-

A Community of Innovators

Social enterprise network platforms are a hobby of mine.  I really enjoy learning all of the corporate options to “go social”

 

Companies can build their own site with MS sharepoint or they can purchase turn-key software being offered commercially.

 

What I find fascinating about this is not the change management that required to get employees to actually embrace these powerful tools.  Nor is it the great options being developed and sold by different companies. What amazes and excites me about social enterprise networking tools is the great potential they offer a company or any organization to get more healthy organizationally.

 

Toxic organization cultures drive me nuts !  I think that I am more sensitive to toxicity than the average employee nevertheless I am a unsympathetic with leadership creating toxic environments by ignoring culture or creating unhealthy environments with their behavior.

 

The behaviors necessary for an organization to become more social are the same behavior changes that an organization needs to become more healthy. Behaviors such as openness, collaboration, helpfulness, selflessness, doing what is right for the organization above personal career ambitions.

 

In general, the same people who will scoff at ever using a social platform are the same people who make organizations toxic and are the same people who behave selfishly in their careers, who keep secrets, who won’t collaborate with anyone outside of their tight circles.

 

For me engagement in social enterprise software is becoming a litmus test. I realize that this may be a bit too soon since we are only in early stages of social enterprise acceptance.

 

I am convinced that organizational health can be helped, can be driven from within partially using social enterprise software.  This is why I feel that organizations should “go social”, a healthy organization is far better to work in than is an unhealthy one.

 

Please comment on this post and connect …

Comments 0
-

Working in a Knowledge Whirlpool?

I’ve noticed that there is a flow to the knowledge that enters a company.  Imagine with me if we could actually see the knowledge that our teams acquire, would there be a pattern to its flow?  We would see if it stays attached to certain people or if it diffuses throughout the organization?   If the knowledge were smoke it would be an easy visual.

 

We’d see the smoke sticking to certain people or flowing out of certain people depending on if they are teachers or secretive/ poor communicators.  Then think company-wide, how would our “knowledge smoke” flow?  The knowledge may enter the company through experimentation, it may enter the company through a certain publication or text-book, it may enter the company through a new hire, but what is particularly important is how the knowledge flows once inside!

 

On some projects that I have been a part of, the knowledge enters the company through a variety of channels, experiments, literature searches, new hires, textbooks, but once inside the smoke finds itself in dozens if not hundreds of whirlpools.  The knowledge flows in one direction (up to managers) if at all.  At the start of each whirlpool is the key scientist, engineer or technician doing the learning.  When I say learning I am not only talking about using science to invent the next product or process.  Learning happens in a variety of ways; experimentation, internet research, telephone calls with vendors, employees attending conferences to name just a few.  Learning occurs all of the time, knowledge is entering our companies in a wide variety of ways and where that knowledge flows after it is in the company matters almost as much as getting the knowledge in in the first place.

 

Healthy organizations have free-flowing knowledge!

 

In a healthy culture employees are not incentivized to hold knowledge hostage until they get credit or rewards of political favor.  The knowledge that enters our companies may enter through one narrow channel but once inside it should disperse easily through a variety of channels.  Whirlpools exist when water is flowing into one narrow path, unlike a whirlpool large portions of the Nile river in South America flows slowly in over a wide area, the Rio Negro is a river basin in Brazil that flows like this.

 

The water flows everywhere giving life to huge area of land mass.

 

Does the knowledge flow in your company like whirlpools or like the Rio Negro in Brazil?

 

I see three exciting ways that a company can free up its knowledge flow.

 

  1. Use social enterprise business software, recent products that are coming out designed for employee connectivity and collaboration are amazing.  I have been researching the many options for this and I can’t recommend it enough, it is well worth the investment.  I use social business tools, and am amazed at its potential to change how companies function, like facebook and twitter have been I believe that these software tools will be company game changers, a driver of cultural change… if they are embraced.
  2. Do not reward secretive, competitive employee behavior, this is difficult because many times the most secretive and competitive employees are also the brightest and best performers.
  3. Reward teachers, reward those who are generous with knowledge internally. The effect of this shift in what leadership values in regards to knowledge sharing will gradually change the company culture.

 

What other ways can leaders “un-stick” the knowledge that flows through their organizations ? please share…

Comments 0
-

The Science Layer

I call the presence of number of scientists in an organization the “science layer”.

 

Quality scientists bring a unique culture to an organization that may not blend well with other employees, setting up an organizational “layer”.  Good scientists are typically highly moved by data rather than persuasive eloquence or political power. Good scientists are well-trained skeptics, are not easily manipulated. Good scientists pursue the facts without bias then spread the facts around.

 

I have noticed in the past few decades that a science layer is forming in high-tech R&D organizations, in our government and even in the media.  As a result of this layer I think that certain scientists and certain theories are beginning to enjoy an untouchable status.

 

Unlike what is happening in the government and media around science I think the presence of a significant number of scientist employees “a science layer” in companies and Universities is a healthy phenomenon.  However, having this layer present in our organization offers unique challenges for leaders within these companies.

 

Below are 3 ways that the presence of a science layer can bring unique challenges to R&D/ Innovation teams.

 

  1. Scientists have a built-in decision analysis tool that many other employees do not, which is their ability to understand things from a fundamental scientific level in their chosen field, any leader who ignores (or doesn’t understand) what the science is saying around their R&D will not easily gain the confidence of his/her team.  This is true regardless of how talented or well-trained the leader is. Sometimes the only type of leader a team of scientists will work with are older promoted scientists who easily speak their “language”.
  2. The majority of scientists are introverts, this helped them to get their credentials, it helps them to focus on study and to learn constantly. However introversion is not always conducive to healthy team dynamics and collaboration, silos can develop intentionally and internal competition is inevitable.
  3. Knowledge has a tendency to cause arrogance, knowledge “puffs people up”, a life-time of study, several decades of University education under academics and earning your living from your intellectual abilities causes many (not all) scientists to develop a stubborn superiority complex, making leading these employees challenging.

 

Creating healthy organizations which have a productive science layer can be challenging but not impossible.  Science layers must be acknowledged, studied and led by the right people. The science layer creates unique cultural traits that should be studied and intentionally molded to maximize the effectiveness of this critical layer in our innovation organizations.

 

What are some other unique challenges of employing a “science layer”?

Comments 0

Stay Up To Date With Email

​-

I use & recommend Bluehost, buy your domain and hosting here!

Get Adam’s From His Side Book Here! Its about Church Transformaton from Institutional Church to Living Ecclesia

Visitors

  • 52,806 hits

Connect on Twitter