Posterous theme by Cory Watilo

Filed under: enterprise social computing

Southeastern integrates operational information into their internal activity stream

In the past six months, Southeastern [a UK railway operator] has leveraged Socialtext Connect, a flexible and robust developer toolset built on our REST API that enables developers to socially enable existing systems of record, such as ERP, CRM, or content management systems. The Socialtext solution, now integrated into the Southeastern infrastructure, enables employees to access train status information on the fly, in real-time with visibility across the entire workforce. By providing Southeastern with a more efficient way to share knowledge, expertise, ideas and information, the company can more quickly respond to change and serve their patrons effectively.

And you thought social inside the enterprise was all about staff telling each other what they had for lunch?

Should businesses use collective intelligence and the wisdom of the crowds?

Amazon reviews are just as likely to give an accurate summary of a book's quality as those of professional newspapers, according to a study from Harvard Business School.

Professor Michael Luca and his co-authors analysed the top 100 reviews from 40 media outlets, including the New York Times, and the Washington Post, between 2004 and 2007 for their paper. The academics used data from reviews aggregator metacritic.com, which summarises professional reviews and then awards ratings, if not given, based on content. They also looked at Amazon reviews for each title.

Although the study points out that there is "virtually no quality assurance" in Amazon's consumer reviews, which can also be "gamed" by publishers or competitors submitting false reviews, they found that, nevertheless, experts and consumers agreed in aggregate about the quality of a book.

Another piece of research looking at the reliability of information shared through social media. Earlier in the year, a report was published of researchers who looked at mining Twitter to predict the success of movies. The study was not so positive in this case:

Overall, the study found no clear evidence that shows a direct link between Twitter hype, ratings and box office sales.
“The most surprising finding was that Twitter data may not be representative enough of the total population, so it is somewhat risky to use the site for forecasting,” Sen said. “More sophisticated techniques may be needed to understand the applicability of such data sets, such as the metrics we developed to understand the extent of the difference between Twitter users and other online rating side users.”
Others, like The Economist magazine, still see potential:
search-volume forecasts will help spot consumer trends of this sort with increased precision. But the improvements they bring will be incremental. Sophisticated methods based on natural-language analysis of tweets, blogs, or Facebook pages, by contrast, hold greater disruptive potential. As users of social media grow accustomed to sharing highly personal information, apparently unfazed by market-research outfits like WiseWindow watching their every step, the feelings and intentions of hundreds of millions of people are there for data-hungry computers to see.
Really, the reliability of crowdsourcing has to be looked at in context. Structured or designed crowdsourcing sites like , Amazon's Mechanical Turk and others are seeing success. Competitions and gamification are popular technique, perhaps hinting at the value of using social media and Web 2.0 to achieve scale or breadth of participants rather than the wisdom of the crowds as such. Crowdsourcing is also useful where no other viable method exists to solving the problem, because there is nothing to lose in those situations. Opinion and research on the reliability of Wikipedia is also an ongoing story, but what is perhaps more interesting is the fact that Wikipedia has an article discussing its own reliability - transparency is critical when evaluating the reliability of social media. "Experts" on the other hand typically don't like to be challenged.

What about crowdsourcing inside businesses?

All the caveats above apply, particularly beware that the size of the pool may affect the quality of outputs. This is why is makes sense to extend crowdsourcing to business partners and customers. But crowdsourcing doesn't need to be about making decisions or prediction markets, it can simply be about sharing information widely, getting tasks done too, solving small problems, and gathering feedback. "Working outloud" is another way to tap into collective intelligence about what is going on and who is doing what, which has the potential to be mined (tools like Jive and Atlassian Confluence for example are already doing by telling users about popular content or making recommendations on relevant people and content).

Finally, lets not forget the role of the user, as information literacy is critical. We can't blame the technology for all its hits and misses.

 

Remember Google Sidewiki? Meet Jive Anywhere

Media_httptctechcrunc_peicd

Remember, Google Sidewiki? I thought at the time that it would make a great way to help make intranets, including internal Web-based apps, more social and now it looks like Jive Software have provided this ability natively in their latest release. Why is this useful? Well, basically it provides a short cut to integrating systems of record with Jive's system of engagement platform to mix social collaboration with tasks.

Better than Sidewiki, Jive Anywhere appears to support HTTPS pages (which is critical these days for it to be useful, since most work systems are likely to be running on protected sites).

Jive Anywhere also takes the basic Sidewiki concept further by also integrating differently with different Websites. Examples Jive mention include Techcrunch.com, Linkedin.com and Salesforce.com where it may behave slightly differently.

