Hi – I flew in on Tuesday night and for those of you who have been here all week, first of all thank you for showing up to my presentation this morning. Second, thank you to those who have been twittering and blogging. I was following the conference from afar on Monday and Tuesday. Please continue to twitter and blog for those of us who cannot be here!
I’m Jen Okimoto.
I’m Jen Okimoto. I’m actually here in place of my dear friend and former IBM colleague Aaron Kim. He recently left IBM to go work for the Royal Bank of Canada and he asked me if I would stand in for him. I readily agreed and am thrilled to be here in Boston. Who am I? I’m a consultant, like Aaron in IBM’s Global Business Services. My internal business card sayd, “Enterprise 2.0 Provocateur and Hand Holder.” IT is a role I’ve been playing at IBM and with many of my clients for over three years. I’m in our Human Capital Management practice and I’m not a technologist. I am interested in the changing nature of work. I work with big companies who are global, complex and highly technical. Companies with diverse populations…geographically, generationally, culturally, and with highly diverse skills, experiences and job roles. Here’s another view of me…thank you Jonathan Feinberg!
I’m going to cover three topics today.
You are all familiar with the Gartner’s hype cycle. This cycle can be applied to any type of major change. The reason I share it is to remind you that enterprise2.0 and the use of web2.0 technologies in the enterprise is a journey. Despite the fact that web2.0 has become the millionth word in the English language and some of this is becoming so, yesterday. We have not hit the plateau of productivity…ESPECIALLY within the corporation. Things are changing fast, but not that fast.
You are familiar with Geoffrey Moore’s concept of crossing the chasm. Where do you think most organizations today are with respect to this picture? Most the companies I interact with are squarely in the early adopter mode. The distinction is, that unlike many past technological change…people within those companies are moving to early majority in their personal lives. When I do presentations with non-enterprise2.0 enthusiasts, I ask. How many of you use linkedin, facebook, ebay, flickr…etc. Two to three years ago, in a group of business people…non techies, the answer was 20-30%. Today, it will be 70 to 100% If I ask how many use similar technologies within the firewall…the numbers plummet. Even in IBM…where we have an embarrassment of riches of web2.0 technologies inside the firewall. I gave a presentation to about 50 IBMers. I asked the linkedin, facebook question and the response was 100%. I asked how about our web2.0 technologies inside the firewall…blogs, wikis, profiles, beehive, cattail, dogear. And 16% of the people said they’d never used any of them. Some would say, we’ve jumped the chasm. I’d say we’re not at the point where it is all routine and we can say the journey is over. That’s true at IBM…it is very true with most of my clients. Moreover…and this gets to topic two of my presentation. Patterns that develop early adopters often don’t work for the early majority. What the guys and gals on the left side will do and put up with is VERY different than those on the right.
Another way to think about this is in the early part of the journey people are experimental. It is in their DNA to try new things. If something doesn’t work, they tear it us, try it again. They will often seek out others to learn from. So there is are wide swings in productivity. Great stories where things worked really well…and a lot of examples (often not nearly as well documented) where things didn’t work out as planned. But the high volume of experimentation and the learning is really important at the start of the journey. Over time, the patterns begin to stabilize. In the corporation, this means that people start to use the enterprise2.0 technologies as part of the way that they do their jobs. It is no longer optional. It is just how they work. We’re getting there in IBM. More and more work is being done through our enterprise2.0 platforms. However, even in IBM when BlogCentral is down, a large vocal group of people gets very upset. But for most of them work goes on. If Sametime (our instant messaging system) shuts down, the entire corporation practically comes to a halt. The lesson here is the experimentation and learning from patterns is important. Each company is different. They have different business objectives, different cultures, different needs. What you don’t want to do is try to proscribe the patterns in a controlled way… That’s the beauty of web2.0 technologies…you now that. They are user friendly. They let you do things you didn’t even know you needed or wanted to do.
