IBM Social Business Behavior

IBM Software
IBM executive brief:
social business behavior
The changing nature of culture, etiquette and
personal interaction in the workplace

2 IBM executive brief: social business behavior
The changing business landscape
Much has been made of the need for new rules of behavior
in the age of social business. The discussion has focused greatly
on how corporate spokespersons and the general employee
population behave when communicating and interacting with
clients, prospects, colleagues and other audiences through online
social environments.
There has been much less discussion about business
communication and professional interactions inside the firewall.
Social collaboration affects the way workers interact with not
only external stakeholders, but also one another. Just consider
the environmental changes seen in the past four years alone:
●● The increasingly porous nature of the corporate firewall
●● Geographically distributed teams
●● Increased insourcing, outsourcing and cosourcing and more
contractual team members
●● The growing impact of informal networks in team decision
making
●● Employees’ behavior in circumventing standard policies and
tools to “get the job done”—especially as the consumerization
of IT creates new expectations for corporate IT services
Extensive communications over online social networks often
means that entire business conversations—and even deals—may
be carried out online. But human behavior is a rich interplay
of visual cues, body language, facial expressions, voice tone
and other “meta-senses” that are not yet fully realized in online
conversations. The risk is that, without understanding the new
rules of etiquette for social business, we may now misunder-
stand, stall or break down vital business communications.
With these conditions in mind, we need to ask ourselves a
fundamental question: What are the norms for employee com-
munication in a social business? In this IBM executive brief, we
frame our response to this question as social business etiquette.
The role of social business etiquette in social business
transformation
Internal social transformation is often the first step toward a
broader transformation. The IBM 2011 Tech Trends Report,
which surveyed more than 4,000 IT professionals in 93 coun-
tries, shows the importance of social collaboration to overall
strategies: As summarized by InformationWeek:
“Many of the survey respondents noted that their companies are
implementing social from the inside out—that is, they are testing the
waters by deploying intranet-based social systems. The top three drivers
for such deployments are employee collaboration, efficiency in locating
people and resources, and idea generation, according to the
report.”—InformationWeek1
Without a firm grasp of the technology itself or the human
behavior related to the use of the technology, any project or
strategy looking to harness the power of social collaboration
will not be nearly as successful. By testing the waters internally,
companies can understand how technology affects existing
employees’ behavioral patterns. They can then use that cultural
knowledge to encourage and enable successful adoption.
This IBM executive brief is for enterprise leaders who seek to
understand the critical role that social business etiquette plays
in workforce transformation and in adoption of social business
programs. It explores professional interactions among colleagues
over online social networks inside the firewall, with particular
emphasis on colleagues who do not have an established profes-
sional relationship.

IBM Software 3
This executive brief avoids discussions that cover other
enterprise collaboration modalities:
●● Employee communication and collaboration with external
stakeholders. As already mentioned, this is covered by a
large and growing body of work. IBM has contributed to
that discussion with reports such as the 2011 IBM Institute for
Business Value’s Global Chief Marketing Officer Study.2
●● The basics of being a “good businessperson.” These basics are
already extensively covered by management tomes, the
Harvard Business Review, human resource communities such as
the Institute for Corporate Productivity and many more.
●● Organizations with rigidly hierarchical structures. In addition
to the challenges described in this executive brief, these
organizations may face additional change management,
regulatory and other organizational behavior requirements
before fully incorporating social business strategies in their
business model. This executive brief can, however, certainly
benefit organizations that allow, or are experimenting with,
informal and formal online networks of collaboration.
Why etiquette plays a role in internal social business
adoption
Most organizations have professional norms: the written
and unwritten rules and behaviors that govern working with
colleagues across formal organizational structures. The nature
of social collaboration, however, elevates the importance of the
informal networks within the organization, whereas the newness
of interacting in this manner creates a fog of uncertainty on how
to behave. It is important to understand the organization’s cul-
ture, the rules of etiquette that fit and how these factors enable
employee engagement in such social networks.
As always, a good set of definitions will help frame the problem:
Culture: the beliefs, behaviors, objects and other characteristics common
to the members of a particular group or society4
“Culture eats strategy for lunch.”
—Coffman Organization, 20093

