So I have created my Flickr Site for Classroom to Cubicle.
I went around our campus and took pictures of classroom applications. Although much of it is protected and intellectual capital, the overall outcome I found to be true is that it takes a mix of ICTs to make a workplace successful and no two places are the same. Maybe there isnt a recipe for successful communication?
Here is the link: http://www.flickr.com/photos/classroomcubicle/
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
we the people.
From all the Zoho research and posting, I found that social media is not only social but really belonging to the people. Companies that are implmenting social media techniques and platforms are doing so for promotion or for empowerment. I read an article about President Obama's media campaign and while we can say that he was everywhere and too visible, his goal was to connect with the people. I think it's interesting that all these businesses, people, organizations equate connection with social media. Perhaps thats so because of how it's established or how it's driven. Twitter cannot be updated without someone going in and writing a tweet. If it's not, it just sits there and is a reminder of its outdated stale presence. That's where I find social media to be the real and telling- the time stamp, the last time your profile was updated, your last login. Websites can conceal that and emails can be set up to be sent at a certain time.
Maybe companies are gravitating to social media because it stands for that unique combination and has an ingredient that some technologies are missing. People implementation and people adoption. Recent research shows that more Boomers are reading blogs and writing blogs then Gen Ys- even if it is to catch up or become more familar with these tools- it shows that they certainly arent going anywhere and that social media is the ICT with the human touch.
Maybe companies are gravitating to social media because it stands for that unique combination and has an ingredient that some technologies are missing. People implementation and people adoption. Recent research shows that more Boomers are reading blogs and writing blogs then Gen Ys- even if it is to catch up or become more familar with these tools- it shows that they certainly arent going anywhere and that social media is the ICT with the human touch.
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Are your office communications making A list?
Classroom:
Our class discussion last week revolved around Chapter 6 of our text book. We discussed accessbility of technology communications: the user friendliness involved in implementing and the its expanding use. If something is easy to use, going to make my job easier, and just relieve stress in my life, then I'll use without a peep regarding change. It brings me back to my point from a previous blog. Why should we reward employees for giving them a tool that makes their lives subsequently easier? I probably wont ever agree with our last guest speaker who really drove that point home. "Reward employees" for using new technologies. As an employee it's my job to not only know new technologies but assist with their implementation at our workplace. Where's my reward? Knowledge is. But I digress.
We discussed the theory of social presence. I thought of mediums being ranked and rated like celebrities on a red carpet. So this is what I walked away with from that discussion: the richer the media experience, the more personal situation. So is there more social presence with a blog entry vs. a newsletter brochure? Your channel decides your choice of media? leading to what is lean media vs. what is rich media? (i'll devle into this more in another entry)
Cubicle:
When I think of rich vs. lean media, which I will address at a later point, the first thing that comes to mind is how it affects the end user. But really though if you take a step back, maybe it's the entire process which makes it rich, makes it lean? Social media has the perception that it's rich because it's new, it's trendy, it's as our professor would note, from the ground up. I found this graphic, speaks to how many touch points social media hits. It's pretty impressive.
But there is a counterpoint to this thought that a blog entry is much more rich and personal than a brochure (which I stand behind my enewsletter which I create every week-newsletter just sounds traditionalist and not cutting edge but it can be!) If someone else is writing your entry or tweeting for you, doesnt that take away from the social presence? the richness? I know a CIO who has a twitter and simply does not update it. He may be writes a list of his tweets, provides an outline but the act of using this "bottom up" created tool is not his. Does that take away? I think on some level it does and it leads me to be more inclined to stand by the idea that the richness or the presence of a social media may all be in the process. Like Bob Anderson said, it's a cookbook process, take all the steps and you will have a successful implementation.
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Small input ... big reaction?
Classroom
A guest speaker visited our class week to discuss the technology adoption process he has experienced during his career. He talked about the organizational alignment and the big picture versus the nuts and bolts of the adoption process.
According to his experiences, he believes that 70- 80 % of technology adoptions that are well thought out and have a strong implementation succeed, while the other 20 – 30% fail due to time, pressure, and for the love of having a solution.
What is the challenge with adoption? It’s having to get people to use the technology, therefore you have a strategy and you have tactics to achieve success adoption processes.