So…when embarking on the enterprise2.0 journey a vision and objective is important. But don’t try to control the journey. Columbus had a vision and an objective to sail to India. But be prepared to deviate from the path because you may encounter unknown continents…
The idea of anti-patterns is one that comes out of software engineering. It is looks like a good idea, but then backfires. That’s what I’m going to talk about now.
Here’s the structure of how I’ll introduce each anti-pattern.
I actually see fear2.0 a lot. Those of you who work for small, nimble are by definition risk takers. You probably like extreme sports too. But for the average corporate leviathan (with the exception of our former friends in the financial services sector) risk taking is not highly regarded. AND now you’ve got folks twittering about your company and applying #FAIL about you. This is the number one reason why enterprise2.0 has not jumped the chasm. I’d like to make a shout out to the city of Bozeman, MT for it’s attempt to control by requiring job applicants to submit all social media user names and passwords, and failing quickly and gracefully by retracting the policy.
A cousin of fear is control 2.0 - Really at the root of fear is desire to control because of a lack of trust. First of all, trying to control the journey will result in suboptimal adoption. Instead, develop good guidelines and trust your people to be adults and do the right thing. I like to ask clients if they trust their people, and they say “of course!” I then ask, do you trust them to work from home? And more often then not, they say, NO! Some of the reasons why, become almost comical…but, it is really about losing control. If you wouldn’t put up with total slackers in a cube or an egregious compliance violation in the breakroom, then you shouldn’t put up with one on the web.
Old habits means, I control who I talk to…by walking down the hall, picking up a phone, sending an email or IM. I know who I’m directing my attention to. New world is I share my documents or blog my experiences or ask my questions. I may have a “targeted” audience, but I am doing it openly and people I don’t know exist or who I don’t know are interested jump in and join the conversation. This is true on the Internet, this is true inside the firewall. I can’t lurk and learn from reading people’s email. But I can lurk around their social media contributions through feeds and tags and I can take ideas, ask questions, apply something that works in one domain to try to solve a completely different problem. From a management perspective. I work with a client that has decided that moving from command and control to a culture of collaboration and teamwork is absolutely critical to their future success. They not only remind their people of this change, they’ve developed their leadership competencies around this idea, they’ve restructured their governance models, and they’ve identified first line managers as pivotal roles in this transformation. So I worked with this company to create a management development program and now I deliver it to managers around the world. We use an entirely virtual method. We cover the regular blocking and tackling of management…goal setting, performance management, coaching and feedback. We also cover teams now – multi-cultural, multi-generational and remote teams. New skills. New behaviors. Need training. Need practice. People will be afraid to try. People will not do it well. It is like exercise. You don’t just get up and run 26 miles. You have to work up to it. Conditioning. Coaching. Higher up in the org, often intimidated by the exposure. They’re already experts, leaders, execs. They’re used to having their stuff vetted or written for them.
- A plausible promise (something prospective members need or want that they don't have now) - An effective tool (that helps the members find each other, connect, and collaborate), and An acceptable bargain for members (what everyone contributes relative to others, works for them) Sometimes it takes a lot of work to extend the promise (Caterina Fake said the success of Flickr depended on the premise that &quot;you have to greet the first 10,000 users personally&quot;). The promise and tool must address a real need: Shirky notes wryly &quot;If you designed a better shovel, people would not rush out to dig more ditches&quot;. Top down, bottoms up, side to side (enthusiasts, informal leaders, communities). Blogjam example to improve adoption. Practice. Experiment. Get to know one another. Leadership. Impact.
Two perspectives. Just give me search that works. Or, iPhone simple. If it isn’t integrated into my day-to-day…forget about it.
Match.com sites in India. Lotus Connections implementation in China.
I’m a perfect example of why this doesn’t work. I’m not techie. In fact if I have to use “code” anywhere, even html or wiki markup lanuage, I get pretty freaked out… My self proclaimed title at IBM is enterprise2.0 provocateur and hand holder. We have an entire team of folks doing reverse mentoring. My group has just been hired to do a big adoption program for a big company who implemented sharepoint and can’t get folks to use it. They’ve now hired us to do training, change management and get the help desk trained. The challenge is integrate – Consider how to take web2.0 capabilities and integrate them into the day to day work that people already do.
