Enterprise 2.0 adoption

Sponsored by Enterprise 2.0 Adoption Guide N:Sight Research GmbH

Table of contents 1. Foreword Carsten Rossi ....................................................................................................... 3 2. Background & Idea............................................................................................................... 4 3. Strategic Considerations ...................................................................................................... 5 3.1. Changing Principles & Underlying Ideas ...................................................................... 6 3.2. Holistic Transformation versus Set of Small Initiatives................................................ 9 3.3. Challenges .................................................................................................................. 10 4. Company Insights and Expert Knowledge ......................................................................... 13 4.1. Pitfalls to Avoid .......................................................................................................... 13 4.2. Knowledge Management (KM) versus E20 ................................................................ 15 4.3. Enhancing the Information Flow................................................................................ 16 4.4. Improving Internal Communications ......................................................................... 16 4.5. Fostering Knowledge Sharing..................................................................................... 19 4.6. Enriching Knowledge Retention ................................................................................. 20 4.7. Regaining Business Agility .......................................................................................... 21 4.8. Strengthening Collaboration ...................................................................................... 22 4.9. Enforcing Business Innovation ................................................................................... 23 4.10. Improving Talent & Skill Management ...................................................................... 24 5. Adoption Plan & Management .......................................................................................... 27 5.1. Adoption Archetypes & Pattern................................................................................. 27 5.2. Planning & Organizing Adoption ................................................................................ 27 5.3. Managing Adoption ................................................................................................... 28 6. Summary ............................................................................................................................ 30 7. Author information ............................................................................................................ 33© N:Sight Research GmbH 2

1. Foreword Carsten RossiInstead of a lengthy introduction:Some questions to myself.Why are you sponsoring this study?Because we want to help companies avoid "the endless number of pitfalls (they) are in dangerof stepping in." (See the ideas of Dr. Frank Schönefeld, page 12.) Why do you think that studies like this are necessary?Because "education is the key to a successful implementation of E20." (See the explanationsfrom Luis Suarez from IBM, page 14.)Why do you give it away for free?Because "openness is a critical factor for the adoption of Enterprise 2.0." (See the thoughts ofDr. Thorsten Petry from the Wiesbaden Business School, page 27.)Why do you invite everybody to distribute this copy to as many people as they know!?Because E20 is all about "strengthen[ing] information transfer and knowledge sharing." (See theexperiences of Juliette Girard from Renault, page 18.)What do you hope to achieve by extensively sharing this knowledge?We want these experiences to "translate 2.0 into real business cases." (See the learnings of AnuElmer from SwissRe, page 21.)Why do you engage in Enterprise and Internal Communications 2.0 at all?Because our agency’s mission says: "We want to decrease the distance between companies andtheir stakeholders."At the same time, we are enthusiastic evangelists of these concepts because we, as individualsand as an organization, strive to put them into practice. We live, breathe, and benefit fromthese concepts every single day.Carsten Rossi, May 2011© N:Sight Research GmbH 3

2. Background & IdeaThe Web 2.0 wave has strongly spilled over the corporations boundaries and created a gooddeal of discussions about the way businesses have been managed so far and how they willevolve in the future. Under the name of Enterprise 2.0 social media has found its way into manybusinesses. From many examples we can now see what approaches lead to success. Themistakes that were made at the beginning do not need to be repeated.The Enterprise 2.0 SUMMIT 2010 has initiated quite some interesting discussions around thechallenges of good practices for Enterprise 2.0 initiatives and their adoption. Other topics fordiscussion are the future setup, the design of the organizations and the forms of leadershipwithin an Enterprise 2.0 company. In order to share ideas and to improve the overallexploration of Enterprise 2.0, this report extracts the key ideas and insights from theconference and further research.This research document is structured into four chapters: The following chapter discusses thestrategic considerations regarding the setup of the Enterprise 2.0 initiative. This includes thediscussion of principles, the scope and the approach of the initiative as well as the keychallenges of setting up an Enterprise 2.0 project. In the following chapter we summarize thelessons learned from the discussions of the different use case scenarios at the E20 SUMMIT.This gives an overview of the different starting points and project emphasizes and their specificchallenges as well as success factors. The third chapter outlines and comments on thediscussions about the adoption of Enterprise 2.0 as the key challenge.As previously stated, this paper tries to summarize, restructure and share the actual discussionsrelated to Enterprise 2.0. The study indicates the opinions and experiences of the participantsand other sources. This wealth of experience is complemented by the research that has beendone by N:Sight. It provides a wrapped up snapshot of the common opinions and experiences.The content has to be seen as a recommendation. Each company has different requirementsthat must be considered for the adoption of Enterprise 2.0.© N:Sight Research GmbH 4

3. Strategic ConsiderationsSome examples of early case studies in the field of Enterprise 2.0 were marked by a bottom-up,unintended approach. Nowadays you will find a strong agreement on a more strategicapproach for future initiatives in order to extend the idea towards an Enterprise-wide approachwith a transformable scope for the organization.For this reason some differences and new insights to the so far accepted beliefs have beenpointed out in regards to the principles of Enterprise 2.0, the strategic approach, the challengesand pitfalls as well as the differences, the common grounds of Enterprise 2.0 and knowledgemanagement.We saw a lot of activities around blogs and wiki’s at the beginning. Collaboration and collectingknowledge was the main focus. Some of these activities went very well, but some projects ledto great frustration. There are several reasons for that. People did not publish so much at theweb, like they do today at Facebook and Twitter, but more important was the missingcommunication element, like you have with networking and micro blogging. These Solutionsare much more in focus than they were before.Connecting people with a Facebook-like social network or using micro-blogging seems to be theapproach which works better than other Enterprise 2,0 activities. The activity stream providesthe employees with information and gives you the ability to communicate easily. Knowledgeand information is distributed or received more by accident than planned. And that is the key,because you do not need to think about whether you have knowledge which is important forthe colleagues and needs to be written on a wiki. Other will find these pieces without lookingfor them. Or they can ask, if they need support.However it doesn’t matter which approach a company chooses, it must fit to the needs andculture of the company. We see some general approaches which work well, but not always.Therefore this document contains several examples from the Enterprise 2.0 Summit. They showdifferent use cases and scenarios.© N:Sight Research GmbH 5

