WHAT IF
PETER DRUCKER
TAUGHT
ENTERPRISE 2.0
STRATEGY

What
LESSONS
would he
draw?

How would he
have explained
ENTERPRISE
2.0 to solve
toKHy’s IusPnLss
problems?

LLt’s
EXPLORE
a proposed Curriculum

INTRODUCTION
About successful organizations
Drucker stressed three things
MANAGEMENT
INNOVATION
COMMUNITY

Drucker thought a MANAGER’S task is to
make the strengths of people effective and
their weaknesses irrelevant

Drucker believed that rLlyPnN on yLstLrKHy’s
successes are far more risky than constantly
INNOVATING

Drucker considered a business an
economic organ that was equally a
COMMUNITY

As for technology he deemed it an
extension of the KNOWLEDGE WORKER

DRUCKER: Work creates a unique social bond
HmonNst LmployLLs. |t’s Hlso tOL PntLrMHJL Mor
using technology as tools which in turn helps
shape corporate culture and personality.

NEITHER TECHNOLOGY OR PEOPLE
determines the other, but each shapes the other

So that the result is a more
EFFECTIVE CORPORATION

Work has always been
SOCIAL

But TODAY’S Enterprise 1.0 knowledge
worker is SEPARATED from his colleagues
and customers

Blocked
by voice mail, email and noise

Blocked
by voice mail, email and noise
So we’re less social

Blocked
by voice mail, email and noise
So we’re less social
Less of a community

Blocked
by voice mail, email and noise
So we’re less social
Less of a community
Less effective

But ENTERPRISE 2.0 technologies
and strategies can bring community
back to work

STILL
YET

ENTERPRISE 2.0
is not a substitute for poor
LEADERSHIP

‚Life can only
be understood
backwards. But
then one forgets
the other
principle: that it
must be lived
forwards.‛

So lLt’s look IHJkwHrK HnK sLL
WHATWOULD
DRUCKERDO

LEHMAN
BROTHERS
THE 31st FLOOR

Before top LEHMAN EXECUTIVES
arrived at Headquarters in NYC they
would call the front desk

The front desk would get the security
guard to HOLD A PRIVATE ELEVATOR

The private elevator was programmed
to go straight to the 31ST FLOOR

Why did they spend an estimated
$100,000 to create
this process?

Why did they spend an estimated
$100,000 to create
this process?
INEXPLICABLE – ‚GLt out and meet
pLoplL tOHt’s your laboratory, hands on‛
DRUCKER

Worse, most Lehman employees NEVER saw
OR heard from their top Executives

In fact the CEO was nicknamed the
INVISIBLE MAN

HERE HE |S…
RICHARD FULD

So why did Lehman Executives
AVOIDTHEIR
OWNEMPLOYEES

SomL JlHPm tOLy KPKn’t wHnt to IL
EXPOSED Mor Hll tOLy KPKn’t unKLrstHnK

Like the sub-prime mortgage CRISIS

Made worse by their ISOLATION

And alarmingly, the best at Lehman were
SILENCED as they issued WARNINGS

Execs KPKn’t wHnt to OLHr
TRUTH
THE

Later, banks refused to do business with
Lehman because of its COMPLEX &
OPAQUE methods of trading

Soon, investors lost
CONFIDENCE
And the stocked plunged

Soon, investors lost
CONFIDENCE
And the stocked plunged
-95%

THEN BANKRUPTCY

But if implemented, would ENTERPRISE
2.0 STRATEGY AND TECHNOLOGY have
saved Lehman?

DRUCKER & E2.0
LESSONS LEARNED
MANAGEMENT
Because they were disconnected from the rest of the organization,
bad news was either ignored (because they could ignore it in
private) or never made it to the 31st floor.
ORGANIZATION & COMMUNITY
The organization became “sick” when management failed to ask
themselves, “how long can this market sustain itself?” or even
“what’s our current position and what happens if this bubble
pops?” Where were the community feedback loops?
TECHNOLOGY RECOMMENDATIONS
MindTouch (Social Intranets) or ThoughtFarmer & Yammer
(Microblogging ) would have given the Lehman community a
social platform to alert the organization to the impending housing
bubble collapse.