Etiquette: conventional requirements as to social behavior; customary
conduct as established in any class or community or for any occasion5
In other words, etiquette can be thought of as best practices
(good or acceptable) or best behaviors to avoid (improper or
unacceptable) for specific interactions. Organizational cultures
can then encourage specific rules of etiquette to facilitate
harmony and productivity across the environment.
This customization is important. There is no one single “right
way” to behave, because appropriate behavior is culturally and
organizationally determined, depending on several factors:
●● “Up-down” etiquette: interacting with a direct report or an
up-line manager
●● “Sideways” etiquette: interacting with a peer coworker in your
immediate group, a coworker on your extended team or a
coworker in a different division
●● Asymmetric social knowledge: interacting with a coworker
who is more familiar with your work than you are with his or
hers (or vice versa)
●● Media being used: email, instant messaging (IM), telephone
call, social networks or a combination thereof
●● Number of participants: one to one (face to face, telephone
and instant message), one to many (weekly team meetings,
videoconferences and microblog posts) or many to many
(town halls, community discussions and ideation blogs)
●● Influence of geographic cultural norms: participants are
culturally homogeneous or participants are from multiple
cultures
●● Level of experience of participants: younger workers interact-
ing with older workers—or newer workers interacting with
more-experienced workers
Because of the subjective nature of etiquette, many business
leaders are understandably uncomfortable with the subject. It is
easier to focus on more quantifiable business outcomes and key
performance indicators. But etiquette is important, increasingly
so, as social business strategies become a key source of competi-
tive differentiation:
●● Etiquette is a normalizing practice that helps align your
people to the principles that your organization values, which
in turn shape your business strategies.
●● Etiquette informs employees how to operate in common
situations, and culture guides them in uncommon ones.
●● Etiquette and cultural values can be a strong competitive
differentiator, especially when well communicated to custom-
ers, colleagues and communities. Consider the employees
and fans of Harley-Davidson motorcycles: They have their
own unique rules of etiquette. The well-defined culture of
Harley-Davidson appeals to its constituents and has enabled
the company to succeed over the long term.
●● Trust is critical for successful business relationships, and it’s a
key differentiator for social businesses, because, ultimately, we
are likely to do more business with those we trust. The small
interactions we have every day are as important as the
outcomes of major transactions when developing trusted
relationships. Etiquette helps new employees understand what
is and is not considered trustworthy behavior, and therefore it
helps them map out the boundaries. It also helps experienced
employees share wisdom about successful as opposed to
unsuccessful interpersonal behavior.

5
IBM Software
There is a growing body of discussion on the nature of trust in
online social networks. This includes business versus personal
and the effect of anonymity (or personas) versus true identifica-
tion. Just one recent example: Bertrand Duperrin, a prominent
French blogger on Enterprise 2.0, recently wrote a blog post on the
unforeseen consequences of how these basic structures affect
behavior (“sincerity is impacted by transparency”) and business
outcomes.6 Although this is beyond the scope of our executive
brief, it helps to illuminate the complexity of the issue.
The changing rules of etiquette in an
online social world
Social business etiquette is not built in a vacuum. As with other
cultural artifacts, social business etiquette builds on the rules
that have already been established in other contexts: telephone
interactions, email exchanges, elevator chats, formal face-to-face
meetings and so on. For example, the emoticon (“smiley face”)
was developed to impart facial emotional content, such as
amusement or boredom, within an email conversation.
Emoticons later carried forward into instant messaging and are
now a fixture in newer online social communications like blogs,
microblogs and more.
“Culture isn’t just one aspect of the game ...
it IS the game.”
—Lou Gerstner7
Social business etiquette therefore builds on norms honed
over years of experience in the shared tools of interaction, and
it evolves as the tools evolve. Another example: It is generally
considered improper to use all capital letters in a text-based
message, including email, microblogs and blog comments,
because it suggests that one is yelling at another person. When
the Internet first started, however, “all caps” was not as unusual
because there were still devices that did not have lower-case
letters on keyboards. This is similar to telegraph messages of a
century ago, where that limitation implied no negative sentiment
toward “all caps.” However, because it is almost unheard of now
to have devices without lowercase letters, “all caps” is now
considered improper.
The specific application of etiquette to the particular media in
use is also important. As Marshall McLuhan said, “The medium
is the message.”8 What is considered acceptable in one medium
may not be in another. For example, some social network tools
such as Twitter do not require the permission of people to build
connections, while others such as LinkedIn do. The etiquette on
Twitter therefore forgoes the need to give a reason for people to
connect, while LinkedIn connections are most successful when
users provide a good reason why they wish to connect with
someone.
What follows are some of the more common scenarios that
should be considered in any social business transformation.