3.1. Changing Principles & Underlying IdeasSLATES and FLATNESSES are key mnemonics which described the capabilities andcharacteristics of social software and its benefits of use within the corporation at the beginning.But as the idea of Enterprise 2.0 becomes less technology-centered and more people-centered,principles have to be reviewed and discussed even more in an outcome-related way. McAfees origin SLATES mnemonic Dion Hinchcliffe created a more refined conception© N:Sight Research GmbH 6

When it comes to the key drivers and levers of Enterprise 2.0 the following ideas were heavilydiscussed at the Enterprise 2.0 Summit: ● From Discoverability to Serendipity: While both mnemonics emphasize only the discoverability of information as a key capability of social software, the discussions show that the key business value for Enterprise 2.0 is hidden beyond the just “search & find” pattern in the non-intentional discoverability of information. Technologically speaking, this is realized by the socially created ambient intelligence of social messaging, tagging or bookmarking that provides relevant and valuable business information “in passing by”. As serendipity comes from connections, there is a need to maximize the potential interaction points of people to increase serendipity. ● From Signaling to Sense-Making: While providing new mechanisms to give the the staff access to more and richer information, the need for the contextual relevance must not be overlooked. On an individual level social software must improve the daily work of the staff. On the organizational level the use of social software must support the business processes. On a management level the initiative must help to introduce and adopt people to new management models. ● From Emergence to Re-framing: While emergence only describes the arising of new patterns from the multiplicity of social interactions enabled by social software, the real business values will be created when used for business improvements and business innovations. Therefore setting the right business context is the key success factor for Enterprise 2.0. As seen in the practices discussions about micro sharing and the innovation approach Enterprise 2.0 initiatives can lead to substantial return on investments, if it is set into the context of supporting the re-framing process of the business model. ● From a culture of control to a culture of trust: As transparency opens the information silos and the decision making context, the idea of controlled governance will be outpaced by reality. In order to not enter a state of dysfunctional chaos the culture of control must be superseded by a model of empowered self-responsibility combined with an assimilated collective mind-set. This said guidelines and principles must be combined with training and competence building on social media literacy. The new challenge is to find a gradually incorporated balance between security and privacy to provide enough transparency and to secure intellectual advantages of the enterprise.© N:Sight Research GmbH 7

● From Transition to Operation Mode: While the biggest challenge for today’s Enterprise 2.0 initiative is how to put the organization on track to accept, use and adopt to the new socially enhanced business routines and processes, the open questions for tomorrow’s businesses are: What is the constitution of the future organization? What principles are driving the future business model? What is the role of today’s management ideas and functions? As most discussions around Enterprise 2.0 are still focused on the acceptance and benefiting arguments the impact is still limited to its state of infancy. Supporting the “reframing”….© N:Sight Research GmbH 8

3.2. Holistic Transformation versus Set of Small InitiativesTwo models of transformation can be defined towards an Enterprise 2.0 company. On the onehand the holistic transformation with a top down approach, and on the other a set of smallinitiatives with a more bottom-up approach, implementing Enterprise 2.0 in small steps first inteams and departments.The Maturity ModelBased on the model of maturity, there are various levels of Enterprise 2.0 which become moreand more mature while they are being set up and developed. In traditional companies socialtechnology is still in the pilot phase, therefore there is no measurable competitive advantagegained yet. Next there is a transformation of collaboration happening which leads to a socialtechnologies integrated enterprise. During and after this period there is a cultural changeproceeding after the technology is integrated into the daily work-life. This leads towards theadoption into the entire enterprise, a so called participative enterprise. The next step is theexpansion outside of the company, for example open innovation or changing towards moreopen enterprise business models. The goals of the whole transformation process are thereforecustomer centricity growth opportunities as well as a generally connected enterprise in aconnected society.© N:Sight Research GmbH 9

Holistic TransformationThe holistic transformation process is a top down approach which originates from the top-management of a company. The concept hereby is the full and whole implementation ofEnterprise 2.0 into a company at once, gaining all potential benefits through a breaking changeapproach.Set of small initiativesMany companies start with a set of small initiatives. At the beginning there are separated“silos” in the company, which do not or only communicate little with each other. It is good tointegrate other “silos” (Intranet, Internet, communication etc.) into it. So it is more of a softshift, with people getting slowly started and slowly feeling comfortable. With more people thetipping point will be reached and the Enterprise 2.0 initiative will get a push forward.For both approaches there is to say, that Enterprise 2.0 can be seen as a Trojan mice fororganizational change, starting with small but later impressive changes for the organization.The approach used will depends on the company, the company culture and the size of thecompany as well. But no matter which approach is used, both create quantifiable businessimprovements like lower operational costs, increasing networked productivity and higherbusiness agility.3.3. ChallengesStrategic Relevance not perceivedIt is of high importance, that strategic relevance of Enterprise 2.0 is perceived in a company.Also, it is necessary to find and choose the right persons and departments to take care of thewhole process establishing Enterprise 2.0. A big problem is if nobody really feels responsible forthe implementation process or the development. The company leaders need to understandhow innovation is driven and that innovation and collaboration are highly correlated. Inaddition, it is also part of the organizational development, to find the right place within thecompany.Business Relevance not realizedAs Dr. Frank Schönefeld stated that it is hard to measure the ROI of Enterprise 2.0 becausethere are many other processes affected or changed in the same period of time.. Therefore itcould at least require some effort to measure the success of Enterprise 2.0. At the same timethere is a perception of the business relevance of Enterprise 2.0 needed. It must be presentlyobvious what the process-orientated benefits of Enterprise 2.0 are. Further the management© N:Sight Research GmbH 10

needs to understand, that the results of implementing Enterprise 2.0 are not all based on hard- facts and that cultural and work-life change are part of the transformation process. Management blocks the process Implementing Enterprise 2.0 into established companies means to deal with rigid structures and old management models, as well as traditional ways of thinking. Often these companies are characterized by a command and control culture, which is also reflected in their corporate culture itself. It is a problem when a company tries to stick to their old management model and does not want to change. In addition companies might try to limit the scope of implementing Enterprise 2.0, because they do not want to lose control. So if a company or management refuses to change their behavior, they will not be able to realize the benefits of Enterprise 2.0. People, Process & Technology not aligned An important challenge is to find the right settings for the various people, processes and technologies. Difficulties result from insufficient or bad alignments. Not every technology will work for every company as there are different people with different backgrounds or different processes which need specific adoptions to the technology. Tools, processes and structures that will work in a more office oriented department might not fit for a production department.IOM Summit 2011 Conference about Intranet, Collaboration, Document- and Knowledge- Management Seminarswww.iom-summit.de © N:Sight Research GmbH Frankfurt, 28. and 29. September11