I wonder if corporate system owners will view Jive Anywhere as vandalism, like people feared with Sidewiki? Personally, I think its a fantastic idea (but Google, take note about the execution).

For more thoughts on Jive Anywhere, see Charlie Hope's post and also Alan Lepofsky's analysis.

Social intranets and the rebirth of internal comms

An example

Recently, there was a large conference at work with many senior managers in attendance. Traditionally, the internal communications staff would write up an article after the event, post it on their intranet portal, and send an email to employees with a summary and a link.

This time, though, those same communications people selected more junior staff (outside of communications) to attend the conference and serve as roaming reporters. The reporters posted live updates throughout the conference using the firm’s new collaboration platform. Communications staff also posted but they added to the conversation instead of dominating it.

Now, without email and without searching, people at all levels from around the world were following the conference by following real people (“I felt like I was there”). And, more importantly, they were able to participate.

The graduates were particularly active, asking questions and contributing content. But senior people at the event also used the social platform, soliciting ideas and feedback, adding comments to other conversations. People discovered the hot topics via their newsfeeds, added comments and likes, and interacted with people across their division (and some from other divisions).

We’d never had anything like that before.

Better for the individual and for the firm

Far from being dead, the internal communications function at that conference became much more valuable. They went from producing impersonal content with few readers and zero feedback to using social tools and practices to engage a larger audience in more meaningful ways.

Whether you’re a communications professional, a senior manager, or just someone who has something to say, that kind of transformation is available to you.

If you’re still relying on people coming to you for your message (or visiting your portal or reading your email), then you’re missing one of the biggest communications shifts in history.

Great story about how social intranets are changing internal communications for the better. Don't keep you intranet stuck as a destination, make it a platform for employee participation.

The table experience in social intranets

Last night I presentated at the NSW KM Forum, where I talked about the range of social intranet software options available on the market. While a lot of the subsquent conversation was about being social inside organisations, one of the more practical discussions was about the issue of working online with 'tables'... you know, like those you create in Word or Excel:

Excel
Creating tables and lists etc is a fairly common activity in the workplace. In fact, I suspect many people use tools like Excel more for organising information than they do actually number crunching. So if people are going to work effectively online together in a social intranet, then this type of functionality is an important requirement. Unfortuntely, creating and editing tables in rich text editors online has never been a fantastic experience but recently it has started to get a whole lot better.

Nothing yet beats a spreadsheet in terms of pure flexibility and tools, like sorting and calculations - so for really heavy lifting with tables you'll need to use a Web-based spreadsheet like Google Docs and Socialtext's Socialcalc, or embed a spreadsheet.

However, lets have a look at a few leading tools and how well they support tables:

Atlassian Confluence

The whole rich text editor has been given a massive upgrade in the latest version of Confluence and tables are a lot easier to use now that users don't need to worry about dealing with wiki markup (which has been removed in the new editor). Confluence's table editing is pretty good although Jive (see below) packs a few additional formatting features. However, as complete package Confluence also offers a range of file embedding, spreadsheet, charting, and task list macros that other platforms don't offer.

Confluence

Jive

Jive's table editor is still essentially based on HTML tables, however the user interface removes some of the complexity of fine detail formatting - you can set the padding, background colour, text alignment (horizontal and vertical), font and colour without feeling you are going anywhere near the HTML code.

Jive
Yammer

Not a lot of love from Yammer for tables, unfortunately. You'll need to make do with sharing spreadsheet files instead for anything more than dot points lists.

Yammer
"Generic"

Most other Web platforms use a common rich text editor plugin, like TinyMCE or CKEditor. Support for tables has improved in these plugins but IMHO vendors like Atlassian and Jive are still leading the way. Note: the editing experience on a particular platform will depend on the version of the rich text editor plugin supported and how it is configured.

Tinymce
As you can see, on a particular feature (and apparently simple one) like tables there is a lot of variability between different social intranet platforms. Is there a winner? Well, I wouldn't pick a platform on this feature alone but these are the sorts of requirements I want to understand when helping a client pick a platform. Its may sound like a minor detail, but if you want people to work online in your social intranets then its actually more important than some of the big ticket technical specs.

What's New in Clearvale?

Broadvision continue to improve Clearvale, their Elgg-based enterprise social networking offering. This recording of a recent Webinar covers current updates to the platform and there are a number of features worth highlighting:

  • How tasks and actions are incorporated into the activity stream.
  • Integration with Outlook that allows users to move email conversations into Clearvale.
  • Widgets to display Salesforce reports in Clearvale.
  • Analytics to support adoption.

