For those interested in the topic of Enterprise 2.0....

I just received the final evaluation from the DIG conference and the feedback was great. Across the board we had positive scores and commentary from attendees. Here are a few snippets that I wanted to share:

What valuable insights are you walking away with?

• I now understand E2.0 and its possibilities- Andrew McAfee was excellent.
  
• Predictive markets, social networks can have lots of potential positive impacts, could use it to solve a MDM problem.
  
• I have learned master data management concepts. I wanted to get a better understanding of how business intelligence fit into their organization. Learning about enterprise 2.0 and making me aware of some of the new technologies.

Did the Conference Exceed/ Meet / Not meet your Expectations” Why:

• It met my expectations on the first day and exceeded on the second day. I was looking for new things and found it the second day with E2.0.
  
• I would have liked to have some formalized network opportunities with other speakers wither during or prior to the conference.
  
• This met my expectations, although I wished there were more technical components and that the attendance was higher.

All great feedback and certainly will help us shape next year’s conference. Any additional thoughts from those who attended would be appreciated.

One of the big takeaways for me was the level of excitement on the topic of Enterprise 2.0. Going into the final day, I was a bit concerned. Not because of our speakers, but instead based on our preconference survey results. We had asked our delegates two questions prior to the conference on the topic of Enterprise 2.0.

As you can see from the results of the first question, we had a limited number of organizations (<5%)>

For those still interested in the topic of Enterprise 2.0, there is an E2.0 conference in two weeks here in Boston. I believe this is the second year (I could be wrong, so don’t hold me to that) and they have a great lineup of speakers, including Andrew McAfee who was our keynote on Day 2. Professor McAfee will be moderating a panel discussion on the topic of “Enterprise 2.0 Reality Check”.

DIG countdown begins

The DIG conference begins next week. Personally, I can’t wait to be part of a three day conversation that focuses on DATA, INFORMATION, and KNOWLEDGE as key enablers to better business decision-making. For sure, the “fast company” of my concern is the one that marries solid business facts with the mobilizing energy of mass collaboration. The possibilities are quite exhilarating!

I will be the facilitator of the E2.0 (knowledge) theme of the conference. In this theme, we will be exploring the opportunity and the application of E2.0 tools to drive business value within our enterprises. We are fortunate to have E2.0 veterans, Euan Semple and R. Todd Stephens, joining us to share both their practical experiences and their seasoned insights on the business value of E2.0 tools and applications within world class corporations (ATT and BBC). Both have success stories to share but, of even more interest to me, they have the battle wounds of practical experience to really dig into the topic. Also, we will have a keynote presentation by Andrew McAfee who is recognized for coining the term E2.0! What a line up.

Noting the fact that we plan to have a Twitter event connection to post everyone’s live comments and questions, I hope that we can really have an open and honest dialog that enables each of us who attend to come away with a deeper perspective on E2.0 and an expanded network to draw upon down the road.

Here are the some of the topics that we will discuss.
1) Business value of Social Computing
2) Integration of Analytics within E2.0 – Are we doing it? What is it yielding?
3) Is E2.0 bringing us closer to our Customers?
4) What is the dependent relationship between Culture and E2.0?
5) Is there a maturity model to E2.0 adoption?
6) Can a company really ignore the onslaught of Web 2.0?
7) …and what are the success stories that we should be studying!

Our only task is to bring a good attitude into the dialog. I hope that you will come with an open and inquisitive mind – a mind that is ready to listen, to poke, and to prod. The bottom line is that this conference is all about being “part of the dialog” so let’s have some fun with it.

See you there and please introduce yourself. Safe travels if you are coming from out of state. Let the conversation flow.

Centre Pompidou as an E2.o Analogy!

I'll begin with my conclusion. The transparency enabled by E2.o could unleash a thrust of unstoppable execution within our organizations. Do we dare? Can we handle it? Let me share my thoughts.