There are many topics which are important for the implementation of software. It is notdifferent with Enterprise 2.0 solutions. Existing software needs to be connected and theusability has an influence on the acceptance of the user. Starting with a small user group doesnot mean that a solution will also work later with several thousand participants Problems willbe experienced later on, if the results are not properly filtered and do have a good searchfunction. Therefore it is important to have IT expertise on board.Adoption & Culture not adjustedEnterprise 2.0 is not about technology, it is about the culture of people working together andcollaborating. There are cultural issues which has deep impact on Enterprise 2.0. Things likeopenness or motivation do have influence how people adopt it. It can be different within acompany depending on country or organizational belonging. In addition there are languagebarriers which are a real challenge, especially in Europe.Depending on where we are from our behavior is different. Hierarchy, autonomy, respect ofrules, willingness to engage in other kinds of relationships at work can differ according to thelocal culture and our education. Therefore it is important to be aware of the existing cultureand the cultural change that is caused and wanted by the adoption of Enterprise 2.0.It is important to select carefully the needed technologies and integrate them into existingtechnology. People need some help to understand the tools and the approach behindEnterprise 2.0. Therefore be aware of teaching and educating your staff using Enterprise 2.0 intheir daily work.In some companies Enterprise 2.0 is probably not working due to cultural problems. Enterprise2.0 needs some kind of openness. Especially the top management needs to understand it. It canwork with a bottom-up approach, but it can be stopped by the management when the projectgets some visibility.© N:Sight Research GmbH 12

4. Company Insights and Expert KnowledgeAt the Enterprise 2.0 Summit 2010 in Frankfurt we had some talks with experts on the subjectof Enterprise 2.0. These presentations get in touch with Enterprise 2.0 from different angles.There are different approaches and lessons learned which helps to understand Enterprise 2.0adoption. It shows which activities are supporting a successful E 2.0 project and which onesshould be avoided.First there are some general statements about the adoption of Enterprise 2.0. Thesestatements will be followed by some insight about E20 cases.4.1. Pitfalls to AvoidDr. Frank Schönefeld talked about the endless number of pitfalls companies are endangered tostep in. In his speech at the Enterprise 2.0 Summit he outlined the 7 most well-known pitfallsand described them to create awareness for all involved people.Pitfall 1: Nobody don’t care at allNo one feels responsible to take care of the whole issue of enterprise 2.0. It is important thatsomeone takes the responsibility for the project. This person needs to understand Enterprise2.0, especially the cultural aspect and to drive the whole process.You will find more information about this role at the Enterprise 2.0 manager topic study fromN:Sight.http://www.slideshare.net/nsightresearch/requirements-e20-managerPitfall 2: Do not try to over regulateLet it happen! Enterprise 2.0 is about freedom and openness. It should offer easy to use toolsand structures. People should use these tools in a creative way. They will find the best way touse it getting the most benefit for their daily work. Sometimes they need some support or asmooth push, but in general they should be free to use like they want. It is important for thesuccess that this basic approach of E20 is not constricted too much.Pitfall 3: It is not about technologyEven if the cultural aspects are very important, it is equally important to choose the righttechnology. So it is important to select carefully the needed technologies and integrate theminto existing technology stacks. Although the barriers are lower, be aware of teaching andeducating the staff of using enterprise 2.0 in their daily work. Today only 4 percent feel verycomfortable and are very familiar with all the functions, 70 percent have just started using it.© N:Sight Research GmbH 13

Pitfall 4: It is about cultureIt is not, If you see an “open” culture as a precondition. Enterprise 2.0 does affect the culture ofa company, but it is not the main driver. Applications which support the business processesbring benefit to the people and they will use it. It is about doing your existing workloadcheaper, better and sometimes in a totally new manner, which was not available before.Pitfall 5: You cannot measure the ROI of itIn other fields of business life, it is hard to measure the ROI of implementing E20 into acompany. It is possible, but like Dr. Schoenfeld said “You can, if you want to: You shouldn´t, butif you want to - you can.” But in the end of the day you do not measure the value created andwhat is actually behind the content.Pitfall 6: Information overloadToo much information will confuse employees and reduce their productivity. At the beginningwith a few participants and only little content it is normally not a problem, but participants andcontent is probably growing fast. It is important to use intelligent filters, establish a suitableself-discipline of all the involved people and to increase the media competences of youremployees. In other words, train your staff for the new tools and the new approach for theirdaily work-life.Pitfall 7: Enterprise 2.0 is the Holy GrailLike Dion Hinchcliffe stated with enterprise 2.0 we’ve found the Holy Grail for everything in theorganization, but maturity is also to be seen as the ability to collaborate within the company.Being aware of the fact, that enterprise 2.0 is just an approach to optimize communication andthe exchange of knowledge is of high importance.Additional challengesIn addition to these seven pitfalls, Rob Howard, CTO and founder of Telligent, emphasizes theimportance of aligning online social communities with a company’s business objectives. Hestated that social software is a strategic, scalable way to engage customers while recognizingand rewarding them for their participation. Successful companies, such as Microsoft, Dell, andStarbucks leverage social communities to promote brand loyalty, support open innovation, andincrease revenue© N:Sight Research GmbH 14