Etiquette in building relationships
Assuming your organization is open to employees viewing
organization charts using internal social network profiles and
other resources (see sidebar), anyone can quickly understand an
individual’s place within the formal relationship: job titles,
reporting chain, etc. In addition, most enterprise profile systems
also provide data about employees’ social graphs: their informal
relationships, including shared communities, current projects,
publications and informal networks. Understanding the formal
and informal relationships between individuals can be used to
find expertise and get information from others; for example,
to find a product development expert or to request data for a
specific project.
The availability of formal reporting structures
Like most organizations, IBM has a clearly defined hierarchy
of reporting relationships. However, IBM also provides
universal and easy access to this information in an online
company directory. Employees are actively encouraged to
search through the profile database. Many organizations
today have not yet made this change: some because of
inertia, others because it is culturally inappropriate to publicly
share organizational structures outside of one’s immediate
reporting chain, still others because there is a business need
such as secrecy or legal compartmentalization among
organizational units.
Building networks is therefore not necessarily as straightforward
as it may seem. For example, when inviting someone you don’t
already know to join your network, it is often appropriate to
include a short message explaining your reason for the invitation
and why you think the connection will be mutually beneficial.
In other instances, it may be more appropriate to “follow” a
person rather than invite them to join your network. This is
often the case when individuals want to keep up with managers
or executives outside of the normal reporting structure. Network
connections imply a level of connectedness and an established,
or prior, working relationship.
The effect on etiquette is significant. In such open information
systems, it is perfectly acceptable to research and bring up in
open discussion our colleagues’ documented relationships. It is
not considered inappropriate (i.e., “stalking”). On the contrary, it
is considered to be less than thoughtful when entering a new
conversation without first having done some prior research into
your colleagues’ formal and informal networks. In the case of
organizations that need to maintain more control over such
information, the opposite norms of behavior may apply. For
example, in highly regulated financial services, collaboration
between stock trading and investment banking divisions are
often sharply proscribed. Etiquette reinforces that necessity by
ascribing concern or confusion to individuals approached outside
the tightly controlled norm.