Successful adoption must have a small input with a big reaction, but then I wonder what if it’s a big input and big reaction? Employees as a general assumption are resistant to change, but this of course is based on the culture from they inhabit. But because of this resistance and or this assumed resistance leaders need to spend time, attention and communication efforts to assist with the adoption – “people pay attention to what bosses pay attention to.”
So according to our speaker, a successful implementation happens when all marketing rules apply; when a campaign can be executed and then training can be involved if necessary.
Cubicle
Our speaker stressed rewards for employees adopting and behaving in the work space with the new technology – however if you provided a rewards for every technology implemented or even any new technology aren’t you encouraging another type of behavior? While we should reward employees, we should not reward them for making their job better, for changing their process. My philosophy with new technology and its adoption in my own working experience is that if the communication is transparent on why there is a change and I can see the benefits then I am open to change.
I thought about adoption processes- I don’t think there is a specific win but there have been specific losses. A rushed process; non-transparent communication plan and little or no training have been the attributions that have affected the adoption of technologies in my work experience. But a well thought out, meticulous, logical planned process could still have a minimal effect. So is implementing a new communication technology like going fishing. You go the right place, you use the right bait, still but still the fish wont bite?
A guest speaker visited our class week to discuss the technology adoption process he has experienced during his career. He talked about the organizational alignment and the big picture versus the nuts and bolts of the adoption process.
According to his experiences, he believes that 70- 80 % of technology adoptions that are well thought out and have a strong implementation succeed, while the other 20 – 30% fail due to time, pressure, and for the love of having a solution.
What is the challenge with adoption? It’s having to get people to use the technology, therefore you have a strategy and you have tactics to achieve success adoption processes.
Successful adoption must have a small input with a big reaction, but then I wonder what if it’s a big input and big reaction? Employees as a general assumption are resistant to change, but this of course is based on the culture from they inhabit. But because of this resistance and or this assumed resistance leaders need to spend time, attention and communication efforts to assist with the adoption – “people pay attention to what bosses pay attention to.”
So according to our speaker, a successful implementation happens when all marketing rules apply; when a campaign can be executed and then training can be involved if necessary.
Cubicle
Our speaker stressed rewards for employees adopting and behaving in the work space with the new technology – however if you provided a rewards for every technology implemented or even any new technology aren’t you encouraging another type of behavior? While we should reward employees, we should not reward them for making their job better, for changing their process. My philosophy with new technology and its adoption in my own working experience is that if the communication is transparent on why there is a change and I can see the benefits then I am open to change.
I thought about adoption processes- I don’t think there is a specific win but there have been specific losses. A rushed process; non-transparent communication plan and little or no training have been the attributions that have affected the adoption of technologies in my work experience. But a well thought out, meticulous, logical planned process could still have a minimal effect. So is implementing a new communication technology like going fishing. You go the right place, you use the right bait, still but still the fish wont bite?
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
What's brand got to do with it?
Classroom
All my fellow students are associated with a company’s brand. Whether it be the color red or even me with a yellow tag and Tiger Woods. In recent discussions, it seems the this aspect of the company’s culture has been the elephant in the room. So does it always mean that a well-branded company or a culture that is well-branded, has a higher change acceptance rate? According to our speakers, adoption is about campaigning and about marketing as well a laundry list of other tactics and strategies.
Cubicle
Because I have more questions than answers from any classroom readings or materials that may have revolved around this subject, I take a step and back and think about my past career experience. Between the two large companies for which I have been employed, I have experienced positive marketing- positive in that it is successful and relatable and – absentee marketing- no concept of workforce or workload just branded logos and branded text.
So between these two some of my questions are answered. Yes it does seem to be more “accepted” for employees of well-branded companies to accept and inherit changes in technologies and hear and see communications accompanying them. However that can also provide a wedge in the union of workforce meets adoption in that these employees are strongly married to the culture and any change may or may not be cause them to rebel against it and stick with the normal, the already accepted.
At the not so branded company where I existed – I found that marketing attempts were merely ploys to gain the trust of the employee- to rescue them from disengagement and to bring them to a land of a busy worker is a happy worker. Well busy workers we were- but happy was not the case. Every change attempted to be implemented and rather any communication occurring was often scoffed and sarcastically taken by the culture or maybe a lack of culture. I hate to end this blog entry with yet another question but can you have a culture existing of people/employees that don’t want to be in a culture?
