Archive for the ‘Social Networks’ Category

Careful Twitter. Opportunity is knocking on your door.

Monday, May 5th, 2008

If I was in Jack Dorsey and Biz Stones I would be monetising their Twitter asset fast, damn fast. Sell it, open it up, whatever it takes. I think they aren’t far away from being standardised out of their current business model unless they can quickly fix their scale problems.

Driven by reliability issues on the Twitter platform, a plethora of conversation emerged this week. Bloggers and tech commentators are turning their conversation to workarounds. It’s as though the conversations and connections in Twitter have become bigger than Twitter itself. The conversation is alive and it wants to fix itself.

One example is Techcrunch’s coverage by Chris Saad of Dataportability.org. His workaround is micro bloggers using tools that are certified as compliant with a microblogging standard (posts of 140 characters and no titles). Users install complaint software on their own servers like you would blog software. He expects this to emerge from the opensource arena.

Personally I disagree, Twitter is successful because it’s easy. Easy to get started, easy to play, easy to have fun. I don’t want to install an app on a server to use a Twitter like product. I love the SaaS Twitter engine and the ecosystem of desktop and websites that have evolved around it.

It’s much like blogging where it’s just a small hassle managing a blog on a server. However, it’s still a hassle. I’d rather someone take care of that for me. My attitude to Chris’s self hosted microblogging application is the same - you’re taking my time away!

Twitter is most at risk from 3rd party application builders who have built desktop apps for Twitter. They are well positioned to build into emerging microblogging engines and thus becoming the microblogging feed readers. In much the same way RSS Readers cover many blog platforms. To do this standards are needed.

So there’s three pieces to the microblogging picture:

  1. Platform
  2. Reader
  3. Standard

I expect one ‘rough’ standard across many platforms the way RSS has evolved. After all who seriously owns a 140 character field limit? How can you protect that?

Social enterprise - needing a little more science

Wednesday, April 30th, 2008

There’s plenty of frustration amongst social media commentators about the steadfast attitude of many enterprises towards the adoption of social tools. More specifically, accepting the philosophy of Enterprise 2.0.

Ross Dawson of Future Exploration Networks and Stephen Collins of AcidLabs amongst others have often commented in detail on this topic. They have pointed to some great successes and I also hear their frustrations. There is language, thinking and approaches around social tools that simply don’t fit into the corporate culture of old. Barriers need to be broken down to give people free open access to these tools, sometimes rules need to be put in place and even some situations call for access to be restricted during work hours. There isn’t a clear and general solution for all enterprises be they large or small.

I’m an advocate for open access for enterprise knowledge workers, as we do in Saasu. We’ve even built connections to social platforms from our online accounting web finance engine. We are building Enterprise 2.0 capabilities into our products and services. However I also hear the frustration of business owners and management teams who believe they are losing productivity due to Facebook and Myspace.

The main factor causing slow adoption by enterprises is productivity fear. Decades of workhorse enterprise culture has left management in fear of productivity declines from social tools. Just as SMS, Instant Messaging systems were perceived to be slowing productivity so are social networks at this early stage of their technology cycle.

20070904 011

Naturally they jump to no access for anyone. Well, they are totally justified to have this fear, but not to apply it to everyone unilaterally. If in managing the flow of information in tools like Facebook can only be served by blocking certain users and allowing others then that’s justified but far from ideal. Many roles in organisations may not be well served by these tools until either a self managing culture or a social communication workflow system is firmly in place that understands or controls acceptable versus unacceptable use.

I talked about restricting access to social tools some time ago in my post about Facebook in the workplace. I’ve witnessed first hand productivity costs in an enterprise environment. I still advocate restrictions and policy around access based on a role by role basis. Access to social networks should be no different to any other communications or knowledge tools used to generate productivity. Any approach to this which is not analytical and scientific in it’s assessment is simply decision making based on poor business intelligence.

Even in the Saasu business we are careful what each new system is that we adopt. It’s not about a free for all, an unequivocal license to explore for all employees. That’s nice, but an analogy springs to mind. If all the scientists choose to go out into the field because it’s fun then none of the lab work gets done.

Most importantly I’m committed to scientific rigor on the adoption of any tool in an enterprise. Anecdotal, emotional and social benefits are all important but what do the numbers also say about the social tool being employed. This is where enterprises should look at the usefulness in numbers and not just jump to conclusions. There is no substitute for at least some rough scientific checks being applied to any system, business or otherwise.

Many managers witness staff spending time working their personal Brand in Facebook. Plain and simple it often about entertainment, events and niche interest groups. So a manager in that situation adds that anecdotal evidence to their bag of reasons and moves on. That evidence is then pulled out of the bag when a decision is being made to block a tool or if thought leaders like Ross or Stephen happen to be giving advise and encouragement on adoption. The argument no doubt becomes tough in the face of this. My approach would be to:

  1. Demonstrate why social tools are an opportunity and not a time waster in many circumstances.
  2. Get them to adopt an Enterprise 2.0 framework with metrics or that connects to a system that has metrics.
  3. Get the social flow managed via culture, tools and procedures.

The reality is that some jobs simply become less productive while others benefit. The job specs for a production line worker, retirement home salesperson or waste removal person probably don’t call for it. However, there is an argument that even people in those roles gain job satisfaction, get better communication with colleagues and possibly better access to management when using social platforms.

Knowledge workers should always be given access to platforms. I’ll leave it to Ross and Stephen to communicate this. Read their blogs, they are the experts.