7
IBM Software
Etiquette in interactions: tooling and communication types
In addition to the tools and data that identify relationships,
IBM has a culture of interaction that enables social business.
Email, conference calls, instant messaging, discussion forums,
web meetings, blogging, microblogging and more are acceptable
ways to meet, explain, invent, argue and listen. The ease with
which people interact and the meaningful ways people can
participate enable the work we need to do together.
In fact, low or even no interaction, when not explicitly
requesting a response or direct engagement, is also acceptable.
According to Forrester Research’s Social Technographics profile,
a significant portion of the population are not, nor will be, vocal
contributors.9 When called “lurking,” the term unnecessarily
denigrates an important and valid type of interaction where
responses are not required: researching a new topic or expert in
the field of interest, broadcast cascades from senior executives
(announcements, policy), informal peer-to-peer information
sharing (tips, Q&As) and more.
Etiquette in responding to others
In social spaces, responsiveness is visible. The IBM culture of
professionalism means that IBM employees expect responses
in a reasonable time, and social pressure can prompt action.
IBM has capabilities in our internal social network tools that aid
in understanding how to respond to others. The “Do Not
Disturb” status on instant messaging, for example, may make
clear a current inability to respond. The tool can also provide
exception building. For example: One can set a preference that
immediate managers can override a Do Not Disturb status. In
the case of IBM, because of the highly geographically dispersed
workforce and the use of customizable status messages, “Out of
Office” notifications on email, or “away” status on instant mes-
saging, are not just acceptable, but are socially recommended
when employees are away for a significant amount of time
(e.g., for email, more than a day; for IM, more than an hour).
Setting “Preferred Contact” information in the employee online
profile, which can then be surfaced in a digital business card,
tells colleagues the best way to connect with one another, and
sets an expectation that if one tries to connect in that manner, a
response will be provided. The functions in the tools give clues
to the rules for starting interactions with one another, and for
knowing when to stop. The response etiquette applies to nega-
tive situations as well, such as providing the ability to indicate
inappropriate content.
Lurking behavior can be perceived as inappropriate when it
seems to be a means to ignore a direct request. For example,
someone posting a question to an IBM employee’s Profile Board
(similar to the Facebook wall) has a reasonable expectation that
his or her question will eventually be answered as if it had been
posed in an email or a voicemail, if not with the same sense of
urgency.

Etiquette in including and acknowledging others
One of the more important aspects of social business etiquette is
the ability to include and acknowledge others, especially when
face-to-face inclusion and acknowledgement are impossible. As
is often taught in school, never underestimate the value of a
thank you. Social tools can provide undeniable benefit by mak-
ing it easy to make those thank you notes public by including
others in your work: share links to your successes and lessons
learned, reshare the interesting work of others, acknowledge a
colleague’s contributions and trace contributions in the network.
The tools themselves can assist in setting up the right etiquette
for the response. If it is unclear whether a file can be shared
with others, the poster can easily set limits on who can see the
file (“only share with John, Jeanne and Jacques”) and what level
of participation each is provided: “read only” versus “editor.”
If a recipient thinks that additional access or privileges are
required, a request back to the document owner is acceptable
(as is a “no” reply).
Another example: In a microblog exchange, acknowledging
comments shows attention is being paid. It is good practice to
address comments to a specific individual using his or her name,
or the “@username” style that is popular on networks such as
Twitter. While this approach is sometimes used, referring to
individual comments by comment number is often considered
less personal and does not engender the same level of trust.
Human resources professionals are always wrestling with recog-
nition and reward strategies in their organization. A year-end
bonus or a private year-end review result is not worth as much
when the norm is no longer “employee for life”. Professional
value is increasingly measured by the public acknowledgment
of one’s accomplishments to extended networks, inside as well as
outside the organization. IBM, for example, is experimenting
with BlueThx, a virtual “thank you” and reward system where
peers can publicly acknowledge colleagues’ positive contribu-
tions. Those acknowledgments are in turn communicated to
managers, posted to the recipient’s online profile board and
tagged to enhance expertise searches.
At IBM, etiquette dictates that negative criticisms and outcome-
based criticisms are generally kept inside private email strings.
Sharing these thoughts via public forums, status updates, profile
boards or public comments to a blog, is considered
inappropriate.
Defining etiquette helps us to understand our responsibilities for
adhering to the code of behavior. In particular, it is the responsi-
bility of every employee to understand differences in perspective
and context when crafting responses and sharing others’ work.
Etiquette of mass communications over social networks
versus spamming
As more people move to social networks within an organization,
new audiences emerge. Often, online communities may have
membership lists that others can see. However, this does not
necessarily impart permission to broadcast messages to all
members of a particular group. Social business tools allow
better ways to drive attention to a topic, event or other subject
such as through a blog or wiki. One recent example within
IBM: when Virginia (Ginni) Rometty assumed the role as CEO of
IBM on January 1, 2012, her first major communiqué was via a short
video outlining her priorities as leader, which she posted to the
IBM internal social network.10

