Cup cakes and bunnies

By Nick Hortovanyi

When I was a young programmer, the key punch ladies used to make cup cakes for the rest of the IT department. All of us enjoyed them at morning tea time, as well as the corresponding witty and fun conversation that was part of that daily ritual.

What happened of course is that we, being IT, were slowly automating the data entry processes and no new key punch ladies were being employed, at least during the years that I worked at the organisation. The ladies used to remind us, every now and then, that if we worked too hard, there might not be anything left for them to do. I moved on, into different pastures and always just assumed that those lovely ladies retired, still happy (I never did find out, something I must do one day).

This has always stuck in my mind, that as the technology progresses, the social and composite nature of teams change, to match the new potential that has been enabled. As they do evolve, you need to be mindful of people but you also can't keep delaying change. I don't hear of organisations now, that still have a separate key punch group, in their IT department. What about you?

Why don't we have them now? We'll communication technology has improved and now IT departments are invariably known as ICT (Information and Communication Technology) departments. The communication allows once manual processes to be automated. The internet, allows exchange of information between organisations, so reports aren't printed in one organisation (or department) that needs to be re-keyed into a computer in another organisation.

Since the internet is now becoming mainstream and increasingly being used to communicate, all sorts of useful knowledge and information, it has encroached on more traditional means of communication. A companies' web presence is in many circumstances the first point of call for new or existing customers. It may no longer be a brochure or some form of advertising. This has meant that the marketing and public relations persons, want to ensure that these internet based presences are executed properly; that is they portray the correct corporate image and messaging. This isn't an easy task to achieve and if you think about it, there is potential for tension between the different disciplines.

Over the last while, social media has come to the forefront. Who should drive the strategy? Who owns it? What is the nature of the skill sets required to successfully deliver it? What do you do if someone in your organisation says something they shouldn't have? (yes, a lot more people are writing things about or for your organisation)

Well I've recognised for a while, that you need a composite set of skills spanning multiple disciplines including marketing to address the aforementioned questions. Yes, us IT guys now need to work with the marketing bunnies ( a term I use with endearment), copy, usability, graphic designers etc. All those people that help make the experience better for the consumer of the medium being used.

Social media is moving rather quickly now, and I was reminded of some of this potential for tension that has been rising between the different disciplines as they seek to take ownership last weekend. I found this blog post "Why your IT person shouldn't manage your social media!" written by Diane Lee and as you can see it wasn't IT getting upset at Marketing but the other way round. It hit a note with me, and I tweeted about what a Marketing Bunny was saying about the social capabilities of IT persons. We'll you can tell by the comments on that post, that it hit the same note with a number of others. However, we were willing to help bridge these gaps if we saw a sincere apology (the apology happened, can read the post here).

Taryn Hicks was concerned about the implications of the original entry written by Diane and wrote "Why Marketing and ICT should work together on social media: a response to mosaic communications". It is well worth reading, as well as the comments.

New composite teams are required, to master not only implementing social media, but also with responding to the implications. There are no text books for where we are going, just etiquette, common sense and trust through sharing our knowledge openly. Those that share, are those that are respected by the communities they are involved in. Those that break the unwritten rules, are given another chance, as long as things aren't swept away under the carpet. Mistakes are shown, so that others may learn. Maybe that's where our text books are now, on the internet, held in conversations on twitter, in online forums and on blog entries? Continuously being appended to as we learn more!

Walled communities can lead to "know how" knowledge in Portals

By Nick Hortovanyi

Early generation portals, are characterised by their brochure like nature in a one way communication with the audience. The audience, normally regardless of their interests is presented with the same content. There is some divergence based on a funnel process to more specific content but this may take a number of  interactions and reading of pages with a great chance of losing the person before they reach the desired content, if indeed that content exists.

However, a major issue can be that there is little implicit knowledge (described by Michael Polanyi) in this content relating to the activity that the person reading it, is trying to achieve. This "know how" knowledge is in general transfered between individuals, through interaction that takes into account the context of not only the environment at hand, but the activity.

This is fine when everyone is located in the same geographic place, but with todays distributed workforces this rarely happens. And this phenomenon  is somewhat compounded with composite business structures. That is when a number of organisations through an ecosystem are engaging to complete an activity. Ideally all persons engaged in this activity, would be located on the same floor, in the same building but this rarely happens.

I mentioned previously that "A portal is not a replacement for "know-how" knowledge.", by this I was talking about the early generation portals that are one way in their communication of content, this content is normally explicit knowledge, in that it is easy to communicate. What's missing, is that tacit knowledge!

But to achieve this through a portal you need to know who the person is that is looking at the content, they can no longer be anonymous. They need to be an identity, a known person, on that portal that can be repeatably authenticated. So now that they have an identity they can become part of a community, where their identity can engage with others.

This is a more costly exercise though then generation one portals and requires an investment to proceed.

The combination of collaborative technology, eg presence awareness and advanced personalisation, as well as recommendation engines, with the ability for all to write or communicate their own content and ideas, can improve the satisfaction of the engagement of not only your staff, but of your trading partners. Improving the intimacy of the engagement through a walled community, establishes trust with those players as it is showing the extent of the flow of the knowledge that has been given in faith.

Is your portal a generation one portal? If so, how do you view the value of more advanced generation portals to the enabling of future innovation in and around your organisation?

Do you have walled communities to improve the implicit knowledge in your portal?

A Portal is not a replacement for "know-how" knowledge

By Nick Hortovanyi

I'm seeing an interesting phenomenon developing in the IT industry where an immediate reaction to uncertainty regarding a question, is direction to a section of a corporate Portal. This is seeming to be the mantra in interacting with the larger vendors, where the shear volume of information is daunting.

I've sat through a number of presentations where lots of effort was spent directing me to a particular section, upon finding it and investigating the material, I've found that it is out of date and does not relate to the material just presented. Personally I think, if such effort is to be made to direct people their, the information has to be up to date and relevant now, not in three months. They won't return back.

There are added dimensions appearing as well, related to people's current level of knowledge and experience to a topic, subject or meme.

A portal helps to facilitate communication and finding knowledge. Where a great portal stands out is when through using it, it helps facilitate activity in a way that supplements the "know-how" knowledge of the participants. To achieve this it still means that people need to communicate, a portal can't be used as the universal answer to eveyone's problems and questions.