get to interact with people much younger than me. I would recommend this toanyone who is mature in business - to pass on their knowledge to those less experienced thanthemselves, but also to be open to new developments that their younger employees areadopting. Alejandro Formanchuk 12

Internal Communication 2.0: A Cultural Challenge_______________________________________________________________________________ GOD SAVE THE GREEN! THE WORLD IS BECOMING A BETA VERSION!This means that it is ever more difficult to draw maps. We don’t know the geography and thecoasts are being continuously eroded, filled, changed… The “Lost island” moves constantly. Butwe should not let these facts discourage us.Alvin Toffler, in his brilliant book “Future Shock”, says that “having a faint idea of what to expectis better than not having an idea at all and, in many cases, extreme accuracy is completelyunnecessary”.Therefore, what is important is not to get the prediction right but to exercise thevision.In particular when you notice that the technological imagination does not work with thetechnology as an object but as a main thought world which contains it, that is: if we stoppedbelieving in “Communications” as a value, the Internet would no longer be a communicationtechnology.Let’s take a look at what “Internal Communication 2.0” is and may be. Alejandro Formanchuk 13

Internal Communication 2.0: A Cultural Challenge_______________________________________________________________________________4. Internal Communication 2.0Culture is communication in movement. I think that communication 2.0 follows several of thosepaths: a. Access and availability: Internal communication 2.0 implies that companies provide their staff with a broad access to information. (I’m tempted to say: EXTENSIVE ACCESS!) Such access makes a lot of data available. In the past such data was forbidden or reserved to an exclusive group. Is this a test of faith? Of course it is! As it implies relying on staff to make responsible use of such information. Does it pose many risks? Yes, a lot! But let’s be honest: although many companies prefer to keep some information for themselves (their profit-and-loss statement, for example), nowadays it’s very easy to find whatever you want if you “google” it properly. Maintaining a Maginot Line to protect information is as useless as the real fortifications were in 1940. The “Maginot line” is as useless as ever. b. Equality: Equality. Big word. But what does it mean in terms of communication 2.0? Reducing the imbalance between those who can create contents and those who are only authorized to read and accept contents. To a certain extent, it reminds me of the “prosumer” concept, which internally means that the roles of information producers and information consumers are interchangeable in an organization. Alejandro Formanchuk 14

Internal Communication 2.0: A Cultural Challenge_______________________________________________________________________________ c. Usability Improving “usability” is a priority to reduce the limitations arising from the lack of technical competences. Strong will is not enough. Companies have to provide the necessary resources for “the reality not to forbid what is permitted by law”. d. Involvement: People often have to pave their own way within the communication monoblock. They should be encouraged to create, enrich, release, discuss and reformulate contents. This calls for the organization to be sensitive to different experiences and individual representations and to avoid being tempted to reduce them or group them under only one model of things able to be said or thought. Then, in practice, you’ll see if the people want or deem it necessary to take advantage of these spaces to create contents or if they prefer to engage in lurking and consume information without commenting anything or taking part in the debate. Lurking is real. (Lurker: a person who often reads discussions on internet networks but seldom contributes to them). And it may be a symptom of many things, such as the following: a. The people are afraid to give their opinions b. They do not trust in the real reasons behind the change c. They are not interested because they consider the change useless or false Involvement and trust are two sides of the same coin. Involvement is a learning process, a test of value. You don’t get involved overnight. And even less when the previous logic was one of punishment, arrogance, unidirection, impositionn or order. Alejandro Formanchuk 15

