Download as PDF, PPTX
Uploaded bySandy Kemsley
Changing Incentives for Knowledge Workers in the Social Enterprise
This document discusses how enterprises are becoming more social and how incentives need to change to encourage knowledge workers to collaborate. Specifically, it covers how work has shifted to more knowledge-based tasks requiring collaboration, how tools now enable participation and user-generated content, and how information is widely available. However, adoption of social processes is limited by misaligned incentives that reward individual over collaborative work. The document argues that organizational culture needs to value participation and transparency, management should trust workers, and incentives should reward collaboration, customer service and teamwork. Emerging social analytics and metrics have potential to better measure and reward social and problem-solving behaviors that achieve goals.
More Related Content
Similar to Changing Incentives for Knowledge Workers in the Social Enterprise
Changing Incentives for Knowledge Workers in the Social Enterprise
- 1. Changing Incentives For KnowledgeWorkers In The Social Enterprise APQC Process Conference Houston 2013 Sandy Kemsley l www.column2.com l @skemsley
- 2. Agenda l How the enterprisebecame social l The disconnect in adoption of new methods and tools l The culture and management mandates l The technology mandate Copyright Kemsley Design Ltd., 2013 2
- 3. The shift inenterprise processes, attitudes and goals How The Enterprise Became Social Copyright Kemsley Design Ltd., 2013 3
- 4. Factor #1: The Natureof Work Changed Routine Work Knowledge Work Execute transactions Solve problems Efficiency Collaboration Compliance/standardization User-created processes Process improvement Assist human decisions Automation Collect supporting artifacts Copyright Kemsley Design Ltd., 2013 4
- 5. Collaboration In TheWhite Space Of The Organization Chart Copyright Kemsley Design Ltd., 2013 5 Source: Luc Galoppin, “Social Architecture: Raising the Bar for our Profession”
- 6. Balancing Hierarchy And CommunityTo Get Things Done Copyright Kemsley Design Ltd., 2013 6 Source: Luc Galoppin, “Social Architecture: Raising the Bar for our Profession”
- 7. Factor #2: ToolCapabilities and Expectations Changed l Consumption l Participation l Creation l User experience l Access anywhere Copyright Kemsley Design Ltd., 2013 7
- 8. Factor #3: Information Everywhere l Nolonger an age of information scarcity: l l l l Businesses have rich customer context through analytics and integration Customers have competitive business information Wide range of public information Productivity is in analysis and connectivity Copyright Kemsley Design Ltd., 2013 8
- 9. External Social PresenceLinked To Core Business Processes l Changes the customer relationship l Extends the ends of the process l Increases external collaboration l Forces operational transparency Copyright Kemsley Design Ltd., 2012 9
- 10. Result: The SocialEnterprise Social Feature Enterprise Benefits Collaboration Exploit weak ties for knowledge sharing and social feedback = Improved decision-making User-created content Transparency Use and capture tacit knowledge = Improved processes Provide context for work = Improved problem-solving Copyright Kemsley Design Ltd., 2013 10
- 11. Copyright Kemsley DesignLtd., 2013 11
- 12. Real-life benefits ofcollaboration and user-created content What Do Social Enterprise Processes Look Like? Copyright Kemsley Design Ltd., 2013 12
- 13. Social In TheFlow Of Work l Social features built into enterprise business processes l l l l Collaboration on demand Zero-training UI for occasional collaborators Informational visibility and sharing Situational applications based on enterprise APIs l User-generated processes and content Copyright Kemsley Design Ltd., 2013 13
- 14. Collaborative Process Modeling l Multiplepeople participate in process discovery, modeling and documentation l l Internal and external participants Technical and non-technical participants l Preserves institutional memory l Facilitates cross-silo collaboration and innovation Copyright Kemsley Design Ltd., 2013 14
- 15. Collaborative Process Modeling CopyrightKemsley Design Ltd., 2013 15
- 16. Dynamic Process Runtime l Usercan add participants from own network or recommended expert l Non-participant can opt-in to process l Audit trail captured within BPMS l Eliminates uncontrolled email processes l Captures patterns for process improvement Copyright Kemsley Design Ltd., 2013 16
- 17. Copyright Kemsley DesignLtd., 2013 17
- 18. Process Activity Streams l Timelineof activity for social monitoring l l l Process models during creation Process instances during execution Publish/subscribe model to “watch” certain processes or event types l Direct link to underlying process model or instance for unsolicited participation l Usually mobile-enabled Copyright Kemsley Design Ltd., 2013 18
- 19. Process Event Streams CopyrightKemsley Design Ltd., 2013 19
- 20. Collaboration at Bank OfTennessee l Service-focused regional bank l Mortgage process before BPM: l l l l l Manual, paper-based Long process with bottlenecks and errors Many exceptions, constantly changing Limited visibility and audit trail Search for social collaboration and BPM platforms merged Copyright Kemsley Design Ltd., 2013 20 Source: Will Barrett, Bank of Tennessee, “Worksocial Pays Dividends”
