Title:  Going Social with SharePoint at Sony

Background:

[These are my quick notes, complete with  (what I hope is no more than) the occasional typo and grammatical error.  Please excuse those. Thanks!

From time to time, I'll insert my own editorial comments - exercising the prerogatives of the blogger.  I'll show those in brackets. ]

Notes:

• Initial focus of this presentation was on the external social media efforts.
• How do they bring social media internally?  Marketing to employees is similar to marketing to customers?
• He noted that they are using SharePoint, but it doesn’t look like SharePoint.
• They use My Sites as a way for employees to build their own brand within Sony
• Use Office Communicator with presence to connect employees while reducing e-mail.
• They encourage people to create “My Sites” by featuring best pictures from individual My Sites on a central site called “Sony Source.”
• They are encourage every employee to blog.  They search through My Sites to find and promote interesting blogs.  Many employees are blogging about work-related content rather than leisure activities.
• They have included an activity stream via SP 2010. This is a more effective way for teams to be in touch – they prefer it to e-mail.
• They encourage employees to build their own brand
• They have a virtual org chart that shows where everyone sits in the food chain and other colleagues who might be able to help. This has led to a huge improvement in responding to queries.
• Why does this matter?
• Externally, this provides a better way to reach customers where they spend their time
• Internally it reflects how people live in their private lives.  Therefore, it improves personal productivity.

Speakers:

• Megan Murray, Community Manager/Project Coordinator, Booz Allen Hamilton @MeganMurray
• Jamie Pappas, E2.0 & Social Media Strategist, Evangelist, and Community Manager, EMC Corp @JamiePappas
• Rawn Shah, Social Software Practices Lead, IBM @Rawn

Notes:

[These are my quick notes, complete with  (what I hope is no more than) the occasional typo and grammatical error.  Please excuse those. Thanks!

From time to time, I'll insert my own editorial comments - exercising the prerogatives of the blogger.  I'll show those in brackets. ]

Jamie Pappas: Building the Business Case

• Define clear goals that tie to the business strategy and resonate with the key stakeholders in your organization.
  • The goals should be measurable (for ROI purposes))
  • Goals should be realistic — under promise and over deliver
• How does your social media tool address pain points that aren’t being addressed well currently.
  • Breaking down information silos and organizational silos that impede efficiency and efficacy
  • Identifying experts and connecting them to the rest of the organization
  • Will your initiative reduce redundancy?
• Find some tangible use cases
• Be realistic about the costs – it really isn’t free!
• Find executive sponsors and key players within your organization
  • Ideally, they are already using social media tools and understand the potential (and actual) value they provide.
  • These folks can help answer the What’s In It For Me question.
  • They can spread the message at a peer-to-peer level, which can be much more influential than generalized blast messaging.
  • Reflect the feedback of these sponsors to ensure their continued support.
• How to choose from all the tools available?
  • Try to satisfy 80% of your needs (don’t aim for 100%)
  • The tools should match your goals and address your pain points. Don’t adopt silo tools.
  • Don’t assume that the tool everyone else is using is right for your organization.
  • Start small. Be targeted. Then expand.
• Never underestimate the need for education.
  • Not everyone knows how to use these tools – they need to be taught.

  Not everyone wants to play with the tool in order to learn how it works.

  • Not everyone understands the dynamics of E2.0 tools – e.g., folks who start a wiki may not realize that others can (and should) edit their work.
  • Be sure that users know what is expected of them.  Don’t focus on the don’ts. Do focus on what they should and could do.
  • Provide a variety of training to suit a variety of learning styles.
  • Make sure you “train the trainer” focusing on equipping the internal advocates to train their peers.
  • Include the training in all new hire training.
  • Exploit existing corporate training methods and channels.  Take advantage of every possible training opportunity.
• Pitching the Idea – how to introduce the idea and who should you tell?
  • Focus first on your executive sponsor and key players
  • Consider who are the influencers, the advocates, the bit players for the purposes of this initiative.
  • Explain how they tools/program address the pain points.
  • Be very open to the feedback.
• Common Objections:
  • “This stuff is not for business”
  • “Social collaboration is not work.”
  • “You expect us to pay our employees to socialize???”
  • “Great. One more tool to keep track of…”
  • “This is going to take way too much time to learn.”
  • “I don’t have anything to contribute.”
• Dealing with the Critics
  • Acknowledge the concerns and then explain how the tool can help.
  • Engage in friendly dialogue – hostility will not advance your case.
  • Don’t be dismissive – often the initial criticism reflects a lack of education.  Seize the opportunity to educate and convert them.
  • Remember that this is not for everyone.  Very few tools are used by everyone equally.  You need to match tools to needs.
  • It takes a long time to achieve material levels of adoption.  Sometimes as much as 3-5 years.
  • The Ideal Rollout
  • Consider doing a soft launch rather than a highly marketed one.  Keep it small and let it go viral.
  • Try pilots.  Tell people not to tell others.  They won’t be able to contain themselves!  Result — viral spread.
  • Word of Mouth is the most powerful way to market.
  • Equip your sponsors and sponsors so that they can advocate for you and your program.
  • Keep the content fresh — people make snap judgments based on what they see.
• What is Success?
  • How do you measure the impact and success?
  • Can they find what they need?
  • What are the levels of participation and feedback?
  • How do users feel about it?
  • Some Benefits to Suggest
  • Build institutional memory
  • Expertise location
  • Personal and professional growth
• This is an Iterative Process
  • You can’t just do it once and forget about it.
  • You have to keep repeating your message
• Exercise: Crafting an Elevator Pitch to Sell Your Program
  • Exercise:  Crafting an Elevator Pitch to Sell Your Program
  • Collect Anecdotes of success stories
  • Open with results
  • Focus on your audience’s “hot buttons”
  • Explain how the program will ACCELERATE corporate STRATEGY by tearing down silos, targeting innovation, tap in into  knowledge resources addressing out pain points.