For Luis Suarez of IBM education is the key for a successful implementation of E20. It is not justimportant to know how to use the tools right, it is also important to change the behaviors ofthe staff. It is more different to write and email than a blog. Another point concerns security,some companies might want to implement guidelines for blogging and messaging.4.2. Knowledge Management (KM) versus E20Jenny Ambrozek from SageNet LLC described the dispute between Knowledge Managementand Enterprise 2.0 as a kind of cultural war. So it is necessary to have a look behind the curtainand to break things down to their roots. Like Simon Dückert (Cogneon) described, firstmanagement was all about hierarchy and knowledge management changed this perception.So like Luis Suarez said in his presentation, in the last seven years there was a transformation ofKnowledge Management into something different. The Management part of KM is kind of dead,because it is almost impossible to manage something you do not know, but the knowledge partis not. And this knowledge part is one of the key points of enterprise 2.0, because at the end ofthe day both ideas have the same overall intention, to improving how people work.The fundamental idea of Enterprise 2.0 is to create value through interaction between people.It is based on participation. That means people need to be engaged and are contributing. Incontrast to KM where key people within the enterprise predefine the relevant knowledge thatis valuable for the company, in a enterprise 2.0 approach this “work” is done by the employee,using the wisdom of crowds theory. People are not aware that they are creating knowledge forthe company. It is done more by accident.Therefore companies and employees have to leave the old way of thinking to control theirknowledge, to control people. Enterprise 2.0 will guide to a learning organization. Like LuisSuarez mentioned during his presentation, “to persuade people that I am an expert, I have totalked to them, argued, shared knowledge and learned with them.”Furthermore he reminded that the approach of KM was ruined and that we might be makingthe same mistakes again. Technology is the solution, but you have to build it around people.People really want to share, so you have to give them the possibility to do it. They should beable to help each other and be recognized.In Summary, looking at the results of the discussion after the presentation, it can be said thatKM and E2.0 do not fit. Even though KM and E20 share the same goals they use differentapproaches, have different socialization and different values. It is more important that thepeople come together and work on the challenges of tomorrow.© N:Sight Research GmbH 15

The challenge will be to rethink every function in the business, like human resource andinnovation for example, where a new culture has to be created.4.3. Enhancing the Information FlowHow can you encourage informal information flow within your corporation to support yourbusiness objectives? Dietmar Zipfel from T-Systems shared his experience in knowledge sharingat the Enterprise 2.0 Summit.T-Systems decided to use an internal micro blogging system, because the communicationshould take place behind the firewall. The whole implementation process is running bottom up,presenting showcases for the management.In contrast to the person driven approach of Twitter, T-System decided to use a topic drivenmicro blogging solution. Limited input fields are used to keep the status messages short andconcisely. There is an exchange with wiki read & write permission as well as Wiki integrationwith a lot of customizing parameters like location based tags.Micro blogging is often used in projects, teams, departments and internal conferences foronline comments. People use it because it is very easy to understand. Everything is just twomouse clicks away. It can be integrated immediately into running discussions and late joinersare able to see the whole story. The reasons people back off using it is that there is actually noapproval by the workers council. Since there is no public usage of Micro blogs allowed yet, ithas only been tested in closed groups so far. There is no surveillance that reads the informationat an exact point in time exactly, so the fear of noticing information too late rises.The vision is to integrate micro blogging into the desktop as well as into personal profiles of theinternal social network. A mobile access to the internal network is also planned. The next stephere fore will be to convince the workers council to overcome the legal boundaries within thecompany since E 2.0 has an image problem due to Web 2.0. (In the meantime, the councilagreed)4.4. Improving Internal CommunicationsHow can internal communications be supported and improved by social software? Kornelia Kisfrom The Boston Consulting Group and Samuel Driessen from Oce shared their experiences andlessons learned.© N:Sight Research GmbH 16

The situation at The Boson Consulting Group Marketing Department was a global network of 74offices in 42 countries with more than 10 different time zones and intensive communicationbetween the 3 pillars of marketing: Editorial, Global Marketing and Local/Regional Marketing.Outlook based global communication was completed by the adoption of IT tools like Intranet,SharePoint and a companywide social software; but instead of helping, these rather causedproblems and resulted into a “communication spaghetti” with many inefficiencies. Compared tothe previous investments, the usages of the new platforms, such as Mindshare, were notmeeting expectations.To solve this problem and to improve internal communication BCG Marketing’s “mPoint” wascreated, bringing communication together into a centralized virtual office space with threedimensions in regard to the three pillars of marketing. One dimension based on tasks, thesecond on the floor plan so people can find each other and the third based on regions,interests, type of content and functions. Regarding the type of content, there are news,policies, guidelines, events, expert search and discussions available.Today people are more and more active sharing their ideas across the world. You have tochoose the software best fitting to your needs and you found the right one when you feel thatyour creativity is at the limit. “Less is more” – Optimize your platform to your targetcommunity, instead of maximizing functionality. Integrate your platform into your workingprocess, allocate your efforts wisely and not underestimate usual pitfalls during the changeprocess.The idea of having communities cross functional makes a structured approach easier for thepeople using the tools. There are so many processes that have to be transparent. Building afloor plan is the only way to bring everybody together without that happening. So otherdepartments will soon take over the “mPoint” approach as well. The approach used by BCG wastop down. ---------Oce uses Yammer as a tool for micro blogging. There is a big need of horizontal communicationwithin the organization and they are focusing on the formal structured business/informationprocesses. Yet Oce has a general interest as well as existing experience in E2.0 and Social mediawhile focusing on how these two fields interact with Business Process Information.Starting in rough economic times in 2008 as a bottom up approach the first focus was on resultsand learning points. Today 2000 people use Yammer realizing that this could change the waythey communicate. The tool has also been used in a chemical manufacturing plant within a very© N:Sight Research GmbH 17

structured environment to improve horizontal and vertical communication in order to speed uplean time.It is difficult to have reliable figures for success, like money or the improvement of productivity.Most of the soft facts are leading to it, but it is difficult to measure. They play an important role.In order to get people to use the tool training is essential. Do not just assume that people willuse it. Moderation is the key. It is a community and will not work without.There are wikis installed as well. They are good for information processes, not useful for dialog.So people are starting to bring structure in the different tools, e.g. starting to link to moredetailed wiki information in their micro blogging status updates. Regarding security concernsdue to the use of the free version of Yammer a Security Officer was involved. There will be aswitch to the paid version soon.© N:Sight Research GmbH 18