- 21. A Social MortgageProcess Copyright Kemsley Design Ltd., 2013 21
- 22. Bank Of Tennessee:Benefits l ROI based on social and BPM l l l Process activity stream user interface l l l l 30% faster to complete process Reduced errors Unified communication channel Faster, more efficient actions in place Increased adoption/decreased training Improved visibility and audit trail l l Critical SLAs visible for action Entire process within BPM Copyright Kemsley Design Ltd., 2013 22
- 23. User-Created Content at NorwegianFood Safety Authority l Ensuring food safety, animal/plant welfare: l l l l l Scheduled inspections and events Emergency response Maintain food safety history Apply complex regulations Case folder with dynamic worklist l l Case = person/establishment, e.g., farm Tasks created dynamically as required, manually or triggered by events Copyright Kemsley Design Ltd., 2013 23 Source: Computas
- 24. Copyright Kemsley DesignLtd., 2013 24
- 25. NFSA: Dynamic TaskSelection Copyright Kemsley Design Ltd., 2013 25
- 26. NFSA: Benefits l Entire foodsafety history for each establishment l Two dynamic case management modes l l Control activity module for regular activities with full domain data Emergency response module with alerts and follow-up tasks Copyright Kemsley Design Ltd., 2013 26
- 27. What is limitingthe adoption of social enterprise processes? The Social Dilemma Copyright Kemsley Design Ltd., 2013 27
- 28. Fear Of... l ...assuming responsibilityfor collaboration l ...having to share credit for work l ...appearing weak for requiring collaborators l ...not getting credit for time spent collaborating l ...helping the competition l ...losing control over a process l ...opening access to information l ...fluid, non-hierarchical roles Copyright Kemsley Design Ltd., 2013 28
- 29. Misaligned Business Goals AndMetrics l Executives want collaboration across silos; management required to get work done on time l Process performance indicators measure efficiency, not service levels Copyright Kemsley Design Ltd., 2013 29
- 30. The Employee IncentivesConflict “When an organization doles out bonuses, raises, awards and promotions based on individual contributions, what’s the carrot for social participation?” -- Gia Lyons, Jive Software Do the right thing What’s in it for me? Copyright Kemsley Design Ltd., 2013 30
- 31. Misaligned Employee Incentives l Incentivesbased on job description, not value of contribution l Incentives reward individual efforts, not collaboration Copyright Kemsley Design Ltd., 2013 31
- 32. Mandates for organizationalculture, management and technology Creating A Culture That Rewards Knowledge Work Copyright Kemsley Design Ltd., 2013 32
- 33. Participatory Culture l Time andresources explicitly allocated l l For collaboration and co-creation All stakeholders expected to participate l Appropriate tools provided l Input considered regardless of level and technical skills of participant Copyright Kemsley Design Ltd., 2013 33
- 34. Transparency And Openness l Allowinternal users to see all information l l Set open as default, override for specific exceptions Allow access to external stakeholders l Customers, business partners should see their own information l Enables easier knowledge dissemination l Provides context for problem-solving and collaboration Copyright Kemsley Design Ltd., 2013 34
- 35. Management Style OfTrust l Allow workers to deviate from pre-defined workflow when appropriate l l l Management must allow sufficient autonomy Workers must feel comfortable creating/modifying processes Allow workers to collaborate with resources of their choice l l Assign work or ask assistance Internal and external Copyright Kemsley Design Ltd., 2013 35
- 36. Rewards And Incentives l Setexpectations for participation l Reward for collaboration and process improvement l Reward for customer service over efficiency l Reward teamwork over individual effort Copyright Kemsley Design Ltd., 2013 36
- 37. The technology mandate TheFuture Of Social Enterprise Incentives Copyright Kemsley Design Ltd., 2013 37
- 38. Enterprise Social Scoring l Peerrecognition l Gamification l Social graph connectivity/strength Copyright Kemsley Design Ltd., 2013 38
- 39. Using Collaboration Metrics l Detectand analyze social graph l l Measure contributions to community l l l Boost signal of weak ties Social score Successful performance of task Recommend collaborators based on reputation Copyright Kemsley Design Ltd., 2013 39
- 40. Problem-Solving Metrics l Customer satisfaction l Timeto resolution l Correlate quality of decision with degree of collaboration involved Copyright Kemsley Design Ltd., 2013 40
- 41. Next-Generation Social Analytics l Evaluate(and reward) collaborative behaviors that: l l l l Are aligned with organizational culture Get work done Assist others to achieve shared goals Resistant to “gaming” by workers Copyright Kemsley Design Ltd., 2013 41
- 42. Summary Copyright Kemsley DesignLtd., 2013 42
- 43. Summary l Enterprise processes aresocial, whether you admit it or not l Misaligned goals and incentives will reduce success of outcomes l Organizational culture and management style may need to shift l Core social process technology is in place, but metrics are still catching up Copyright Kemsley Design Ltd., 2013 43
- 44. Slides at www.slideshare.net/skemsley SandyKemsley Kemsley Design Ltd. email: sandy@kemsleydesign.com blog: www.column2.com twitter: @skemsley Copyright Kemsley Design Ltd., 2013 44