Internal Communication 2.0: A Cultural Challenge_______________________________________________________________________________ e. Interaction: 2.0 involves an interactive communication where staff has the chance to create, share and take part in contents under a network paradigm or environment and not simply under an ascending-descending bidirectional paradigm. That is the reason why an internal communication 2.0 scheme requires a design which is not focused on strengthening or multiplying the capacity to spread contents but on maximizing the interaction. There is a change from broadcasting content from a platform to spread contents to the creation of a public square which encourages decentralized, multi- dimensional, multi-hierarchical and free dialogue. f. Collective Construction and Collaboration: We need to accept that good ideas come from anywhere. Yes, especially from the “bottom” of the pyramid. Internal communication 2.0 is consistent with the cooperation in the open preparation of contents under a “Wiki” model for instance. And this requires many things. First and foremost, leaders need to validate the fact that certain contents may be produced by people who are not at the top or in the centre of the pyramid and that “meritocracy” outweighs formal hierarchy at the time of validating participations. The challenge is to organize diversity, to articulate the differences and to get micro-actions or ideas together before they are dissolved. The benefit: to strengthen collective intelligence and to change from implied knowledge to expressed knowledge. Alejandro Formanchuk 16

Internal Communication 2.0: A Cultural Challenge_______________________________________________________________________________ g. Listening, replying and taking action: In a 2.0 model, expression is the main value. When companies adhere to this culture, they minimize the logic of “broadcasting” and get ready to listen to the staff because they are really willing to know what they think. They also take on the responsibility to reply to whatever is said and, most importantly, to do something about what they hear. A typical counter example: a company creates an internal blog because they are eager to know what the people think. Everything is fine until criticism arises. What happens in 90% of the cases? a. They don’t reply b. Those messages are erased c. There’s a witch hunt to find out who wrote those messages d. The blog is shut down h. Respect and ego reduction: Good Communication is only possible when people respect and value each other. Ans this is the mantra of communication 2.0, either internal or external. Here’s an example: In a company we suggested that the “Customer Care Manual” should be prepared by the employees under a Wiki model where everybody could give their ideas and where the best ideas would be chosen regardless of the author’s formal hierarchy. We faced a really big challenge (see point 6): get the leaders to accept and believe that the people who dealt with customers were smart, knew a lot, knew even more than them (that turned out to be heretic on my part and I was almost hanged!) and therefore, they were encouraged to do the following: Alejandro Formanchuk 17

Internal Communication 2.0: A Cultural Challenge_______________________________________________________________________________ a. To think together b. To write together c. To decide together After all, who deals with the customers every day? THEM! I was inspired by Dan Gillmor, (journalist and author of the classic "We, the Media") when he said: “My readers know more than I do, and that’s a good thing”. Leaders should recite this mantra: “My employees know more than I do, and that’s a good thing!” This is how the story ended: the “Customer Care Manual” turned out to be excellent, with millions of productive ideas, many more than if it had been written by a boss or a know-it-all consultant. A blow to the ego? Yes, all the 1.0 leaders’ egos were bruised”. But the CEO, who I know well, told me later: “Ale, until now, I didn’t know that my company was full of so much talent at the base of the pyramid. Maybe it is time to redesign it. Thanks for showing it to me.” i. Network and interaction: A communication 2.0 scheme requires a participative and flat organization, where the interaction is not affected by classic hierarchies or uni-directional relationships. Where roles, tasks, borders, leaderships and interchanges are more flexible and dynamic, where the center and the surrounding areas are contingent, situational or blurred because of a network of interactions. Alejandro Formanchuk 18

Internal Communication 2.0: A Cultural Challenge_______________________________________________________________________________ j. Control reduction: Thanks to all these guidelines the company is ready to “lose” control over what is said, thought or decided. Opening the game to the model 2.0 means to stop wondering “how do I control what the staff says?” and start thinking “how do I take advantage of what the staff say?” (as Manuel Castells put it: “The only question which does not admit the Internet is how to control it”). a. Key concept: Equipotentiality. Potentially everyone has equivalent capacities to publish information. b. Additional idea: Permeable media. We should stop using Henry Ford’s phrase: “You can have any color you want as long it’s black”. Reedited: “You can say anything you want as long as you are respectful and constructive”. k. Disintermediation and Horizontality: The architecture to take part in the universe 2.0 entails a process of disintermediation in the production and spread of contents. The active role of the “communication prosumer” requires a space where opinions may be freely interchanged and debates may held for as long as necessary, always taking care of basic principles of respect. It is a “peer to peer” interconnection with a minimum intervention to ease the contact or the creation of the public square. Alejandro Formanchuk 19