All my fellow students are associated with a company’s brand. Whether it be the color red or even me with a yellow tag and Tiger Woods. In recent discussions, it seems the this aspect of the company’s culture has been the elephant in the room. So does it always mean that a well-branded company or a culture that is well-branded, has a higher change acceptance rate? According to our speakers, adoption is about campaigning and about marketing as well a laundry list of other tactics and strategies.
Cubicle
Because I have more questions than answers from any classroom readings or materials that may have revolved around this subject, I take a step and back and think about my past career experience. Between the two large companies for which I have been employed, I have experienced positive marketing- positive in that it is successful and relatable and – absentee marketing- no concept of workforce or workload just branded logos and branded text.
So between these two some of my questions are answered. Yes it does seem to be more “accepted” for employees of well-branded companies to accept and inherit changes in technologies and hear and see communications accompanying them. However that can also provide a wedge in the union of workforce meets adoption in that these employees are strongly married to the culture and any change may or may not be cause them to rebel against it and stick with the normal, the already accepted.
At the not so branded company where I existed – I found that marketing attempts were merely ploys to gain the trust of the employee- to rescue them from disengagement and to bring them to a land of a busy worker is a happy worker. Well busy workers we were- but happy was not the case. Every change attempted to be implemented and rather any communication occurring was often scoffed and sarcastically taken by the culture or maybe a lack of culture. I hate to end this blog entry with yet another question but can you have a culture existing of people/employees that don’t want to be in a culture?
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
Twittering at work....
A cool article- social media at work!
Management March 8, 2009, 8:16PM EST text size: TT
When Skittles Met Twitter
A bold social media marketing experiment on the Mars brand's home page prompted a lively debate at the fourth annual Social Media Conference
By Kerry Capell
On Mar. 2, Skittles, the colorful candy brand owned by Mars, transformed its home page into an online portal featuring a live Twitter feed alongside Facebook, Flickr, and YouTube content.
Instead of the usual corporate propaganda, the home page and "chatter" section became the brand's Twitter page, the video media and images pages became the brand's YouTube page and Flickr stream, respectively. Meanwhile, the "friends" section morphed into a Skittles Facebook fan page. According to Andy Hobsbawm, European chairman of online ad firm agency.com , which came up with the idea, the site received so many hits the first day it brought down Twitter.
But just two days after its launch, Skittles was forced to rethink its social media strategy after users deluged the site with inane and often profane "tweets," the messages sent by Twitter users. The Twitter feed, once prominently displayed as the home page, is now harder to find—just a small link in the corner of the screen.
Social media still stump the experts
Is this a bold experiment in the potential of social media or evidence that allowing consumers, not brands, to control content is fraught with reputational risk? The jury is still out but the question was at the center of a lively debate at the fourth annual Social Media Conference held in London on Mar. 2. Much of the discussion centered on the growing popularity of Twitter as a marketing tool. While other social media sites such as Facebook and LinkedIn, were mentioned, the one noticeable omission from the discussion was Second Life, hailed as the next big thing two years ago.
Indeed, there was no consensus on which of the social media tools were likely to remain important—or how companies should use them. Despite the fact that many businesses are using social media, plenty are still uncomfortable with the loss of total control other their marketing messages.
"Smart companies are grappling with how to engage and influence the discussion, but many are scared of doing so for fear it will open up the floodgates," says Niall Cook, Hill & Knowlton's worldwide director of marketing technology.
More than 1,000 companies are social
Still, businesses know that they need to tap the power of social media. British companies such as mobile-phone retailer Carphone Warehouse (CPW.L) and Virgin Media (VMED.O)—a provider of broadband, digital TV, mobile, and phone services—use micro-blogging site Twitter to answer customer service queries, as does Comcast. Computer maker Dell (DELL) offers its followers on Twitter special discounts while footwear retailer Zappos CEO Tony Hsieh's tweets have achieved near cult-like status with more than 130,000 followers. Nokia (NOK) used networking site Linkedin to help market its 5300 phones to professionals, the product's targeted customer base.