4.5. Fostering Knowledge SharingHow can you strengthen information transfer and knowledge sharing via social networking?This case by Juliette Girard, Web 2.0 Program Manager at Renault, discusses successfulapproaches to knowledge management at the Enterprise 2.0 Summit.Renault already has a culture of e-collaboration developed since 2003 with 50,000 users, 8,000virtual working spaces and 20.000 Web conferences per month. So sharing knowledge isalready a key success factor in the company. They belief that Web 2.0 is an ongoing revolutionwith the question how does the corporate culture change if social tools get implemented? Sothe question is not „to go or not to go“, but „how to go?“In 2008 it was possible to go for a big solution. It started when the COO went to Davos to meeta professor who wrote a book on Web 2.0 and made him aware of the subject. After that astudy was developed on opportunities & risks of Web 2.0. The aim was to have one common IT-Platform and to capitalize the experience on the usage to help people with their daily work. Itwas possible to spread out the Web 2.0 culture towards a successful Web 2.0 strategy buildinga strong change management culture. The vision of Renault 2.0 is to inform and have dialogthrough blogs, wikis, tweets, intranet, forums and more, to share and innovate as well asdevelop collaboration through innovation jams and to build networks in form of onlinecommunities. In order to do that the behavior of employees need to be changed.Step by step they launched small business communities of six to a hundred people. After thatthe project went global. So everybody could start building social networks and communities.Some KPI’s were defined to measure the activities. Everything has been tried out in a controlledenvironment without training for specific user, but they trained the community managers.These people need to know how to act and react upon certain requests.The opportunity of using social tools is the development of social links, receiving recognition,employee motivation and commitment but what are the main Web 2.0 applications for Renault2.0?: ● Publish & Dialogue ● Network ● Collaborate ● InnovateThere are three examples of how Web 2.0 is used at Renault. Within the department of salesthe integration of new colleagues now happens more easily by simplifying access to the needed© N:Sight Research GmbH 19

information. In the Women@Renault community which developed within the company,women are able to boost their careers through sharing and making suggestions and on the B2Blevel the possibility for vendors was created to share experience and knowledge.4.6. Enriching Knowledge RetentionHow can you manage the communication within a consultancy arm of Bertelsmann AG, wherepeople often work at the customer? Dr. Martin Wünsch and Carsten Ripper from BertelsmannAG shared their experience with the implementation of the just.connect platform.Bertelsmann is an international media company encompassing television, book publishing,magazine publishing, media services and media clubs in more than 50 countries with more than100.000 employees worldwide. Established as a spin-off from the Corporate Financial Reportingdivision Bertelsmann Business Consulting (BeBC) reports directly to the CFO and remains awholly-owned subsidiary of the Group. After many years of managing customers within theBertelsmann Group, Bertelsmann Business Consulting will now focus increasingly on externalcustomers as a special provider of consulting services in the areas of reporting andconsolidation. During the dynamically growing consulting business BeBC recognized the need tomanage communication challenges by developing a system that allows the sharing ofknowledge within the company overcoming cultural boundaries.So Bertelsmann AG decided to implement Enterprise 2.0 based on a pilot for BeBC’s consultingbusiness. As technical solution Bertelsmann selected the platform just.connect from JustSoftware AG.The aim was to create an interactive communication and cooperation platform across internaland external project teams, including customers as well as consulting partners. Without beingbound to geographical or hierarchical restrictions staff should be enabled to communicate andorganize themselves in different sub-groups to exchange knowledge resp. experience topics.Inefficient email traffic should be replaced by open communication and collaboration.Even as the system is not fully integrated into the company today, there are several learning’sdiscovered. A Facebook like web 2.0 approach fosters the acceptance especially by the youngerpeople in the company. What’s more, new employees have a good chance to get in contactwith other staff and can easily get an overview about any ongoing project.© N:Sight Research GmbH 20

4.7. Regaining Business AgilityHow can we increase business agility of corporations by using social software? Dr. CheeChinLiew from BASF showed improvements on business processes.The increasing speed in product development cycles at BASF requires different communicationskills and tools. BASF is a people-oriented organization changing from hierarchies & teams toever-growing networked formal as well as informal communities. To support this process theglobal platform Connect.BASF for internal knowledge sharing, networking and collaborationwas introduced.It started out with a steering committee on that topic with a board member as sponsor. Theshowcase was demonstrated in form of presentations and demos on special events as well as inforums. During the launch phase there was a focus on IT implementation, but it is an ongoingproject. Today for example there are connect.BASF days with external, inspiring speakers doinga lot of demoing and presenting. Consulting is also part of the job, helping departments/groupsunderstand e2.0 and use tools. Up to the pilot phase BASF had 1000 users.From that point BASF stopped project communication. Five months later there are more than15.500 participants. There is no central control and support is done by the evangelists. BASFscommunities grew emergently. "Dont coach them from the beginning" says Dr. CheeChin Liew.You have to keep the engagement up with a system that works for your needs. The benefits arethat employees can present themselves and be visible (profiles), build up & strengthen networkties (communities), find experts (tags), share knowledge (blogs), work together (files & wikis).The communities resent as an emergent structure like following: ● U4O: experts & professions (expertise) ● U4U: social networking (interest) ● O4O: projects & working teams (practice) ● O4U: initiatives & services (dialogue)One success story is that micro blogging has been used for exchanging studies, adding otherstudies, so that the marketing manager can share this info professionally with the whole team.The second success story is that employees feel connected in an hour of need through a blogfor a donation in Pakistan. Employees could follow the amount of donation and promote a 2ndstage for helping people in need. The five basic highlights are:© N:Sight Research GmbH 21

● People-oriented and voluntary character ● Visible commitment from top management ● Leadership by advocates and community builders ● Transfer of communications and workflows ● Sharing of benefits and success stories4.8. Strengthening CollaborationIn September 2009 Swiss Re went live with an internal collaboration platform. Swiss Re is aknowledge and expertise intensive business which is getting more and more complex withcustomers looking for tailor made solutions. The geographically dispersed teams have a strongneed for collaboration.The implementation kicked off a lot of changes in the company. Anu Elmer, core team memberof the initiative, stated that “in order for you to go out and swim in the ocean you first have tolearn how to swim in the lake“, implying that it makes sense to learn how to use newtechnologies and work in a different way first inside the company.The collaboration platform is based on Jive SBS. The first groups to emerge on the platformwere groups formed around key customers to foster cooperation between different clientteams around the globe. The big variety of communities also includes several innovation groupsand learning groups such as the Leadership Development Program.The company has a strong collaborative culture which provided a strong foundation for theplatform. Nevertheless, employees needed inspiration and role models to understand how touse the new technology and what were its benefits. The goals of the platform includedsupporting virtual and asynchronous teamwork, sharing information and knowledge, gettingmore agile and responsive resulting in faster innovation processes and solution capabilities. Lastbut not least, the platform was to foster a more dialogue-centric and engaging companyculture.Swiss Re E 2.0 team is of the opinion that in order to initiate an Enterprise 2.0 change you needto have a business need first and then choose the right technology to adapt to it, not the otherway round. For a change of this kind a very strong legitimation from different stakeholders isneeded. A grass root approach without management support possibly would not gain enoughmomentum or could be aborted. Swiss Re therefore combined a top down support with abottom up initiative. In order to develop business relevant use cases and communitymanagement skills they started looking for advocates who could translate 2.0 into real businesscases. The change management approach mostly relied on viral peer level promotion.© N:Sight Research GmbH 22