WOULD E2.0 HAVE SAVED LEHMAN?
POSSIBLY No methodologies or
technologies can replace extremely poor
leadership, but the right E2.0 tools and
resulting community would have caused
DRUCKER enormous pressure to change course.
NO LLOmHn’s demise was a failure of leadership in
multiple areas including strategy, risk management,
organizational culture, integrity and ethics, and possibly
including information systems. Enterprise 2.0 technologies
can certainly enable greater information transparency up
and down the corporate hierarchy but they cannot solve
systemic malfeasance and deception. E2.0 systems would
Jas Dhillon not have been able to overcome this organizational
ThinkPassenger penchant for secrecy and opaqueness as they were too
ingrained in the organizational culture.

GENERAL
MOTORS
The Aztek – ‚|t looks
tOL wHy MontLzumH’s
rLvLnNL MLLls.‛

The Original AZTEK concept car
wHsn’t tOHt IHK

So HOW did it end up like this?

In fact, the concept car received
mostly POSITIVE feedback
=

So good in fact that GM decided to
PRODUCE the vehicle

SALES anticipation was high
GM ANNUAL
SALES FORECAST
75,000
PER YEAR

Only 30,000 cars were needed to
be sold to BREAK EVEN
BREAK EVEN GM ANNUAL
POINT SALES FORECAST
30,000 75,000
PER YEAR PER YEAR

But ACTUAL SALES were than
lower than break even
ACTUAL CARS BREAK EVEN GM ANNUAL
SOLD POINT SALES FORECAST
27,332 30,000 75,000
FIRST YEAR PER YEAR PER YEAR

But ACTUAL SALES were than
lower than break even
ACTUAL CARS BREAK EVEN GM ANNUAL
SOLD POINT SALES FORECAST
27,332 30,000 75,000
FIRST YEAR PER YEAR PER YEAR
WORSE: Of the cars sold more than
50% were sold to Rental Car fleets

WHAT
HAPPENED

Beset by money
woes, the
Manufacturing
Dept. DETHRONED
the legendary
design department
which was blamed
for rolling out cars
that cost too much
to produce.

Then manufacturing boss Don Hackworth
& team ordered the design to be
DELIBERATELY HARDENED
WEIRD FRONT SQUARE BODY
END
a tall hatchback
PLASTIC CLAD
SIDING

AS A
RESULT

The Aztek is declared a
FAILURE

The Aztek is declared a
FAILURE
SomL JHllLK Pt tOL ‚The AMC
PACER of tOL 21st JLntury.‛

‚WL’K MPrL tOL Nuy wOo
GREENLIGHTED the
Aztek if we could find
anyone willing to
Bob Lutz HKmPt Pt.‛
GM Product Boss

Shortly thereafter,
and ‚JoPnJPKLntHlly‛
Manufacturing Boss
Don Hackworth
announced his
retirement after 38
years with GM

So what went
WRONG?

No one noticed the LEMON

BUT
WHY

BUT
WHY
3 REASONS

1 INTERNAL MARKET RESEARCH
went unheeded

1 INTERNAL MARKET RESEARCH
went unheeded
2 THE CONCEPT CAR
was changed to a Saccharine
adaptation of the original

1 INTERNAL MARKET RESEARCH
went unheeded
2 THE CONCEPT CAR
was changed to a Saccharine
adaptation of the original
3 MANUFACTURING
made key decisions based
solely on cost

But could
ENTERPRISE 2.0
STRATEGY and
TECHNOLOGY
have saved the
Aztek or caused
it not to be built?

DRUCKER & E2.0
LESSONS LEARNED
MANAGEMENT
When the Manufacturing division of Pontiac took “control” they
ignored the concept car data and made decisions based on cost.
These decisions changed the car and thus demand for it.
ORGANIZATION & COMMUNITY
Pontiac either ignored key data or didn’t reach out to potential
prospective customers once the design changes were made. Thus
the build/no build market data was outdated and ultimately
wrong.
TECHNOLOGY RECOMMENDATIONS
ThinkPassenger, Spigit, or Brightidea would have provided a
portal for GM to continuously seek community input (customer &
employee) in order to test different ideas or gain new ones.