Others such as Swedish clothing retailer H&M HMB.ST, Victoria's Secret, and Reebok are using Facebook. And according to social technology entrepreneur Peter Kim, the list is growing longer each day. His Wiki lists more than 1,000 companies using social media.
It's easy to see why. Take video-sharing Web site YouTube. The four-year-old site boasts 350 million unique viewers each month and is now the second-largest search engine on the web after Google (GOOG), according to Benjamin Faes, head of YouTube for Europe, the Middle East, and Asia. He points to a recent study YouTube did with General Motors (GM) that found that the use of YouTube has given the brand a cooler edge with consumers. Faes, perhaps not surprisingly, believes that online video is becoming the media mode of choice because consumers prefer visual storytelling to written text.
Philips: Too much static on Twitter
A new study from San Francisco marketing firm Netpop Research reveals a shift in consumer Internet usage from entertainment toward communication that's being driven by social media and networking sites. According to Netpop, 105 million Americans use social media sites, spurring a 93% increase in social networking since 2006. Increasingly, consumers are using these sites to comment—sometimes positively and frequently negatively—about brand experiences, products, and services.
That means companies need to find new ways to engage customers via social networking, attendees at the Social Media Influence confab agreed. But participants were divided about the best way to do it. According to Hubert Grealish, senior product marketing manager for Philips consumer and lifestyle unit, Twitter is "an inaccurate information medium." He believes that for major corporations such as Philips (PHG), the big issue is quality control. With potentially thousands of users tweeting real time, he says, companies will find it difficult to quickly and accurately respond to users.
"Twitter is useful for feedback but we'd need a small army of people to jump on every comment or complaint," he says. Instead, Grealish thinks it's better for companies to internalize the insights they glean from social media and use them to make any changes needed to improve products or services.
Assessing a campaign's effectiveness
Many companies see social media as a relatively inexpensive new marketing tool. Companies can reach new consumers and build brand loyalty at a fraction of the price of a traditional TV or print ad campaign, says Matthew Yeomans, managing director of social media agency Radar DDB. Many traditional ad agencies attending the conference reported a growing interest among their corporate customers in developing social media marketing campaigns. "A lot of our clients see social media as an opportunity to spread their message more cost-effectively," says Lucy Jameson, the London-based executive strategy director for ad agency DDB.
But if companies are going to invest in building a social media presence they need to be able to better measure the effectiveness of such campaigns. Many of those attending the social media conference complained that the tools currently available to measure the return on investment from social media aren't very sophisticated. Kris Hoet, marketing manager for Europe, the Middle East, and Asia for Microsoft's (MSFT) MSN online services group, says blog monitoring technology is "rudimentary and not that useful." Guilluame du Gardier, new media director for chocolate maker Ferrero France, complained about the challenge of having—and measuring—a conversation with his 11 million consumers.
Meet the Chief Community Officer
Successfully tapping into the power of social media may require companies to change their corporate culture, says Lee Bryan, co-founder of social computing consultancy Headshift. "You can't just throw tweets at users. Companies need to create an internal organization," he says.
DDB Worldwide President and CEO Chuck Brymer agrees. In his recently published book, The Nature of Marketing, he suggests that the time has come for companies and agencies to appoint a Chief Community Officer, or CCO, whose role would be to "oversee the relationship between brands and their communities, not just in the narrow confines of how a consumer interacts with a product at point of purchase but also in how consumers interact with each other."
With social media constantly evolving, it will be some time before companies figure out how to fully exploit its potential. Early adopters such as Guy Stephens, knowledge engineer for Carphone Warehouse, describe it as just another tool that a brand might use to engage with customers. "Understanding what motivates your customer and trying to meet that need is still key, regardless of whether you use Twitter, Facebook, e-mail, or pick up the phone," he blogs.
Management March 8, 2009, 8:16PM EST text size: TT
When Skittles Met Twitter
A bold social media marketing experiment on the Mars brand's home page prompted a lively debate at the fourth annual Social Media Conference
By Kerry Capell
On Mar. 2, Skittles, the colorful candy brand owned by Mars, transformed its home page into an online portal featuring a live Twitter feed alongside Facebook, Flickr, and YouTube content.