Furthermore, focus was put on providing an integrated platform supporting daily activities andon recruiting advocates from core business functions as role models. Another important insightwas the need to to synchronize the change with business needs and company readiness.Swiss Re’s approach for implementation was to “go small and start fast” – the core teamconsisted of 5 people from different units. A pilot run for three months and resulted inbusiness-relevant content being already available upon rollout and the users immediatelyseeing the directs benefits of the platform. After one year the platform became an integral partof the company with 12.000 users of which 85 % actively participate. 15 % of them createcontent, the rest replies, comments and asks questions. The users include members of topmanagement who join discussions, create blogs and share their ideas.Today there are around 500 out of 700 very active and vibrant communities. Every communityhas their own community manager. They are coached on how to successfully lead a community.People look for advice, contacts and experts. In order to get even more out of the platform andthe emerging communities it is crucial to coach the community managers and give them officialrecognition for their work, e.g. through setting up an annual community award.4.9. Enforcing Business InnovationHow can we enhance business innovation processes with social software? Stephan Oertelt fromBMW and Alessandra Pelagallo from Telecom Italia discussed different social media approachesto enforce business innovation.The innovation platform "Red Square" at BMW represents a virtual market place, a melting potfor different elements, be it ideas, concepts, or the users of the platform. This creates a basisfrom which develops a platform for communication, action and interactive exchange. RedSquare serves as a catalyst for the emergence of new ideas and concepts and expandsinspiration in all directions through the variety which is offered.These thoughts lead to the first basic idea of the Red Square philosophy, namely openness,freedom and transparency. In Red Square, it should be possible to allow everything, to take inall ideas, to promote diversity, so that from this tension and energy, innovation can arise.Creativity and innovation are only possible if an adequate platform is provided, which isaccessible and free to all and open to diversity. This platform is created and offered throughRed Square.All employees of the BMW Group have access to this collective knowledge, are able to discuss itand further develop themselves and thus achieve an optimum. The idea of networking leads to© N:Sight Research GmbH 23

the next element of the Red Square philosophy. The platform is designed to resemblea living organism, a growing system that is not controlled from outside, but with developmentand dynamics in itself. This is achieved by both content structures (ideas and concepts), andsuch structures which emerge between the participants (formation of groups, interestgroups and associations) which are formed.At Telecom Italia the whole E.20 project is called the Archimede project with the basic functionof collecting ideas from 200.000 employees. When the Open Access was formed there were20.000 people from different backgrounds, different jobs and skills. The whole idea was abottom up suggestion to enhance business processes.The goals were to involve the targeted 20.000 Open Access Employees and let them definetopics around idea and knowledge sharing with Archimede as the 2.0 evolution of ideas. InArchimede you can post comments, ideas, suggestions, invitations and you can create groups.The result has been 2.500 ideas, 6.000 unique visitors, 15.000 accesses and 792 commentsmoving from an unstructured system to a structured one by Homogeneity as well as theevolution of teams and clusters on ideas. A grading matrix has been additionally installed withthe three dimensions Quality, Efficiency and Transparency. There is a full feedback support forall participants as well.The outcomes for the company are benefits from projects, action plans, idea implementationand an organized knowledge system for new start ups. The impact on the implementation ofideas can be seen as well.The lessons learned are to work even more on the brand awareness, give more feedback, lookfor more top manager’s commitment, involve people and see 2.0 as an opportunity to getbetter idea with a bottom up approach while focusing on strategic business topics.4.10. Improving Talent & Skill ManagementHow do talent and skill management practices change with the emerging social software?Franck La Pinta from Societe Generale and Ellen Trude from Bayer Business Services gaveinsights into their projects.Enterprise 2.0 is an opportunity to propose a new social agreement in order to promote newskills in relationship, cooperation, collaborative approach in the way of working. At the end ofthe day, Enterprise 2.0 can be a new model of reference. Enterprise 2.0 provides new© N:Sight Research GmbH 24

information about employee’s competencies and skills to HR or it is an option for a bettermatch of competencies, employee’s expectations and internal needs.The situation at Societe Generale regarding the external environment is tougher legalframework, a high technicality, low growth and a war for talents. With HR 2.0 the brand isreplaced by your reputation. The online presence is an element of the offer and therefore acriterion of choice. In order to develop an attractive employer brand you have to facilitatesourcing and recruitment. Today, the relation between job seekers and companies is totallyimpacted by the new behaviors affected by social networks.The HR 2.0 ecosystem meanwhile exists of e.g. wikis and blogs for job descriptions, forrecruiting or for career paths. Four main objectives structure the presence on „ the outer belt“: ● Focused targeting ● Discussions ● Exchanges ● Relays of our brandYou have to be open and approachable, accept an equal relation, take part in the eco system,listen and explain more than attempt as well as being proximate and modest.In order to start an Enterprise 2.0 initiative you have to first build up Social Media Competenceswithin the company says Ellen Trude from Bayer Business Services. Offer a workshop or aninformation presentation about your own experience and ways of using Web 2.0. But in orderto do that you have to define the target group and targets first.The idea behind “Enjoy Social Media” is to provide the users with enough Social Mediacompetences so that they can act upon independently in the Web 2.0 environment. Therefore aSocial Media Skill Matrix with the three layers “Knowledge”, “Skill” and “Approach” has beendeveloped, the project got approved and the budget provided in order to build a learningenvironment designed through workshops.Social Media Education at Bayer formally consists of a Project competences Matrix, a learningenvironment, workshops and customized solutions as well as presentations. The learningenvironment consists hereby of the curriculum, standards for the „virtual trainers“ and theplatform itself. There are 5 different learning steps separated into 2 different levels (Discoverer& Explorer). The learning steps are:© N:Sight Research GmbH 25

