Skip to main content

Home/ entreprise2.0/ Group items tagged hierarchy

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Filter: All | Bookmarks | Topics Simple Middle
anonymous

Maslow's Hierarchy of Enterprise 2.0 ROI | CloudAve - 2 views

www.cloudave.com/...ierarchy-of-enterprise-2-0-roi

entreprise 2.0 enterprise2.0 KnowledgeManagement web2.0 maslow hierarchy enterprise maslow's

shared by anonymous on 20 Mar 10 - Cached
  • anonymous on 20 Mar 10
     
    "Maslow's Hierarchy of Enterprise 2.0 ROI"
Christophe Deschamps

Enterprise 2.0 - an adoption model - 0 views

www.theappgap.com/rise-20-an-adoption-model.html

entreprise 2.0 enterprise 2.0

shared by Christophe Deschamps on 17 Nov 08 - Cached
  • low readiness for change high risk-aversion preference for hierarchy and processes to create knowledge over personal freedom to collaborate and share individual preference for position power and legitimate power over referent powerand expert power
Christophe Deschamps

Beyond Enterprise 2.0 ROI, evaluation and management of knowledge in the workplace - 0 views

venividiluxi.com/en

BSC ROI entreprise 2.0 enterprise 2.0

shared by Christophe Deschamps on 29 Oct 08 - Cached
  • It is common knowledge that “what you can’t measure, you can’t manage”. And because knowledge is intangible by nature, it is not measurable and therefore not manageable.  This argument is seated in a fundamental law of Science. Consequently, the only way to move forward is to rematerialise knowledge, which we do by transforming knowledge into information or data.
  • Social computing helps transform tacit knowledge into formal transferable knowledge. This is why social software fundamentally complements existing organisational information architecture, as well as provides a constructive replacement for email, which is often considered a silo because of its overtly individualistic nature.
  • Today, ROI is the iconic, easy-to-catch and use wording for a much significant concern: evaluation. ROI is one tiny piece of a real big puzzle. ROI is an indicative ratio commonly used to anticipate the financial impact of decisions. It is a simplistic rendering of a very complex set of parameters.
  • ...3 more annotations...
  • In fact, calculating the ROI on social software is complicated to the point that economically it is unrealistic to do so. Instead of an estimation a posteriori a pilot phase, ROI as it is commonly referenced in the “Enterprise 2.0″ scene is pure guess and absolute non-sense in most cases.
  • * New metrics. Because we deal with different stuff, we need to invent metrics that are relevant to what we are trying to follow and drive. For social software, one can start with the usual web and online community metrics. Some new initiatives, such as Me-trics, open doors to more in-depth analytics that are worth considering (with a barrage of ethical considerations however).
  • Why Balanced Score Cards? For four reasons: 1. Kaplan & Norton have escaped the collusion of measurement and quantity. Measurement is not necessarily quantitative. That is a common source of confusion and of inefficiencies in numerous parts of human activity (to name a few: reporting (exhaustiveness), research (methodology), education (elite creation via selection on maths)). Measurement can be qualitative (see  Georgescu Roegen work if you’re curious). It is no surprise if numerous initiatives in intellectual capital used Balanced Score Cards 2. Balanced Score Cards are notably visual, which is not so with quantitative ratios.  That visual characteristic invites greater meaning and relevance. 3. Balanced Score Cards are heterogeneous and are therefore a more natural receptacle for a) qualitative and quantitative analytics and b) can encompass a variety of topics. In this regard, one can build official reporting encompassing both physical and knowledge activities. 4. Balanced Score Cards are aggregative so that one can build reports from various levels in the organisations. Coupled with its heterogeneous nature (previous point), one can build reports for HR, Marketing, Finance, … under the same format and surface analytics at one or many levels. The result is that some knowledge related metrics can climb the hierarchy up to the summit.
Christophe Deschamps

Management.fr Vs 21ième siècle : le coût de la hiérarchie et du contrôle - 2 views

ceciiil.wordpress.com/...e-la-hierarchie-et-du-controle

ib entreprise 2.0 enterprise 2.0 adoption technos 2.0 Etudes

shared by Christophe Deschamps on 16 Feb 10 - Cached
  • Right now, your company has 21st-century Internet-enabled business processes, mid-20th-century management processes, all built atop 19th-century management principles. (Gary Hamel – The Future Of Management)
  • Cette étude visait à démontrer que la culture d’entreprise ne pouvait pas être la même dans toutes les filiales car elle ne faisait nullement disparaître la culture nationale ; dans le meilleur des cas, elle se juxtaposait à elle.
  • Dans le cadre de cette étude, Hofstede mesure les distances hiérarchiques des différentes filiales. Pour un indice médian de 57, il mesure des distances hiérarchiques faibles dans les pays scandinaves (moins de 31) et anglo-saxons (moins de 40) et élevé en France (68).
  • ...5 more annotations...
  • Dans cette même étude, Hofstede mesure le contrôle d’incertitude.Le contrôle faible suppose davantage d’acceptation des situations comme ambiguës, réversibles dans leurs malheurs et leurs bonheurs. Les personnes sont acceptées comme pouvant changer d’humeur et de décision. Le contrôle fort veut s’appuyer sur des bases assurées qui peuvent aller de précautions concrètes à des précautions juridiques voire religieuses. Le contrôle fort est très en rapport avec le développement de la culture scientifique et techniqueEncore une fois, la France se classe en haut du tableau avec un contrôle fort de l’incertitude (un score de 86) tandis que les pays anglo-saxons ou nordiques affichent des résultats faibles attestant d’un contrôle faible de l’incertitude.
  • la primauté de la hiérarchie va à l’encontre des valeurs ayant emergé de la culture collaborative internet
  • Depuis au moins dix ans, la France est en retard sur les principaux pays de l’OCDE en matière de développement du télétravail (notamment dans l’administration), quelles que soient les sources ou les approches statistiques. Dans les pays scandinaves et anglo-saxons notamment, il concerne deux à trois fois plus de salariés.
  • ce détail a un coût. Cisco a ainsi publié un rapport intitulé the The Economics of Collaboration, et dans lequel l’entreprise explique comment en mettant en oeuvre des outils collaboratifs et en facilitant la mobilité des employés avec entre autres une démocratisation du télétravail, celle-ci a obtenu des résultats étonnants : Cisco IBSG analysis shows that Cisco realized net benefits of $691 million/year through its Web 2.0 and visual collaboration investments in FY08. (…) These benefits represent a 4.9 percent productivity increase for Cisco. We believe this is just the beginning of the value creation we will see around the new collaborative web.
  • These solutions achieve their remarkable benefits by removing the costs and inefficiencies with which our employees have been struggling. Eliminating these inefficiencies not only brings financial benefits to the company; it also increases employees’ work/life balance, reduces stress and fatigue from extensive travel, and increases job satisfaction.
  • Christophe Deschamps on 16 Feb 10
     
    Analyse d'études sur le contrôle et la hiérarchie dans les entreprises. Le modèle français est-il encore adapté?
1 - 5 of 5
Showing 20▼ items per page