9
IBM Software
Social business etiquette also takes advantage of rapid iteration
to accommodate changing definitions of success (what works and
what doesn’t). For example: Where previously it may have been
considered bragging to overcommunicate one’s successes, online
social networks actually respond better when subject matter
experts (humbly) communicate their successes to the broader
community. Over time, as subject matter experts develop suffi-
cient social trust, senior leaders may actually send organizational
messages through such thought leaders instead of themselves or
other more formal communiqués; they know that a thought
leader’s message will likely draw more attention than one sent
through more formal—and unsolicited—channels. Most recipi-
ents may equate unsolicited messages, even those coming from
the senior leadership team, as spam and ignore them, whereas
they may be much more interested in hearing what a trusted
subject matter expert has to say about the same topic.
Understanding differences in perspective
People violate codes of behaviors all the time, of course, and
need help understanding expectations. Melissa Sader, one
of the contributors to this executive brief, writes a monthly
column about corporate etiquette to encourage employees to
be mindful of how they communicate and interact with others.
Her column is “about IBMers practicing our values with special
regard to effective business communication and building strong
professional relationships in a global enterprise.” Her focus
is similar to that of The Emily Post Institute Etipedia, the online
etiquette encyclopedia where the great grandchildren of Emily
Post are using the framework of Wikipedia to update her classic
rulebook with social networking etiquette.11
The IBM Social Computing Guidelines advise all IBM employees
to be respectful and factual.12 The expectations are described
clearly. Problems occur because social interaction crosses
borders, flattens hierarchies, involves multiple generations and
practically moves at the speed of light. Many breaches of eti-
quette are not deliberate, but often are failures to understand
perspectives, cultural norms and expectations: “I didn’t know—
I haven’t had a chance to read the guidelines yet.”
Other transgressions occur because the interactions are happen-
ing so fast that people do not have access to all the facts. In some
cases, the original interaction is acceptable, but the feedback is
subsequently handled inappropriately. With a corporate culture
that has publicly valued diversity, IBM employees have the clear
responsibility to understand the differences in perspective that
other contributors bring, and the blind spots that we may have
ourselves.13
Recognizing context
Understanding differing perspectives is only part of the
responsibility. Professional social collaboration also engenders a
responsibility to understand context: of the content, the people
and the exposure. Content always has a context: draft versus
final version, vacation photo versus team dinner photo, informal
remarks versus official press release. Just consider the pitfalls in
the use—and misunderstanding of—humor used in a business
context. People also have a context relative to you, depending
on such factors as their history, their relationship to you, their
position in the organization and more. And finally, there is
the context of exposure: a “for your eyes only” versus wider-but-
still-controlled-distribution communications versus public
communications.