In the recent April 2008 HBR piece by David Collins and Michael Rukstad titled, Can You Say What Your Strategy Is?, the authors offer the following visualization of the importance of having a clearly articulated strategy:

Think of a major business as a mound of 10,000 iron filings, each one representing an employee. If you scoop up that many filings and drop them onto a piece of paper, they’ll be pointing in every direction. It will be a big mess: 10,000 smart people working hard and making what they think are the right decisions for the company—but with the net result of confusion…

If you pass a magnet over those filings, what happens? They line up. Similarly, a well-understood statement of strategy aligns behavior within the business. It allows everyone in the organization to make individual choices that reinforce one another, rendering those 10,000 employees exponentially more effective.

The article goes on to delineate the elements of a clear strategy and outlines both the analysis and supporting documents that should be shared throughout one’s organization to take advantage of that strategy (you should also check out Dave Norton and Bob Kaplan's Strategy Map). Collins and Rukstad then make some observations that scream E2.o. However, I believe that there is an oversight (my opinion!) that pulls up shy of the true opportunity that we have. The article reads:

The process of developing the strategy and then crafting the statement that captures its essence in a readily communicable manner should involve employees in all parts of the company and at all levels of the hierarchy. The wording of the strategy statement should be worked through in painstaking detail. In fact, that can be the most powerful part of the strategy development process. It is usually in heated discussions over the choice of a single word that a strategy is crystallized and executives truly understand what it will involve.

The authors begin the preceeding vignette talking about employees in all parts of the company helping to develop the strategy and, then, they end the same paragraph with only "the executives being involved in the heated discussions" that allow them [executives] to truly internalize what the strategy will involve? Is there no way that we can allow the heated discussions to be transparent throughout the organization?

Imagine if we could have the good, the bad, and the ugly of the strategy dialog open to the organization - like the Centre Pompidou in Paris – where all of the supporting structure and systems, such as the escalators, are exposed to the outside world.

Color-coded ducts are attached to the building's west façade... blue for air, green for fluids, yellow for electricity cables and red for movement and flow. The transparency of the west main façade allows people to see what is going on inside the centre from the piazza, a vast esplanade that the architects conceived of as an area of continuity, linking the city and the centre. [quote link - Centre Pompidou website, picture link - Wikipedia]

I can only dream of being in an organization that is designed to run itself with the transparency and intentionality to always “link the city and the centre”. I believe that a liberal use of E2.o applied to the strategy development process could lead to a profound mobilization of the human capital within our organizations. But I understand the fears that run wild within our corporations -> our competitiors will get our information!

As Andrew McAfee concludes at the end of a post in 2006 on E2.o Insecurities,

Imagine two competitors, one of which has the guiding principle "keep security risks and discoverability to a minimum," the other of which is guided by the rule "make it as easy as possible for people to collaborate and access each others' expertise." Both put in technology infrastructures appropriate for their guiding principles. Take all IT, legal, and leak-related costs into account. Which of these two comes out ahead over time? I know which one I'm betting on.

In conclusion, the transparency enabled by E2.o could unleash a thrust of unstoppable execution within our organizations. Do you agree?

What do you think? Have you seen any real-life successes in "open strategy" dialog, please tell us.

Andrew McAfee to be a key note speaker at DIG 2008

Palladium and the DIG conference team is excited to announce that Andrew McAfee will be a key note speaker at DIG 2008 in Las Vegas, Nevada. Andrew will kick-off our Enterprise 2.0 theme on day 2 and set the stage on how the concepts associated with Web 2.0 are starting to be integrated into the operations of a business.

Andrew is a faculty member at Harvard Business School in the Technology and Operations Management Unit. One of Andrew's research focus areas is on how Web 2.0 technologies can be leveraged inside an enterprise. Andrew has spoken at numerous industry events on a broad range of the IT topic areas. One of the more interesting events was a debate that Andrew had with Tom Davenport on the impact of Web 2.0 technologies inside a business.

Andrew was the first faculty blogger at Harvard Business School and we hope to engage with Andrew in the blogosphere between now and the conference.



Welcome to DIG Andrew!