WOULD E2.0 HAVE CHANGED THE
OUTCOME?
PROBABLY While Manufacturing may
have ignored any data produced by having an
E2.0 organization, at the very least Pontiac would
have seen the weaknesses of the Aztek and
DRUCKER responded more sharply and sooner
PROBABLY If they were able to
measure sentiment of the concept car,
manufacturing may have seen that perhaps a
new cost model was warranted and gone
Mike with original design instead of the design
Puterbaugh that was taken to market
Mindtouch

September 11
Spooks, Suits &
Terror

The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and
the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)
have been at WAR for decades

The reasons behind this war are due to culture,
charter, & INEFFECTIVE communication

The Mission of the FBI is
to protect the United States
from FOREIGN
INTELLIGENCE AND
TERRORIST ACTIVITIES;
to provide leadership and
law enforcement
assistance to federal, state,
local, and international
agencies

The CIA is charged with
national security,
counterintelligence activities,
special activities, and other
functions related to FOREIGN
INTELLIGENCE AND
NATIONAL SECURITY as
directed by the President.

On Feb 26th, 1993 an explosive devise was
planted and DETONATED on the second level
of the World Trade Center parking garage

As a result
People were killed

were injured

50 thousand EVACUATED

After an investigation both the CIA and FBI were
criticized for how they had communicated
information received about the attack prior to the
occurrence.
Ramzi
YouSef

‚ VP t H l i n fo rm at i o n w a s
ex ch a n ge d w i t h
A m e r i c a n I n t e l l i ge n c e
a n d t h at t h e at t a ck
c o u l d h ave b e e n
Egyptian
P R E V E N T E D i f t h ey President
l i s t e n e d t o o u r a dv i s e ‛ Hosni Mubarak

It was assumed by Egyptian
Intelligence that the CIA
would pass this information
along to its domestic
counterpart, the FBI. But due
to past differences the chain
for sharing this information
was not in place.

‚| want coordinated
law enforcement
and interdiction
LMMorts… tOHt mHkL
Senator sLnsL…HnK rPNOt
Orrin Hatch now, tOLy’rL not‛

But the rivalry lead
to other failures in
COMMUNICATION

And all of these examples point to a pattern of
MISCOMMUNICATION
between the FBI and CIA due to mistrust.

Unfortunately, these
COMMUNICATION
LHpsLs wLrL not MPxLK…

Unfortunately, these
COMMUNICATION
LHpsLs wLrL not MPxLK…
Which led to DEVASTATING
CONSEQUENCES

W{Y D|DN’T |T
?

9/11
TERROR
REDUX

"It's going to look like
a mosaic that was not
put together at the
right time. A lot of
the failures will go
back to the lack of
communication Richard Shelby
between various Senate
agencies." Intelligence
Committee

Communication between the FBI and
CIA in the months leading up to 9/11
revealed several instances of
COMMUNICATION FAILURES

If the two agencies had been
effectively sharing intelligence the
attacks MAY HAVE BEEN PREVENTED

"In terms of whether
or not the FBI and
the CIA were
COMMUNICATING
properly, I think it is
clear that they
weren't"

As early as January 2000, CIA agents were tracking
Khalid Almihdhar and Nawaf Alhazmi in Malaysia
at an al-Qaeda conference whom then promptly
returned to a flight school in the United States.

But an unnamed
CIA officer was
quoted as saying
‚No onL pPJkLK up
on tOHt‛

Worse, that
INFORMATION
was not shared with the
FBI prior to 9/11

Worse, that
INFORMATION
was not shared with the
FBI prior to 9/11
Nor did the CIA NOTIFY ANY
GOVERNMENT agencies when Almihdhar
and Alhazmi returned to the United States
after the al-Qaeda conference

Thus INS did not
catch them upon
entry into the
United States

Shockingly, Almihdhar
and Alhazmi were finally
placed on the State
Department watch list
through CIA
communication on August
23, 2001
The CIA cable warned that
two ‘BPn LHKLn rLlHtLK
PnKPvPKuHls’ OHK HlrLHKy
entered the United States
and that two other
suspected terrorists should
be barred from entering

Unfortunately Almihdhar and
Alhazmi had already obtained new
visas by then and had
DISAPPEARED
in the US

Unfortunately Almihdhar and
Alhazmi had already obtained new
visas by then and had
DISAPPEARED
in the US
They were part of the group that flew
a passenger airliner into the Pentagon.

Similar issues
PLAGUED the FBI

FBI Field Agent Colleen Riley complained
to FBI Director Robert Mueller that her
immediate supervisors discouraged her
Minnesota Field Office to search the
computer hard drive and belongings of
Zacarius Moussaoui (considered to be the
20th terrorist in the hijackings).