Internal Communication 2.0: A Cultural Challenge_______________________________________________________________________________ INTERNAL COMMUNICATION: FROM 1.0 TO 2.0 1.0 2.0 Information Dialogue Communication as a product Communication as a process Sender and receiver Communication prosumers Uni-directional communication Peer-to-peer comunication Descending and ascending paradigm Networks Many affirmations Many consultations Blah, blah, blah Listening to people a lot Data Significance The power of the megaphone The power of the neurons Vertical messages Horizontal chats Information monoblock Live communication networks A lot of passwords A lot of access Classified information Public and open information Maginot Line Google Reserving information Sharing dialogues Power of information Power of conversation Media focused on information spread Media seeking interaction “Bottle neck” Architecture of participation Broadcasting logic Decentralized interactions Information panopticon Public square for communications Egyptian pyramids Global networks Hatred of critism Celebration of diversity Fear of what is heard on the grapevine Celebration of conversation Big media Great people Alejandro Formanchuk 20

Internal Communication 2.0: A Cultural Challenge_______________________________________________________________________________5. Courses of actionIf I had to create a tag cloud for this text, the words which would stand out would probably be:active role – collective construction – sincere listening -decentralization – open mind and access – architecture of participation- willingness to talk – fluent interaction – public square - symmetry -collective intelligence – actors and authors – neuronal layout -equipotentialityNow I’d like to share with you some thoughts that cross my mind:1. It’s not that easy to do internal communication 2.0Implementing an internal communication 2.0 scheme is a big challenge because it impliesreconfiguring the company culture, practices, powers, dynamics and ways of organization.Therefore, it’s “dangerous” to do it because it will cause stress and there will be dissidents,“insiled” (people who feel exiled within the same company), but also adepts.It’s not easy. Unless we just want to create blogs and wikis and open Twitter accounts.As Michel Houellebecq put it in his book “Platform”: “Things should be clear: life, as it is, is notbad. Some of our dreams have come true. We can fly, we can breathe underwater, we haveinvented electric appliances and computers. The problem begins with the human body”. Alejandro Formanchuk 21

Internal Communication 2.0: A Cultural Challenge_______________________________________________________________________________2. 2.0 is not a univocal or universal destinationNot all the organizations are ready to implement communications 2.0 or must do it. I believe thatyou, as a communicator, must solve problems and not add problems. And sometimes if you forcesome companies to adopt the paradigm 2.0, you will give them a box full of unnecessarydifficulties.3. It’s very hard to create communication 2.0 if the culture is 1.0Culture is the key. Culture and communication go hand in hand together. If the culture is 1.0,communicating using a 2.0 model will be false, unproductive or even worse: counterproductive.What are our culture numbers? Sometimes they are even negative!4. Companies may be 2.0 without having digital tools 2.0My favourite conclusion. My most practiced and best implemented idea in companies. Let’s startby being 2.0 without technology!Let’s see: Rather that a tool, 2.0 is a culture or an attitude. Therefore, a company can embracethis paradigm without having to design or create “social media”. For example, I recommend thatcompanies should reconfigure the classic work meetings under a model 2.0.A meeting can be 2.0 because 2.0 implies participation. And the meeting goals are met: to easecommunication, to achieve interaction among participants, to share information instantly, tocreate knowledge in a collaborative way, etc. In addition, a meeting has two advantages:synchronic communication and reduction of “lurking”.Technologies like Wiki for example can strengthen this attitude and act like an “anabolic steroid”in an open communication. But a simple meeting can also be 2.0. And free! Alejandro Formanchuk 22