• Presentations:  www.e2conf.com/boston/2010/presentations/workshop
  • User name: Workshop
  • Password: Boston
• Presentations also on Slideshare: http://slideshare.net/20adoption

It’s a different situation for folks in sales and marketing. The ones I talk to rave about the enormous, extensible list of contacts they can develop via LinkedIn. To be honest, that’s also why some friends of mine have locked down their contacts — they don’t want their vendor friends harassing their non-vendor friends.

And what about those 59 million LinkedIn groups? Have you joined any? What percentage of the proposed discussions are more than thinly veiled marketing ploys or pleas for social media contacts?

As you can see, I’m struggling to find a way to make LinkedIn really work for me. Do you have any advice? What’s working for you?

Here are some of the practices Paul Sloane believes are deadly:

1. You have no clear objectives.
2. The group involved is too homogeneous.
3. Your boss is autocratic and doesn’t trust the creativity of his or her team.
4. You allow early criticism to smother creativity.
5. You settle for just a few ideas.
6. Your process lacks closure or follow through.

How many of these “worst practices” are present in your KM program?  What are you going to do about it?

[Photo Credit:  Jacob Botter]

*******************

For an interesting view of the brainstorming process, see the following charts from Rick | Crinid:

The instructions for making these miniature floats contain some gems.  For those working with a shoebox:

The first step is picking a shoebox. Usually whatever is hanging around your house that isn’t holding bills or other random junk will work.

The options here are as endless as your imagination!

And, for those with a bit more scope, here’s how to tackle a wagon float:

First, dig your wagon out of the garage, and clean all the cobwebs and other assorted dead insects out of the inside. Scream as zombie spider comes alive as you are picking it up. Gather your senses. Back to cleaning.

Next, put your thinking cap on and create yet another theme for your float. Some more suggestions: “Little Mermaid”, “The Godfather”, “In the Garden of Eden”, “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory”, or the classic “Throw Me Something, Mister!” The entire look of your float will be born out of your theme, and your requirements for materials will change as well.

There’s a metaphor here for our knowledge management work and for life. Even if circumstances dictate a change in scale, they need not result in the inability to participate or to generate something of beauty. And, as is often the case, when you strip things down to their bare essentials, you begin to see what’s important.  (See Creating A Great KM Department of One.)

The wagon float and shoebox float remind us that despite all the tough economic news, we can still do something of worth no matter what our resources, provided we have some creativity and focus.

Laissez les bon temps rouler!

[Photo Credit:  Paul Mannix, Creative Commons license]

As with many provocative questions, it dazzles initially but doesn’t always hold up well under further analysis.  The reality is that KM, like many other support services within a firm, does help with the delivery of client services, but it isn’t always possible to draw a straight line between the KM activity and the benefit to the client or the firm.  In part, it’s because we simply have not been rigorous about the metrics or, in fairness, finding and tracking the right metrics has been difficult.  For example, let’s say you received a request from an associate who was trying to pull together a package of precedents for a new client engagement.  Of course, you would provide that lawyer with a full package, but would you be able to state with any certainty how much time and money you saved that client?  In order to do that, you’d need statistics on the amount of time lawyers usually spend trying to gather precedents or, worse still, how much time they waste working with the wrong precedents.  Do you have those statistics?  Most likely not.  Unless you are very lucky, it has been a long time since  decision makers within your firm analyzed how much and why billable time is spent unwisely.

An added problem is that with the worsening economy, business decisions are likely to be made on the basis of available metrics.  If the only metrics you have concern activity levels (e.g., time spent by KM personnel, number of tasks completed by KM personnel, etc.) rather than productivity levels (e.g., money saved, realization rates, etc.) you aren’t any further ahead than the knowledge manager providing the precedents in my earlier example.  You may be doing great work, but the decision makers need more than your word for it.  This is a case when tooting your own horn results, at best, in a hollow sound.