Focus on the bean counters… Guy on airplane. Controller for BU in large global industrial products company. HQ in Germany. Ops in Philipines. He’s in SF. Used to focus on debits and credits. Now I focus on solving business issues. They use SAP. Everything is a work around. ST saves the day. Real-time…only works so far across all those timezones. People create work arounds, but every group does it differently. No consistency…in an area where they need it…largely b/c no visibility or collaborative space to share and collaborate on the work arounds.
Jen Okimoto [email_address] <ul><li>Senior Managing Consultant, Enterprise 2.0 Provocateur and Hand Holder with IBM Global Business Services – Human Capital Management Practice </li></ul><ul><li>Leading our Workforce and Talent Solutions – Connect initiative </li></ul><ul><li>17 years as a Consultant – BPR, CRM, ERP, L&D, K&C, WTS </li></ul><ul><li>Current clients in Electronics, Chemicals & Petroleum and Pharmaceutical industries </li></ul><ul><li>Co-chairs the Web2.0 for Business IBM Community </li></ul><ul><li>Political Science and Chinese Studies degrees from Wellesley College </li></ul><ul><li>MPIA in Comparative Public Policies from University of California, San Diego, International Relations and Pacific Studies </li></ul><ul><li>In the last year I’ve worked in the US, Toronto, Buenos Aires, London, Paris, Bangalore, Singapore, Shanghai and Beijing </li></ul>About Me
Tag cloud generated by Wordle, a masterpiece app by IBMer Jonathan Feinberg About Me Jen Okimoto [email_address]
<ul><li>From Hype to Productivity </li></ul><ul><li>Enterprise Web 2.0 Anti-Patterns </li></ul><ul><li>ROI and Metrics * </li></ul>Agenda
Hype Curve conceived by Gartner Visibility Time Technology Trigger Peak of Inflated Expectations Trough of Disillusionment Slope of Enlightenment Plateau of Productivity Web 2.0 Going through Gartner’s Hype Curve
Source: Crossing the Chasm , by Geoffrey A Moore Crossing the Chasm Technology Enthusiasts Visionaries Pragmatists Conservatives Skeptics Early Adopters Early Majority Chasm
Source: IOA CMM Level 5 Journey From “Hit or Miss” to Process Stability & Improvement Initial Manage Defined Quantitatively Managed Optimized Hero-based culture Process-based culture
The roadmap to the future Columbus Monument, Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic Photo by Aaron Kim
<ul><li>In software engineering, an anti-pattern is a design pattern that appears obvious but is ineffective or far from optimal in practice. </li></ul><ul><li>It’s a pattern that tells you how to go from a problem to a bad solution . </li></ul><ul><li>It’s something that looks like a good idea , but which backfires badly when applied. </li></ul>Sources: Wikipedia (as of 12/Sep/2008) http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?AntiPattern
Why the bad solution looks attractive It becomes a pattern because somehow it looks like the right thing to do Why it turns out to be bad Common pitfalls What positive patterns are applicable instead Best (Good?) Practices
Antipattern: Fear 2.0 Photo by Flickr user Violator3, licensed under Creative Commons, Attribution 2.0 Generic
<ul><li>Fear is not a bad thing, but action paralysis is </li></ul><ul><li>Failure comes with a name tag </li></ul><ul><li>Innovating is risky , not innovating may be riskier </li></ul><ul><li>Full control is no longer in your hands </li></ul><ul><li>Fail often , fail quickly , fail gracefully and learn from it * </li></ul>* Partially based on a presentation by Mike Moran Antipattern: Fear 2.0
The cousin to Fear2.0 Antipattern: Control 2.0 Photo by IBM Beehive user Ole Rasmussen, licensed under Creative Commons, Attribution 2.0 Generic
Photo: Leopard EM Antipattern: New World, Old Habits
Photo by Flickr user dcjohn, licensed under Creative Commons, Attribution 2.0 Generic Antipattern: New World, Old Habits
Photo: StockExchange Antipattern: New World, Old Habits