Instead of the usual corporate propaganda, the home page and "chatter" section became the brand's Twitter page, the video media and images pages became the brand's YouTube page and Flickr stream, respectively. Meanwhile, the "friends" section morphed into a Skittles Facebook fan page. According to Andy Hobsbawm, European chairman of online ad firm agency.com , which came up with the idea, the site received so many hits the first day it brought down Twitter.
But just two days after its launch, Skittles was forced to rethink its social media strategy after users deluged the site with inane and often profane "tweets," the messages sent by Twitter users. The Twitter feed, once prominently displayed as the home page, is now harder to find—just a small link in the corner of the screen.
Social media still stump the experts
Is this a bold experiment in the potential of social media or evidence that allowing consumers, not brands, to control content is fraught with reputational risk? The jury is still out but the question was at the center of a lively debate at the fourth annual Social Media Conference held in London on Mar. 2. Much of the discussion centered on the growing popularity of Twitter as a marketing tool. While other social media sites such as Facebook and LinkedIn, were mentioned, the one noticeable omission from the discussion was Second Life, hailed as the next big thing two years ago.
Indeed, there was no consensus on which of the social media tools were likely to remain important—or how companies should use them. Despite the fact that many businesses are using social media, plenty are still uncomfortable with the loss of total control other their marketing messages.
"Smart companies are grappling with how to engage and influence the discussion, but many are scared of doing so for fear it will open up the floodgates," says Niall Cook, Hill & Knowlton's worldwide director of marketing technology.
More than 1,000 companies are social
Still, businesses know that they need to tap the power of social media. British companies such as mobile-phone retailer Carphone Warehouse (CPW.L) and Virgin Media (VMED.O)—a provider of broadband, digital TV, mobile, and phone services—use micro-blogging site Twitter to answer customer service queries, as does Comcast. Computer maker Dell (DELL) offers its followers on Twitter special discounts while footwear retailer Zappos CEO Tony Hsieh's tweets have achieved near cult-like status with more than 130,000 followers. Nokia (NOK) used networking site Linkedin to help market its 5300 phones to professionals, the product's targeted customer base.
Others such as Swedish clothing retailer H&M HMB.ST, Victoria's Secret, and Reebok are using Facebook. And according to social technology entrepreneur Peter Kim, the list is growing longer each day. His Wiki lists more than 1,000 companies using social media.
It's easy to see why. Take video-sharing Web site YouTube. The four-year-old site boasts 350 million unique viewers each month and is now the second-largest search engine on the web after Google (GOOG), according to Benjamin Faes, head of YouTube for Europe, the Middle East, and Asia. He points to a recent study YouTube did with General Motors (GM) that found that the use of YouTube has given the brand a cooler edge with consumers. Faes, perhaps not surprisingly, believes that online video is becoming the media mode of choice because consumers prefer visual storytelling to written text.
Philips: Too much static on Twitter
A new study from San Francisco marketing firm Netpop Research reveals a shift in consumer Internet usage from entertainment toward communication that's being driven by social media and networking sites. According to Netpop, 105 million Americans use social media sites, spurring a 93% increase in social networking since 2006. Increasingly, consumers are using these sites to comment—sometimes positively and frequently negatively—about brand experiences, products, and services.
That means companies need to find new ways to engage customers via social networking, attendees at the Social Media Influence confab agreed. But participants were divided about the best way to do it. According to Hubert Grealish, senior product marketing manager for Philips consumer and lifestyle unit, Twitter is "an inaccurate information medium." He believes that for major corporations such as Philips (PHG), the big issue is quality control. With potentially thousands of users tweeting real time, he says, companies will find it difficult to quickly and accurately respond to users.
"Twitter is useful for feedback but we'd need a small army of people to jump on every comment or complaint," he says. Instead, Grealish thinks it's better for companies to internalize the insights they glean from social media and use them to make any changes needed to improve products or services.
Assessing a campaign's effectiveness
Many companies see social media as a relatively inexpensive new marketing tool. Companies can reach new consumers and build brand loyalty at a fraction of the price of a traditional TV or print ad campaign, says Matthew Yeomans, managing director of social media agency Radar DDB. Many traditional ad agencies attending the conference reported a growing interest among their corporate customers in developing social media marketing campaigns. "A lot of our clients see social media as an opportunity to spread their message more cost-effectively," says Lucy Jameson, the London-based executive strategy director for ad agency DDB.