I’ve been thinking about this problem for some time now, and am working towards some answers.  However, I’d be very interested in your views on this issue.  If we can’t explain why and how knowledge management matters within the specific context of our own firms, how can we make a winning argument for the survival of our teams?

[Photo Credit:  woodleywonderworks, Creative Commons license]

It will, undoubtedly, take us a few days to process what we saw and what we learned.  We have the quick notes we tweeted from the various sessions to remind us, but we don’t yet know if they will prove to be  invaluable or completely ephemeral.  In addition, some hardier souls (like David Hobbie and Kelly Talcott) have already published their blogs on various sessions.  I’m in awe of their ability to synthesize information so quickly and grateful that we have the benefit of their views.

For me there is something about the learning process that requires a period of quiet reflection in order to consolidate the disparate bits of information I’ve picked up.  And when I’ve been drinking from an information firehose as I was at LegalTech, it takes even longer.  Starting tomorrow, I’m going to indulge in a little quiet reflection and when I emerge, I hope I’ll have something sensible to say about what I learned at LegalTech.

Before I hibernate, I would like to thank the good folks on the LegalTech Advisory Board and at Incisive Media for organizing a conference rich in possibilities and opportunities.  I was glad to have a chance to participate both as a speaker and a blogger.   Best of all, LegalTech provided a wonderful lab for demonstrating how we interact with and learn from each other.  The multi-layered interchanges that bounced between the conference rooms, the Twittersphere, the Blogosphere and the hallways  made for a very rich learning environment. Thank you to everyone in New York and online who made this possible.

[Photo Credit:  cobalt123, Creative Commons license]

The organizers of LegalTech did go out of their way to invite bloggers to “Live Blog” the sessions.  In fact, they treated us to breakfast on Tuesday morning and gave us an opportunity to introduce ourselves and our blogs.  Very nice.  It will be interesting to see what gets written in the daily blogs and once folks return to their own lives and have had chance to think further about what they saw and heard.

For me, the big surprise was Twitter.  I had gone to LegalTech fully expecting to write 3-4 paragraph blog posts at each session.  Instead, I discovered the power of tweeting the conference.  There was an immediacy and energy about Live Microblogging that was irresistible and effective.  We were getting the information out as quickly as we could cram it into 140 character packages.  And, we were getting responses back from other bloggers in the room, as well as tweeple around the world.  In fact, tweeple outside the conference tweeted their questions to us and we put them to the panelists.  Suddenly the sessions were relevant to far more than the hardy few who braved the bad weather in NYC to attend.

Over the next few days, I will do some blogging on the sessions I attended.  Above all, Lee Bryant and I will be posting notes and slides from our session yesterday (which, unfortunately, was the one for which we did not have full WiFi access).  Until then, do take a look at the Twitter stream.  It gave a remarkably accurate snapshot of the flow of conversation and key quotes from the sessions.  For my money, Live Microblogging via Twitter was definitely the way to go.

[Photo Credit:  kopp0041, Creative Commons license]

Unfortunately, we soon discovered that there was no WiFi in the room.  (I was later told that the only room with WiFi initially was the ballroom.)  As a result,  I took my notes offline and will move them to a blog post when I get the chance.  No live blogging for me.

By contrast, some bloggers attended the Twitter session at LegalTech (in a ballroom with WiFi)and decided to tweet the various presentations.  What a blast!  Although readers around the world were getting multiple 140 character sound bites in duplicate (and triplicate) and were slightly reeling from the impact, I do think the medium somehow conveyed the energy of the session in a way that a blog simply cannot.  We were frantic and frenetic, and we were clearly having a great time.  A quick look at the feedback received shows that our friends online enjoyed the tweets and participated via Twitter by commenting and posting their questions.

In a single day we got to experience two different ways of communicating information and dealing with technology.   Social media tools like blogging and micromessaging via Twitter are wonderful and powerful.   Several of my readers said they had so much fun reading our updates that they wished they had been in the room with us.  That said, they acknowledged we’d delivered the next best thing.  If they can, they’ll find the cash to come to LegalTech next year.  I’ve got to believe this is something the conference organizers would like to encourage.

So, about that WiFi…

[Photo Credit:  vkdir, Creative Commons license]

Asking questions like these help you understand part of the value proposition for your KM effort.  It also helps you understand what your priorities should be.  Presumably, you need to focus on the activities that provide the greatest leverage.

The next question to ask is this:  is my current level of KM leverage sustainable without additions to headcount?  The answer to that better be yes since additions to headcount in this economy are likely to be close to impossible this year in most law firms.  If the answer is no, what are you going to do about it?

At LegalTech 2009, Lee Bryant and I will be leading a discussion on using Web 2.0 tools to create and sustain meaningful leverage for your KM program.  The session is on Tuesday at 10:30am in the Sutton Parlor South.  I do hope you’ll join us.

[Photo Credit:  Tamaki, Creative Commons license]