Internal Communication 2.0: A Cultural Challenge_______________________________________________________________________________5. Introducing tools 2.0 may affect the cultureI am always asked what will happen if tools 2.0 are introduced in a “broadcasting culture”. Is itany good? I think that it’s better to act first on the culture itself. But in case that’s not possible,we should keep in mind that structures are both structuring and structured. Structured by thesame practice they structure. That sounds paradoxical, doesn’t it?Introducing tools 2.0 may then have an impact on the culture because in their DNA they carry away of Communications, an implied logic, an energy field. They look harmless or neutral butthey aren’t.It is like when you want to start working out. First, you “buy the tool”, which is the easiest thingto do. For example you buy a pair of shoes. Then alter a few days you take a look at your shoeswhich are in your bedroom, you take a look again, you think about the 200 dollars you spent andfinally you decide to wear them. The tool encourages you to take action and, if everything turnsout to be fine, your working-out routine may even be long-lasting and sustainable.Sometimes tools 2.0 may be like these shoes. And they may help you to tell the leader: “If wealready have the blog, the wikis, etc. why don’t we really take advantage?6. Deciding what kind of social media you need to implementLet’s suppose we have the culture. We have the practices. Do we want tools? Let’s think whichones we need because they aren’t the same. For example we can focus on the following: • Expression: If we want to strengthen and ease the creation of contents on the part of the staff. We use: Blogs, Twitter, etc. • Interaction: If we are interested in easing or strengthening the communication among the company staff, creating communities or forums. We use: Facebook, Linkedin, Friendster, MySpace, Orkut, Skyrock, Netlog, Hi5, Tuenti, etc. • Collaboration and education: If we seek to create collaboration and learning, we should open a space where the staff can cooperate to create contents and ask for help or give help. We use: Wikis or social bookmarkers such as Delicious o StumbleUpon. Alejandro Formanchuk 23

Internal Communication 2.0: A Cultural Challenge_______________________________________________________________________________Other angles I think about are: • What is the capacity of social media to mediatize contents? What model of communication, architecture or communication layout do they recommend? • In what ways do these social media allow or not allow the articulation of relationships between senders-receivers-prosumers? What is the logic?That is, the mediatization of contents and relationships.7. There isn’t an IC 2.0 scheme and a regular IC scheme. There is an ICscheme. Period!There isn’t a “virtual” world. All is real. And all is mediatized for a reason. This book you’rereading now is real even though you may be reading it through a “virtual” medium. If I insult youin the next sentence, you will ask me why and I won’t be able to tell you: “Ah, no, that happenedin the virtual world, don’t get mad at me”. If a company’s image is torn apart on a YouTube video,their shares will fall in the “real” world and not in the market of “virtual values”. That is, we andour communications are always “real” and always have consequences. Therefore, there isn’t acommunication scheme 2.0 and a regular or real communication scheme. There’scommunication. Period! Alejandro Formanchuk 24

Internal Communication 2.0: A Cultural Challenge_______________________________________________________________________________8. We’re always talking about the same thingInternal communication 2.0 is important because old matters are reanalyzed. Matters which Iconsider really important when working on internal communication: a. Models of organization b. Power structures c. Architecture to spread information d. Interaction policies e. Organizational culture f. EgoWe’re talking about the same thing.We aren’t talking about technologies. We’re talking about models.About the same models we’ve always talked about. Alejandro Formanchuk 25

Internal Communication 2.0: A Cultural Challenge_______________________________________________________________________________9. A bad message is always bad even if it’s published in media 2.0Mi first e-mail account was mariscal@fsoc.uba.ar and I opened it in 1996. A few months later Ihired the internet service at home (while I surfed on the net I couldn’t use my phone) and thatyear I also created my first personal page at “Geocities”, in the category “SouthBeach”. (All thismay seem prehistoric for many people who’re reading this book).I was really happy with the Internet. I thought it was too good to be true. One day I invited mygrandpa home and I proudly started to show him this new wonder. He looked at me, made apoker face and told me: “Yes, it’s very nice. But a fool with the Internet is still a fool.”I didn’t dare to ask him if he was talking about me.“What internal communication media should I use for my company? What do you think aboutstarting an internal video channel? Should our CEO have a blog?”I’m often asked this kind of questions. In companies, at seminars, in my blog. And I use mygrandpa’s anecdote to explain that a bad message is still a bad message even when you give itthrough the most innovative, attractive or cool media.Media should not be chosen. We should separate the media from the strategy.The use of media 2.0 shouldn’t be a choice.The use of media 2.0 should be a need arising from the organizational cultureitself and from the strategy. Alejandro Formanchuk 26