Your clients Your business partners Other employees in your company Co-Workers Friends People as your competitive advantage You Jim Mary Your manager Jim’s manager Susan John Helen Roberto Akira Chris Peter Frequent e-mails Infrequent e-mails Web 2.0 Collaboration
<ul><li>“ It’s just like phone and email ” </li></ul><ul><li>A fool with a tool is still a fool </li></ul><ul><li>“ Web 2.0 is an attitude , not a technology” (Ian Davis) </li></ul><ul><li>It’s about culture transformation, not a toolset </li></ul><ul><li>“ Ultimately, taking full advantage of Web 2.0 may require Management 2.0 ” (Business Week, June 5, 2006) </li></ul>Antipattern: New World, Old Habits
Antipattern: Build it, and they will come Photo by Flickr user Sister72, licensed under Creative Commons, Attribution 2.0 Generic
<ul><li>“ If Wikipedia works, my wiki will too” </li></ul><ul><li>People have limited bandwidth 2.0 </li></ul><ul><li>The joke , the circus and the soap-opera </li></ul><ul><li>Clay Shirky’s plausible promise , effective tool and acceptable bargain (HCE) </li></ul><ul><li>User Adoption Plan + Balanced Incentives </li></ul>Antipattern: Build it, and they will come
Source: C’est la maturité, stupide! Maslow s’invite à la table du 2.0 http://mediapedia.wordpress.com/2006/07/30/c%E2%80%99est-la-maturite-stupide-maslow-s%E2%80%99invite-a-la-table-du-20/ Motivations and Rewards
Antipattern: The World Is Flat Photo: Wikimedia Commons, Public Domain, NASA
<ul><li>In a flat world solutions should be universally applicable </li></ul><ul><li>Locations and companies have unique cultures </li></ul><ul><li>Online ecosystems mimic natural ones </li></ul><ul><li>The joke, the circus, the soap opera… </li></ul><ul><li>Think about survival strategies: competition, predation, cooperation, symbiosis </li></ul>Antipattern: The World is Flat
Antipattern: Geekness 2.0 Photo by Flickr user pipeapple, licensed under Creative Commons, Attribution 2.0 Generic
<ul><li>“ For it to work, you just need to use Firefox, download and install Greasemonkey, edit a Userscript and install it. Anybody can do it. ” </li></ul><ul><li>Second law of thermodynamics: Energy and Entropy </li></ul><ul><li>Laziness 2.0 </li></ul><ul><li>Nudge and KISS </li></ul>Antipattern: Geekness 2.0
Antipattern: Search, and thou should not find Photo: Wikimedia Commons, Public Domain
Flickr: “Interestingness” and “The Wisdom of Crowds” What is Web 2.0? Seven Principles
<ul><li>Your users embraced Web 2.0 and are creating plenty of content </li></ul><ul><li>Most of it is likely to be, err, not very good </li></ul><ul><li>Information overload will quickly overwhelm your users </li></ul><ul><li>UGC needs to be indexed by the main search facility </li></ul><ul><li>Not all UGC is created equal, so make the good float to the top </li></ul>Antipattern: Search, and thou should not find
Antipattern: Intangible means unmeasurable Photo by Flickr user Memotions, licensed under Creative Commons, Attribution 2.0 Generic
<ul><li>“ Nobody asks what’s the ROI for phone and email ” </li></ul><ul><li>Business value must discount costs </li></ul><ul><li>Value creation vs. value capture </li></ul><ul><li>Easy to understand business case </li></ul><ul><li>Easy to calculate ROI models </li></ul>Antipattern: Intangible means unmeasurable
Antipattern: Measuring supply, not demand Photo by Flickr user Memotions, licensed under Creative Commons, Attribution 2.0 Generic
<ul><li>Number of bloggers, posts, wiki spaces, wiki authors are measures of supply </li></ul><ul><li>Not all UGC has business value </li></ul><ul><li>Not all UGC has business value proportional to its volume </li></ul><ul><li>Find which demand metrics can be associated to business value </li></ul>Antipattern: Measuring supply, not demand
ROI: The need for an “R” Source: Let's get real or let's not play" by Mahan Khalsa "If there is no 'R', your 'I' is a 'C'. And the cost is always too high ."