● Watch User Generated Content ● Join User Generated Content ● Collect & Share User Generated Content ● Critic User Generated Content ● Create User Generated ContentThere are specific assignments to be fulfilled at each level for the participant with theDiscoverer Level taking up to about 20 hours of time and the Explorer Level up to about 50hours. The course is kept general for everyone and not specified to certain job positions sopeople can find out on their own how to use Social Media for their specific job purposes best.The project has so far been established with several project partners working on technicallysetting up the learning environment in the “mixxt” community platform, developing onlinesessions and training the moderators on how to facilitate and lead the participants through theprogram. Additional partners are concerned with the facts of setting up resources for thelearning environment in order to make it easier for the participants to follow through theassignments. The role out of the learning environment is supposed to happen this year. (Thelearning environment is active now)© N:Sight Research GmbH 26

5. Adoption Plan & Management5.1. Adoption Archetypes & PatternIn their presentation of “Exploring the Adaption Archetypes” Alexander Stocker and AlexanderRichter described their developed pattern of understanding of enterprise 2.0.Out of their research about the adoption of Social Software they developed a grounded theoryapproach which led to two different archetypes. The presentation is based on a study of bestpractice cases and is a result of the evaluation of these cases.First, there is the archetype of exploration.It is specified through a continuously identifying process of feasible usage scenarios for IT-services which are suitable for any use. Here, the potentials are often not clear in the forehand;the implementation is part of the exploring process and can be seen as a learning process witha bottom-up approach.Second, there is the archetype of promotionThis archetype is specified through a coordinated communication and a targeted training of IT-services with the focus on certain modes of use. In contrast to the archetype of exploration,there are clear expectations on how to use it. The decisions are made by the management,which have envisioned a specific use case with a certain goal for using these tools. Therefore itcan be said, that this archetype is common in a top down approach.As they stated, these two archetypes are found combined in some of the company. Somestarted with the bottom-up approach like the first archetype and changed later on to the topdown approach. An adoption of both, exploration first and switching to promotion seems to bea successful way.5.2. Planning & Organizing AdoptionLuis Suarez from IBM set up 5 conceptual stages of an adoption process. In stage one the valueof enterprise 2.0 must be discovered and learned. The possibilities of this approach must beclear. In the second step, it is necessary to recognize the use for business. How can it be used tosupport process with the most benefit? The third stage is the “all together”-approach. Peoplemust learn to work together and have to internalize the benefits of enterprise 2.0. Step four isto set up integrative workshops to further establish the culture of enterprise 2.0 in thecompany. In the fifth stage there will be a shift in the perspective, the culture of enterprise 2.0is installed and all the benefits of enterprise 2.0 can be received.© N:Sight Research GmbH 27

There are different levels of maturity within the company. In the road ahead, changemanagement is a big issue, because change of behavior takes time.5.3. Managing AdoptionCritical success factors and key findingsIn his presentation Prof. Dr. Thorsten Petry from Wiesbaden Business School spoke aboutcritical success factors for the adoption process of enterprise 2.0. Openness is a critical factorfor the adoption of Enterprise 2.0. Especially management has to be open as a role model.Enterprise 2.0 works best with a mixture of bottom-up and top-down approach.Another critical success factor is the definition of clear responsibilities. Clear and centralresponsibility for the topic is often missing in companies. Also the corporate management israrely in the driver seat of the implementing process. This leads to the third critical successfactor the maintenance of control of the implementation process. If the management or theresponsible department loses the maintenance of control, the process will stagnate and thewhole approach is in danger to fail.Cécile Demailly gave an overlook to possible early strategies how change can happen towardsenterprise 2.0 and stated three key findings. 1. give it sense 2. make it balanced 3. sustain the change cycleFirst, one has to think about what best fits the company and its culture. It is necessary to beaware of the fact that technology is also important, but it is not only technology. Theorganizational level has to support the strategic vision and the change must help on the dailywork, so that people accept the implementation and changes in their workplace. And also themanagement level must support the new management model. It is important to find a goodbalance between the different parts.© N:Sight Research GmbH 28

According to Cécile Demailly there are four distinct phases to sustain the change cycle: Phases 1: Awakening the focus on connecting the change towards enterprise 2.0 with the organizational culture and strategy. Phase 2: Envisioning the approach of enterprise 2.0. Pick up an apprentice, start with a test phase and set up the change governance. Also in this phase you start to recruiting early adopters to develop a working structure. Phase 3: Re-architecting. Now it is necessary to put the tools together and make them work well for you staff. Also people should be able to try it out. Phase 4: Leveraging and stretching. Learn from the input of your users and overwork the structure and tools. The goal is to create an intuitive structure with tools that are needed and wanted.Enterprise 2.0 Summit 2011 European Conference about Enterprise 2.0 Expert Talks and Praxis Cases www.e20-summit.de Paris, 16. - 18. November www.e20-summit.de © N:Sight Research GmbH 29

6. SummaryEarly times of Enterprise 2.0 are gone. Now companies are presenting their cases based on amaturity level. At the beginning many Enterprise 2.0 initiatives started as grass root projects.Enterprise 2.0 was new and it was simply trial and error, the destiny of early adopters.Sometimes the management was involved, but mostly it was just done by a department or ateam driven by web 2.0 evangelists. Some of these projects “infected” the whole company andchanged the way people work together. Some of the projects just died or stagnated. Companieslearned from these experience and we can determine an Enterprise 2.0 maturity now.There are two major approaches which can be seen at successful Enterprise 2.0 projects. Youcan find a holistic approach, driven by the top management, and a set of small initiatives drivenby a bottom-up approach. Both can lead to a successful Enterprise 2.0 adoption.The holistic approach is driven by the management and the goals are set. Ideally, a team wasappointed which accompanies the whole process. Everything can be prepared before you startwith Enterprise 2.0. It is recommended to start with an open project communication, as a goodexample for the way Enterprise 2.0 is working. It is also a good way of finding evangelists. Theywill start to comment early. Probably it is good to invite them as team member. It is better tohave enthusiastic team member than having a team of people who are member, because it partto their job role.But even with a holistic approach it is a good approach to start with small projects and testingthe tools. These small projects can be done more easily than to do the same in the entirecompany. Failures do not have the same impact and you can start with departments orbusiness units which see Enterprise 2.0 as a good tool to support them. Other can learn fromthese good examples and you will get an organic growing which can be pushed by the projectteam. But at some companies it is better start with the whole company.The bottom-up approach has been tested with positive results. With many of the Enterprise 2.0tools also small teams will recognize benefits for their daily work very soon. Otherwise you donot probably see the whole picture. There are only the benefits for this group in focus. It isrecommended to have at least the backing of one or more members of the top management.Otherwise there is a risk that the project will be stopped when getting awareness. Many© N:Sight Research GmbH 30