For example, those who have been exposed to more traditional
brainstorming workshops know that spirited discussions are
encouraged to drive innovative idea generation. But because the
discussions remained behind closed doors, the etiquette of the
caucus applied: Any disagreements are kept behind closed doors;
when in public, everyone is on the same page. But newer tools
allow for much more distributed brainstorming, such as ideation
blogs or IBM InnovationJam® sessions. This more public
context requires a different etiquette, such as discussion forum
comments that are kept more factual and less emotional than a
closed-door discussion.
Context is a very strong governor of etiquette. The transforma-
tion to social business creates an added responsibility in workers
and leaders to understand that online social environments bring
a transparency to context that doesn’t exist in other realms of
interaction.
Risk and governance
Open communication in social spaces makes managers worry
that they have less control over employee behavior. IBM and
other companies have addressed risk by relying on existing codes
of behavior (such as the IBM Business Conduct Guidelines)
and forming new policies where needed (see the index of social
media governance guidelines from 176 companies compiled by
Chris Boudreaux).14 Many companies form new governance
models in their organizations, with representation from business
units, legal and HR, to assess risk, educate employees and report
progress on the impact of social business.
IBM BlueIQ
The IBM BlueIQ program educates employees on social tasks
and behaviors, and it taps into thousands of volunteer BlueIQ
ambassadors across the company to help teach and model
usage scenarios. At the management level, IBM established
its Social Business Management Council to help ensure
alignment with corporate strategy and handle policy issues.
But etiquette breaches can still occur, even with new policies and
programs in place—just like they did before the transformation
to a social business takes place. The most effective means of
etiquette control rely less on rules and sanctions, and more on
norms, values and the influence of peers. In a social business, the
desired end state is one where employees help each other govern
and enforce social business etiquette according to the policies
and values of the company.
The game changers that make governing etiquette in a social
business different are issues of access and identity, expectations
for participation, and the impact that a breach can have across
the organization. For example, social spaces enable access to
information as well as many channels for distributing informa-
tion, which can mean faster communication—or inappropriate
dissemination. Employees can manage identity in social spaces
so they create digital eminence and avoid a digital disaster. The
vast spectrum of participation in a social network (from content
creators to commenters and observers) means that employees
can influence others by their presence—or their absence.

11
IBM Software
Clear policies, training and feedback mechanisms help employ-
ees understand how best to interact, and how best to help each
other. Social businesses must establish clear policy tied to roles:
who is authorized to speak for the company and how employees
can convey when they are not. Policy must also be tied to
ownership: who has decision-making ability and which organiza-
tions take responsibility for what issues. Training programs
should stress the behaviors and tasks, and not just the tools.
And feedback mechanisms are essential for formal and informal
community dialogue about questions, concerns, ideas and
compliments.
The viral, social aspects of a social business are an advantage in
communicating desired etiquette. Practices are observed by all,
both good and bad. And both can be addressed quickly in an
appropriate way. The informal networks that form so quickly
and easily in social spaces can be used for reinforcement, train-
ing and feedback. Skilled people who have respect in their own
networks can spread desired practices faster, achieving the influ-
ence of good etiquette that a social business needs to reach its
maximum potential.
Next steps
Social business etiquette is not about a “feel good” approach to
business. It is rooted in the deepest levels of how businesses cre-
ate and engender trust, which is increasingly the most critical
capital an organization has. It is ultimately about driving profes-
sional and organizational success through reduced friction and
increased transparency.
As organizations embark upon a social business transformation,
they should consider these next three steps critical in helping
ensure that the transformation is not about tools but about what
will drive strategic success for the business.
1. Consider your own organization’s culture and behavioral norms
when rolling out social business tools. A social business strategy
that does not take into account the current culture will likely
stall or even fail in the face of rejection by the social body.
Specific, existing, written and, just as important, unwritten
rules of conduct must be considered when deploying social
collaboration technologies in the enterprise.
2. Walk before you run. Because social business etiquette is tied so
closely to the complexities of your organizational culture, it is
important for both individuals and groups to experiment and
rapidly iterate. Individuals should be encouraged and empow-
ered to try public social media to collaborate on non-confi-
dential projects and tasks. Although not behind the firewall,
public social collaboration can give employees and groups an
excellent feel for how these tools will work internally.
Designate moderators and coaches to keep an eye on progress
and capture lessons learned before rolling out similar tools
internally.