What is the top barrier to the further success of your Web 2.0 initiatives? Source: Building the Web 2.0 Enterprise - McKinsey Global Survey Results, July 2008 Based on survey responses by 1,988 executives from around the world “ Do not understand potential financial returns” 28%
How does your organization measure the business value of its Web 2.0 deployments? “ We use traditional measures such as ROI, TCO & IRR” 63% Source: IT Will Measure Web 2.0 Tools Like Any Other App , Forrester Research, July 25, 2007 Base: 190 IT decision-makers at US firms with 500 or more employees invested in orpiloting Web 2.0 technology (multiple responses accepted)
The 9x Effect: Innovators vs Bean Counters Value x effort Adapted from: Understanding the Psychology of New-Product Adoption , by John T. Gourville, Harvard Business Review, June 2006 (modified) 3x 9x 3x <ul><li>EARLY ADOPTERS/INNOVATORS ARE USUALLY </li></ul><ul><li>Convinced the innovation works </li></ul><ul><li>Likely to see a need for the product </li></ul><ul><li>Dissatisfied with the existing substitute </li></ul><ul><li>Set on viewing the innovation as the benchmark </li></ul><ul><li>BEAN COUNTERS ARE USUALLY </li></ul><ul><li>Skeptical about a new product’s performance </li></ul><ul><li>Unable to see the need for it </li></ul><ul><li>Satisfied with the existing product </li></ul><ul><li>Quick to see what they already own as the status quo </li></ul>Innovators outweigh the new product’s benefits by a factor of 3 Bean counters outweigh the incumbent product’s benefits by a factor of 3
Identifying the right metrics Photo by Flickr user oskay, licensed under Creative Commons, Attribution 2.0 Generic <ul><li>What is your business objective? </li></ul><ul><li>Is your metric stable? </li></ul><ul><li>Can a benchmark be established? </li></ul><ul><li>Do you have the levers to influence it? </li></ul>Iterative and Interactive! Adapted from: 1) Rethinking Measurement: More than evaluating performance (Interview with Dean Spitzer, IBM Research) Consultant’s Edge #146 by Peter Andrews, February 21, 2007 2) The Metrics Maze - Am I Lost? , by Srishti Gupta MediaPost’s Online Metrics Insider, Sep 5, 2008
<ul><li>Increased revenue </li></ul><ul><li>Increased conversions </li></ul><ul><li>Increased social capital </li></ul><ul><li>Brand capital </li></ul><ul><li>Future value of client loyalty/employee retention </li></ul><ul><li>Proxy metrics: Marketing equivalent </li></ul><ul><li>Side benefits: New ideas, digitization of knowledge </li></ul><ul><li>Cost avoidance: </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Time saved, travel costs, real estate costs, carbon footprint </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Replacement cost: knowledge lost by turnover/retirement </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Opportunity costs: what is the cost of status quo or doing NOTHING </li></ul></ul></ul></ul>Returns need to be broadly defined Photo by Flickr user zieak, licensed under Creative Commons, Attribution 2.0 Generic
<ul><li>...we rather need many of them! </li></ul>We don’t need a Web 2.0 ROI Model... Source: ROI 2.0, Part 3: We don’t need a Social Media ROI model http://aaronkim.wordpress.com/2009/02/19/roi-20-part-3-we-dont-need-a-social-media-roi-model/ <ul><ul><li>There is no perfect Web 2.0 ROI model, there are only perfect Web 2.0 ROI model s . </li></ul></ul>
Thank You [email_address] @jenokimoto #e2conf29