But if companies are going to invest in building a social media presence they need to be able to better measure the effectiveness of such campaigns. Many of those attending the social media conference complained that the tools currently available to measure the return on investment from social media aren't very sophisticated. Kris Hoet, marketing manager for Europe, the Middle East, and Asia for Microsoft's (MSFT) MSN online services group, says blog monitoring technology is "rudimentary and not that useful." Guilluame du Gardier, new media director for chocolate maker Ferrero France, complained about the challenge of having—and measuring—a conversation with his 11 million consumers.
Meet the Chief Community Officer
Successfully tapping into the power of social media may require companies to change their corporate culture, says Lee Bryan, co-founder of social computing consultancy Headshift. "You can't just throw tweets at users. Companies need to create an internal organization," he says.
DDB Worldwide President and CEO Chuck Brymer agrees. In his recently published book, The Nature of Marketing, he suggests that the time has come for companies and agencies to appoint a Chief Community Officer, or CCO, whose role would be to "oversee the relationship between brands and their communities, not just in the narrow confines of how a consumer interacts with a product at point of purchase but also in how consumers interact with each other."
With social media constantly evolving, it will be some time before companies figure out how to fully exploit its potential. Early adopters such as Guy Stephens, knowledge engineer for Carphone Warehouse, describe it as just another tool that a brand might use to engage with customers. "Understanding what motivates your customer and trying to meet that need is still key, regardless of whether you use Twitter, Facebook, e-mail, or pick up the phone," he blogs.
Sunday, March 29, 2009
Discussion Board 6
When classroom meets cubicle....
Bob's Anderson was insightful and effective, even when I with Best Buy every day. It is not every day that we are able to experience the client discuss openly the failures and successes of his career.
I found his discussion to be interesting, but I valued his analogy for deploying processes by coining it "cookbook process." Whether it is a new technology, a new process, or a new communication, it is essential for implementers to test and follow the process before implementing in the new environment. Too many changes in the environment can cause chaos and confusion- however if you follow the cookbook process to assure that it is a successful implementation.
Anderson stressed that the process affects the bottom line of the organization – from its financials to its employee engagement, more so the support of vendors and the importantly the internal support structure and executive support is essential.
Anderson revealed successes and failures in his discussion, however a good testing process and following the cookbook and having the key ingredients makes a successful adoption and implementation.
I thought more about my recent post to the discussion board- if you followed the cookbook process (the joys of implementing technology into the workforce) - for implementing communications- would the process seem as seamless?
Not all cultures are receptive and open to change and especially change in how they receive communications - so it is as easy as checking something off a list? We can control the implementation of technology- to an extent- watching the environment, anticipating the process problems, preparing the team for the changes- but communications is much harder to anticipate. It thrives from the its recepients so if the recepients reject it, it's much more difficult to "fix" than technological climate changes.
Bob's Anderson was insightful and effective, even when I with Best Buy every day. It is not every day that we are able to experience the client discuss openly the failures and successes of his career.
I found his discussion to be interesting, but I valued his analogy for deploying processes by coining it "cookbook process." Whether it is a new technology, a new process, or a new communication, it is essential for implementers to test and follow the process before implementing in the new environment. Too many changes in the environment can cause chaos and confusion- however if you follow the cookbook process to assure that it is a successful implementation.
Anderson stressed that the process affects the bottom line of the organization – from its financials to its employee engagement, more so the support of vendors and the importantly the internal support structure and executive support is essential.
Anderson revealed successes and failures in his discussion, however a good testing process and following the cookbook and having the key ingredients makes a successful adoption and implementation.
I thought more about my recent post to the discussion board- if you followed the cookbook process (the joys of implementing technology into the workforce) - for implementing communications- would the process seem as seamless?
Not all cultures are receptive and open to change and especially change in how they receive communications - so it is as easy as checking something off a list? We can control the implementation of technology- to an extent- watching the environment, anticipating the process problems, preparing the team for the changes- but communications is much harder to anticipate. It thrives from the its recepients so if the recepients reject it, it's much more difficult to "fix" than technological climate changes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