Their adoption metrics are based on the concept of network usage and assess the value of contribution, using three measures: connectivity, activity, popularity.

Do all enterprise tools have to solve single quantifiable problems?

The benefits of VisiCalc go beyond its humble origins as calculating paper. It represents a way of using computers that allows the user to ask 'what if' questions that would be too tedious to carry out by hand. Not only are such questions important in planning, they can be vital to the user in learning and coming to understand his own application.

Both the words 'serendipity' and 'synergy' are appropriate for VisiCalc. As VisiCalc evolved it showed us how effective personal computers can be as streamlined interactive tools. But, VisiCalc was not simply a lucky extrapolation of the basic ideas. Both authors of VisiCalc have extensive background in using large mainframes as personal computers and in creating systems to be used by large numbers of people with little training. Word processing background was of special importance since it provided experience in designing screen-based, highly interactive interfaces. More important for VisiCalc, it made us very aware of the need for a carefully designed and tuned user interface. This interface was constantly refined during the development process.

I hadn't seen this paper by Bob Frankston before - presented in 1979 it introduced the world to a new fangled idea: the Visicalc spreadsheet. Apparently there weren't a lot of people around to hear the original presentation of this paper, but it is worth reading retrospectively. Diffusion of this innovation was slow to gather momentum, but some people could see the potential.

Why is this worth mentioning?

The personal computer it seams was a solution looking for a problem and the idea for Visicalc came from an idea for improving how individual people currently worked on tedious calculation tasks, rather then affecting the bottom line of a business. I particularly appreciate that the creators of Visicalc thought carefully about how users would interact with it and other software they already used (bearing in mind the limitations of the hardware at the time). In the end Visicalc didn't completely kill off the idea of either prepackaged solutions for personal computers or enterprise systems, but it is hard to imagine any business today where spreadsheets aren't still considered to be a critical tool. In many instances you could even argue that spreadsheets are more critical than any of the large, complex systems of record that many organisations invest in.

From this perspective, I can't but help draw parallels with social software and wonder if its a good idea that all enterprise tools have to solve single quantifiable problems?

BTW if you prefer, you can watch a 2009 re-reading of the paper by Bob Frankston - part 1 and part 2. You can find more Visicalc history on Dan Bricklin's site.

Hat tip David Weinberger.

Collaboration How-To: Start with Narration of Work

Everyone talks about collaboration in the workplace today but what does it really mean? How do you get from here to there? Every snake oil salesman is selling social something: enterprise social; social learning; social CRM; etc. For me boils down to three principles.

Media_httpwwwjarcheco_bscfb

In my post about Designing Social Workplaces, I discussed a model for collaboration built around social networks, observable work, and insights and analysis. However, I quite like the nuance in Harold Jarche's post, Making collaborative work work where he talks about stepping through Narration of Work, then Transparency and finally Shared Power as a basic roadmap for creating a collaborative workplace.

What is the digital workplace? Mostly harmless

I think I've worked out what the "digital workplace" is:

If you think an intranet is that internal Website you browse on your PC at work, where a small number of people publish stuff for everyone else inside your company or organisation then the digital workplace is that and more - this includes mobile and remote access, but also other Web-based tools that employees use to get their work done. Wouldn't it be great if this all worked together, in a useful and usable way?

This might be considered a more polite version of my 3 intranet truths ;-)

Alternatively:

If you don't define an intranet in such a narrow way, then really the digital workplace is just a fancy word for your enterprise information system*. For those with legacy IT or technology-driven architectures (rather than being user-centred), the digital workplace is just a concept to push you towards a more progressive IT environment for your users. If you are already on that journey, well done - nothing to see here :-)

Yes, I'm a digital workplace skeptic; but if all the digital workplace idea is about is a bit of clever change management to get some intranet managers to think more broadly then its mostly harmless and may even do some good. The reason I say this is that (based on what I've read so far), the digital workplace:

  • Still lacks a business case or imperative.
  • Doesn't address the capability or place within the organisational structure of traditional intranet managers to actually deliver the digital workplace (although this could be part of a strategy to raise the status of intranet managers?).
  • Doesn't address the organisational, operational and fundamental workplace impact of what Headshift | Dachis Group describe as Social Business (Dion Hinchcliffe has been documenting trends and issues in this space for some time).

*A good introductory text to this topic is something like Information Systems Management in Practice or similar.