Worse, the FBI was NOT ALLOWED to
COOPERATE with the CIA nor see the
CIA files on Moussaoui

In a separate occurrence, Special
Agent Kenneth Williamson sent a
memo to FBI superiors in the
summer of 2001
“I’m concerned that
suspected al-Qaeda
members are enrolled in
flight schools in
Arizona.”

But WPllPHmson’s superiors
largely ignored the memo, and failed to
pass information on through
intelligence channels

Not only did these concerns fall upon deaf
ears, neither FBI office was aware of the
otOLr’s rLlHtLK JonJLrns KuL to Hn
OUTDATED, INEFFECTIVE INFORMATION
system
Minneapolis Phoenix

‚TOL FB| has no way to
place leads, tips and
other potentially useful
information in an
electronic repository
that agents can sLHrJO‛

‚TOL FB| has no way to
place leads, tips and
other potentially useful
information in an
electronic repository
that agents can sLHrJO‛
In effect, not only was the information
not passed to others at the FBI, it
definitely did not make it to the CIA.

DISTRUST

DISTRUST
The cultures at the FBI and CIA lead to an
additional level of communication
ineffectiveness and contributed to the inaction
prior to the 9/11 attacks

DISTRUST
There are also various institutional constraints,
such as organizational bylaws and even federal
laws that restrict certain aspects of the sharing
of intelligence between the two agencies.

WHY
D|DN’T T{E FB| &
CIA CHANGE

FROM THE 1993
ATTACK

If implemented
would ENTERPRISE
2.0 STRATEGY AND
TECHNOLOGY have
changed the culture
and IT systems at
the FBI and CIA and
thus prevented the
9/11 attacks?

DRUCKER & E2.0
LESSONS LEARNED
LEADERSHIP
The Government failed the American People by not establishing a
more effective communication system after the 1993 attacks.
They also didn’t act to change the negative impact of FBI/CIA
culture
ORGANIZATION & COMMUNITY
The lack of an organized system, cultural issues, legal restraints
and an inferior information sharing structure led to the
“malfunction in information”.
TECHNOLOGY RECOMMENDATIONS
MindTouch (Secure Social Intranets), SharePoint, Jive Software, or
Atlassian Confluence would have provided a secure information
sharing hub between agencies.

WOULD E2.0 HAVE CHANGED 9/11?
POSSIBLY Had the proper information
sharing system been in place prior to 9/11, the
collaborative efforts of the FBI & CIA may have
uncovered the plot. Yet deep cultural issues and
DRUCKER a lack of overall leadership may have rendered
any E2.0 efforts useless
A SKEPTICAL MAYBE while
E2.0 solutions would have certainly
helped and may have allowed the CIA or
FBI connect the dots, I am not convinced
Aaron the US Government would have adopted
Fulkerson a proper E2.0 strategy due to cultural issues
Mindtouch

SUMMARY
Organizations
are going to
change

When there is an easy way to
COLLABORATE people always will

The key is to provide technology
that enables EASIER collaboration

for
COMMUNITY
INNOVATION
AND
MANAGEMENT
to thrive

So that the technology facilitates
social connections with people

which IMPROVES business

and creates NEW customers

and catastrophic mistakes are
AVOIDED

We call this
ENTERPRISE 2.0

DRUCKER
‚MHnHNLmLnt is about human
beings. Its task is to make
people capable of joint
performance, to make their
strengths effective and their
weaknesses irrelevant. This is
what organization is all about,
and it is the reason that
management is the critical,
determining factor.‛

Did you like this presentation?
THEN
VOTE

Did you like this presentation?
THEN
VOTE
HERE

CREDITS & ATTRIBUTION
Slide Sources Notes
7-15 http://www.amctv.com/originals/madmen/
26 http://www.flickr.com/photos/matthew_cameron/2868770311/sizes/l/
27 http://www.flickr.com/photos/sparkfun/4255272762/sizes/o/
39 http://www.entertainmentwallpaper.com
96 http://www.flickr.com/photos/batram/3140360731/
124 - 129 http://www.amctv.com/originals/madmen/
120, 123, http://www.druckerinstitute.com/
132
http://www.amazon.com/Colossal-Failure-Common-Sense-Collapse/dp/0307588335 Lehman Brothers case history
46, 74 http://www.thecontenteconomy.com/2010/01/enterprise-20-and-collective_21.html Oscar Berg

MARK FIDELMAN
Enterprise 2.0
Enthusiast
@markfidelman