companies changed from the bottom-up approach to the top-down, after the first projectswere done successfully and the management saw the benefits.There is a big discussion on whether it is important to see the entire company or using flexiblesolutions which addresses teams and organizational units. Generally it seems that the holistictop-down approach is the better one, but it must fit to the company culture.There are some discussions as well whether there is a need to have an open minded culturestarting with Enterprise 2.0. That means some kind of “E20 readiness”. It will be difficult tochanging the culture without tools which allows transparency and to give employees a voice.It sounds like a hen and egg problem, but it is not. Generally you should start with Enterprise2.0, because that is the way people will change their behavior. They will learn to communicateand collaborate. It will change the way people work together. So every Enterprise 2.0 projectwill be a change project. This needs to be clear at the beginning and it needs to be handled likeany other change management project.In a company with a very strong hierarchical thinking and a top management which forbids anyintervention of staff you should think about Enterprise 2.0 carefully. It will be definitely a toughproject than with the good possibility to fail. It needs at least certain openness and a willingnessto respond to demands of employees. You can’t provide a comment function and inviteemployees for example and just work than before as you didn’t hear the voice of your staff.They won’t comment any more and your project is dead. So it’s not really necessary to have anEnterprise 2.0 culture at the beginning, but you should know the culture of your companybefore you start.Whatever approach you choose, you need to define a clear responsibility. Someone needs topush and control the project. Not everything needs to be done by this person, but someoneneed to take care. This isn’t different from any other project.Read more at the Enterprise 2.0 manager study:http://www.slideshare.net/nsightresearch/requirements-e20-managerThe discussion about Enterprise 2.0 moved to a more culture driven discussion, because itaffects the culture of a company and it is working only, if you take care about the motivation ofthe employees. Some people are supporting the opinion “it is all about culture”, but that’s nottrue. The Enterprise 2.0 solutions need to fit into the company. It needs to be integrated intothe IT landscape. The tools should have a good usability. It helps to keep the barrier low. Peoplewill use the tool only, if they can easily use it and if they are getting the information which© N:Sight Research GmbH 31

supports their work. Probably, it is helpful to run a usability test, especially when the Enterprise2.0 applications are integrated into an existing Intranet, for example.For some tools, like Wiki’s for example, it is not recommended to start with an empty version.People need at least some examples to understand how it works. It is also a problem for peopleto be the first to create content. It is a good approach to go through the existing tools forcontent which can be moved. By doing this, you will find relevant content for the Wiki whichdoes not need to be created again. You should not forget to update it and remove it from theold resource. Otherwise you will have the same content at two places and you will get twoversions of it after some time.At the beginning of Enterprise 2.0 many people thought it was user generated content and youdid not need to take care. This is not the case. People need advice and support, thus if the toolsare very easy to use. In small companies it can be done centralized. In bigger companies orgroups you need to do it via community managers. These people need to be well trained andneed a central support, if they have problems.Communication from the beginning of a project is important as well. Employees need to beinvolved. So that it is easier to motivate them. Using Enterprise 2.0 tools like a blog or micro-blogging is a good role model as well.It is not a bad decision, to install a steering committee for the project. At least one membershould be somebody out of the top management. You will get the right awareness and thedecisions will be valid. It is also good for your own resume.The benefits of Enterprise 2.0 have been shown in many projects. One must make sure that theright elements are chosen that fit to the company and its culture. Allow Enterprise 2.0 someindependent development. Not every use case can be seen at the beginning, but the employeeswill find it. It is also advantageous to show good examples for the use of Enterprise 2.0.We know a lot about the Enterprise 2.0 adoption nowadays, but you need to be sensitive aboutthe corporate culture. Not everything works for every company.© N:Sight Research GmbH 32

7. Author informationAuthor: Joachim LindnerJoachim Lindner has more than 13 years experience in marketing and communications. Formost of that time he dealt with the subject of online communication. Many successful intranetand enterprise 2.0 projects form the basis of his experience.Twitter: http://twitter.com/JoachimLMany thanks for the research assistance to Milos Vujnovic and Tobias BrennerThe study was published under the Creative Common license. The content can be usedcompletely or in parts by naming the author.Enterprise 2.0 adoption from N:Sight Research GmbH is under a Creative CommonsNamensnennung 3.0 Unported Lizenz.© N:Sight Research GmbH 33

The study is a product of the:N:Sight Research GmbHTegernseer Landstr. 2981541 MünchenAbout N:Sight Research GmbHN:Sight Research GmbH is an independent research and consulting firm based in Munich.N:Sight publishes studies and professional information on the topics internet, intranet,knowledge management, Enterprise 2.0 and social web. N:Sight analyzes best practicescenarios and tools with empirical and qualitative methods.In addition to studies, N:Sight also provides seminars and strategic business consulting on thebasis of the research results. N: Sight Research GmbH is a subsidiary of the Kongress MediaGmbH.Twitter: http://twitter.com/nsightBlog: http://blog.n-sight.de/Webseite: http://www.n-sight.de/We thank our sponsor Kuhn, Kammann & Kuhn for their support.http://www.kkundk.de/© N:Sight Research GmbH 34

http://expo.blogtronix.com	14
http://paper.li	7
http://www.linkedin.com	2
http://static.slidesharecdn.com	2
http://www.onlydoo.com	1

Enterprise 2.0 adoption

by N:Sight Research GmbH on May 24, 2011

Accessibility

Categories

Tags

Upload Details

Usage Rights

5 Embeds 26

Statistics

Enterprise 2.0 adoption — Document Transcript