Internal Communication 2.0: A Cultural Challenge_______________________________________________________________________________10. Technology changes, humans don’t.I love this comic strip. It has a negative side which reminds me of that debate about whether theworld moves forward or not opened by Ernesto Sábato in the book “On Heroes and Tombs”,when one of the characters says: “Why do you assume that the world has moved forward? Yes, Iunderstand why. It’s better to kill human creatures with Napalm bombs than with bows andarrows”.Hard, isn’t it?But this thought has something positive: the continuance of certain behaviors, the possibility tohold on to something while the currents drag you.Technology changes all the time. All is in perpetual beta. There are so many things to learn andwe have so little time. Many times I feel that whatever I do, I’ll be outdated. That someone willalways come and tell me: “But how come don’t you know this tool, page, software, guru,platform, etc.?”I already accepted that this is inevitable. Alejandro Formanchuk 27

Internal Communication 2.0: A Cultural Challenge_______________________________________________________________________________But it’s also true that people don’t change so much and that communicators are alwaysaddressing similar matters, common problems, shared emotions.When we work, we focus on people and not on tools. Our goals are to give long-lastingmessages, to do believable actions, to have trusting conversations, to have welfare and to findprofessional and personal fulfillment.We are still people who communicate with people. Alejandro Formanchuk 28

Internal Communication 2.0: A Cultural Challenge_______________________________________________________________________________6. Questions to keep moving forwardIn many of my seminars on corporate communication I ask the participants to close their eyesand imagine the future of our professional discipline. I challenge them to think and debate whatthey think internal communication will be like in a couple of years.To round up, I’d like to share with you some of my favorite questions to think together.Education: How will we teach communication in the future? How will a communicator beeducated and who will determine such education? What will we have to know, learn, study,practice and experience?Political value: Where will the role of communicator be in a company? What political valuewill he have? How will he manage to get such political value? How will he interact with otherareas? What will happen to the hierarchy and to the area where he will work? How will he buildinfluence?Tools and media: What will be the internal communication tools or the media of thefuture? What will happen to the digital universe? What will 2.0 turn into?Culture: How will the corporate culture be built, shared and passed on? What will the model of“good employee” and “good leader” be? How will the management climate, culture and sucessbe measured? What will happen to hierarchies? How will the people be promoted? What will bethe values to be communicated?Planning: What will a communication plan be like? What will it depend on? Will crises becomeconstant and will they cause ever shorter plans to appear? Will we have to plan with fireextinguishers in hand? Will we have to make plans, plan Bs and the opposite plans? Alejandro Formanchuk 29

Internal Communication 2.0: A Cultural Challenge_______________________________________________________________________________Interpersonal: What will be the role of interpersonal communications in our society and inthe companies of the future? What will happen to informal communication? Will we hear thingson the grapevine or will we read them on blogs? What will work meetings be like? Will there beanyone sitting face to face with someone else? How will we form and strengthen teams? How willteams be lead?Creation and circulation: How will the communication circulate in a company? What willhappen to the ascending, descending and horizontal communication flow? Who will produceinformation and who will communicate such information? Will the “Wiki” be extended and willthe knowledge be generated in teams and by anyone? Will the information still be equivalent topower or will it be the most distributed asset in the world”?This is the ending I like: with questions.Let’s go on thinking. Thanks for joining me up to here. Alejandro Formanchuk 30

Internal Communication 2.0: A Cultural Challenge_______________________________________________________________________________Support: Alejandro Formanchuk 31

http://expo.blogtronix.com	30
http://www.linkedin.com	17
https://si0.twimg.com	1
https://twitter.com	1

Internal communication 2.0: A cultural challenge

by Alejandro Formanchuk

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Usage Rights

4 Embeds 49

Statistics

Internal communication 2.0: A cultural challenge Document Transcript