3. Engage in the conversation. Follow IBM and other thought
leaders as we discuss social business transformation in all its
richness, including best practices, tips, tricks, traps and tools
for success. Follow #ibmsocialbiz on Twitter and read The
Social Business on Tumblr. We also encourage you to engage
this executive brief’s authors in an ongoing dialogue about the
nature of social business etiquette:
Jeanne Murray: IBM Software Group Social Software Adoption,
BlueIQ Program. Twitter: @jeanne_murray
Jennifer Okimoto: associate partner—IBM Strategy and
Transformation Center of Competence, Social Business Lead.
Twitter: @jenokimoto
Jacques Pavlenyi: market segment manager, IBM Collaboration
Solutions. Twitter: @mediamutt
John Rooney: program lead, Innovation and Collaboration,
IBM CIO Software Integration Team. Twitter: @roonoid
Melissa Sader: IBM Executive & Workforce Communications.
Twitter: @meezies
Rawn Shah: social business strategist. Twitter: @rawn
For more information
To learn more about social business, please contact your
IBM representative or IBM Business Partner, or visit
The Social Business on Tumblr.
1 InformationWeek, “Internal Social Networks Now Important
Proving Ground,” Debra Donston-Miller, November 17, 2011.
http://www.informationweek.com/thebrainyard/news/community_
management_development/231903248/internal-social-networks-now-important
proving-ground
2 IBM, From Stretched to Strengthened: Insights from the Global Chief
Marketing Officer Study, October 2011
3 YouTube video, Culture Eats Strategy for Lunch produced by the
Organization, 2009, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kiFMJfrCO_0
4 Culture and Society Defined, CliffNotes.com, February 2012,
http://www.cliffsnotes.com/study_guide/topicArticleId-26957,articleId-
26848.html
5 Modern Language Association (MLA): etiquette. Dictionary.com.
Dictionary.com Unabridged. Random House, Inc. http://dictionary.
reference.com/browse/etiquette (accessed: February 02, 2012).
6 Bertrand Duperrin’s Notepad, Does transparency harm sincerity in
business social networking, November 28, 2011 http://www.duperrin.com/
english/2011/11/28/does-transparency-harms-sincerity-in-business-social-
networking/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
7 Gerstner, Louis V., Who Says Elephants Can't Dance? Inside
IBM's Historic Turnaround, Collins, 2002.
© Copyright IBM Corporation 2012
Lotus Software
IBM Software Group
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142
U.S.A.
Produced in the United States of America
January 2012
IBM, the IBM logo, and ibm.com are trademarks of International Business
Machines Corporation in the United States, other countries or both. If these
and other IBM trademarked terms are marked on their first occurrence in
this information with a trademark symbol (® or ™), these symbols indicate
U.S. registered or common law trademarks owned by IBM at the time this
information was published. Such trademarks may also be registered or
common law trademarks in other countries. Other product, company or
service names may be trademarks or service marks of others. A current list
of IBM trademarks is available on the web at “Copyright and trademark
information” at ibm.com/legal/copytrade.shtml
This document is current as of the initial date of publication and may be
changed by IBM at any time. Not all offerings are available in every country
in which IBM operates.
THE INFORMATION IN THIS DOCUMENT IS PROVIDED
“AS IS” WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY, EXPRESS OR
IMPLIED, INCLUDING WITHOUT ANY WARRANTIES
OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR
PURPOSE AND ANY WARRANTY OR CONDITION OF
NON-INFRINGEMENT. IBM products are warranted according to the
terms and conditions of the agreements under which they are provided.
8 McLuhan, Marshall, Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man,
McGraw Hill, NY, 1964.
9 Forrester, What’s the Social Technographics Profile of Your Customers?,
http://www.forrester.com/empowered/tool_consumer.html
0 Robert McMillan, “Ginni Rometty Says Hello to IBM (Without E-Mail),”
Wired Enterprise, January 2012, http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/
2012/01/ginni-rometty-says-hello
1 The Emily Post Institute Etipedia, http://www.emilypost.com/etipedia
2 IBM, Social Computing Guidelines, http://www.ibm.com/blogs/zz/en/
guidelines.html
3 IBM, Diversity 3.0, http://www-03.ibm.com/employment/us/diverse/?
cm_sp=MTE18528
4 Social Media Governance website, Chris Boudreaux,
http://socialmediagovernance.com/policies.php#axzz1gSpVwSKk

Please Recycle
-
1
1
1
1
1
EPW14014-USEN-01

IBM Social Business Behavior

More Related Content

What's hot

Similar to IBM Social Business Behavior

More from Wirehead Technology

IBM Social Business Behavior