Skip to main content

Home/ entreprise2.0/ Group items tagged networking

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Filter: All | Bookmarks | Topics Simple Middle
Christophe Deschamps

Employers taking chances when blocking Facebook too, says Deacons - 0 views

www.deacons.com.au/...media-release.cfm

SocialSoftware adoption technos 2.0 génération Y

shared by Christophe Deschamps on 27 Oct 08 - Cached
  • 14 per cent use it at some time to access social networking sites. Usage is significantly higher among younger workers with 32 per cent of 16-24 year olds and 23 per cent of 25-34 year olds reporting frequent or occasional use. 20 per cent said their employer blocked access to social networking sites while 57 per cent said their employer allowed it (23 per cent did not know). 76 per cent of workers who use the Internet at work could see a benefit to their organisation in allowing access to social networking sites believing it showed: - trust in employees (68 per cent);  - gave people a break from day to day work and kept them fresh (48 per cent); and  - allowed them to better network with other employees, customers and suppliers (40 per cent). Among those who use social networking sites, 91 per cent saw a benefit to their organisation from the activity. In general, younger workers were more likely to see these benefits than their older counterparts. 16 per cent overall said an employer’s policy re on-line social networking would influence their decision to join one employer over another. This view was particularly strong among 16 to 24 year olds, with one in four saying it would. 91 per cent say that they use the Internet appropriately at work, with only 1 per cent admitting to frequent inappropriate use.
  • Christophe Deschamps on 27 Oct 08
     
    Etude australienne, avril 2008
Christophe Deschamps

Open-Source Spying - 0 views

www.nytimes.com/...03intelligence.html

ib renseignement entreprise 2.0 enterprise 2.0 gestion projet 2.0 adoption technos 2.0

shared by Christophe Deschamps on 15 Jul 09 - Cached
  • The spy agencies were saddled with technology that might have seemed cutting edge in 1995.
  • Theoretically, the intelligence world ought to revolve around information sharing. If F.B.I. agents discover that Al Qaeda fund-raising is going on in Brooklyn, C.I.A. agents in Europe ought to be able to know that instantly.
  • Analysts also did not worry about anything other than their corners of the world.
  • ...57 more annotations...
  • When the Orange Revolution erupted in Ukraine in late 2004, Burton went to Technorati, a search engine that scours the “blogosphere,” to find the most authoritative blog postings on the subject. Within minutes, he had found sites with insightful commentary from American expatriates who were talking to locals in Kiev and on-the-fly debates among political analysts over what it meant. Because he and his fellow spies were stuck with outdated technology, they had no comparable way to cooperate — to find colleagues with common interests and brainstorm online.
  • Indeed, throughout the intelligence community, spies are beginning to wonder why their technology has fallen so far behind — and talk among themselves about how to catch up. Some of the country’s most senior intelligence thinkers have joined the discussion, and surprisingly, many of them believe the answer may lie in the interactive tools the world’s teenagers are using to pass around YouTube videos and bicker online about their favorite bands.
  • perhaps, they argue, it’ s time to try something radically different. Could blogs and wikis prevent the next 9/11?
  • during the cold war, threats formed slowly. The Soviet Union was a ponderous bureaucracy that moved at the glacial speed of the five-year plan. Analysts studied the emergence of new tanks and missiles, pieces of hardware that took years to develop.
  • Writing reports was thus a leisurely affair, taking weeks or months; thousands of copies were printed up and distributed via interoffice mail. If an analyst’s report impressed his superiors, they’d pass it on to their superiors, and they to theirs — until, if the analyst was very lucky, it landed eventually in the president’s inner circle.
  • The F.B.I. terminals were connected to one another — but not to the computers at any other agency, and vice versa.
  • If an analyst requested information from another agency, that request traveled through elaborate formal channels. The walls between the agencies were partly a matter of law.
  • Islamist terrorists, as 9/11 proved, behaved utterly unlike the Soviet Union. They were rapid-moving, transnational and cellular.
  • To disrupt these new plots, some intelligence officials concluded, American agents and analysts would need to cooperate just as fluidly — trading tips quickly among agents and agencies. Following the usual chain of command could be fatal. “To fight a network like Al Qaeda, you need to behave like a network,” John Arquilla,
  • This control over the flow of information, as the 9/11 Commission noted in its final report, was a crucial reason American intelligence agencies failed to prevent those attacks. All the clues were there — Al Qaeda associates studying aviation in Arizona, the flight student Zacarias Moussaoui arrested in Minnesota, surveillance of a Qaeda plotting session in Malaysia — but none of the agents knew about the existence of the other evidence. The report concluded that the agencies failed to “connect the dots.”
  • Spies, Andrus theorized, could take advantage of these rapid, self-organizing effects. If analysts and agents were encouraged to post personal blogs and wikis on Intelink — linking to their favorite analyst reports or the news bulletins they considered important — then mob intelligence would take over.
  • Pieces of intel would receive attention merely because other analysts found them interesting. This grass-roots process, Andrus argued, suited the modern intelligence challenge of sifting through thousands of disparate clues: if a fact or observation struck a chord with enough analysts, it would snowball into popularity, no matter what their supervisors thought.
  • What most impressed Andrus was Wikipedia’s self-governing nature. No central editor decreed what subjects would be covered. Individuals simply wrote pages on subjects that interested them — and then like-minded readers would add new facts or fix errors.
  • He pointed out that the best Internet search engines, including Google, all use “link analysis” to measure the authority of documents.
  • Each agency had databases to amass intelligence, but because of the air gap, other agencies could not easily search them. The divisions were partly because of turf battles and partly because of legal restrictions — but they were also technological.
  • This, Burton pointed out, is precisely the problem with Intelink. It has no links, no social information to help sort out which intel is significant and which isn’t. When an analyst’s report is posted online, it does not include links to other reports, even ones it cites.
  • “Analytical puzzles, like terror plots, are often too piecemeal for individual brains to put together. Having our documents aware of each other would be like hooking several brains up in a line, so that each one knows what the others know, making the puzzle much easier to solve.”
  • With Andrus and Burton’s vision in mind, you can almost imagine how 9/11 might have played out differently. In Phoenix, the F.B.I. agent Kenneth Williams might have blogged his memo noting that Al Qaeda members were engaging in flight-training activity. The agents observing a Qaeda planning conference in Malaysia could have mentioned the attendance of a Saudi named Khalid al-Midhar; another agent might have added that he held a multi-entry American visa. The F.B.I. agents who snared Zacarias Moussaoui in Minnesota might have written about their arrest of a flight student with violent tendencies. Other agents and analysts who were regular readers of these blogs would have found the material interesting, linked to it, pointed out connections or perhaps entered snippets of it into a wiki page discussing this new trend of young men from the Middle East enrolling in pilot training.
    • Christophe Deschamps
      Christophe Deschamps on 15 Jul 09
       
      Peut-être un peu idyllique?
  • “The 16 intelligence organizations of the U.S. are without peer. They are the best in the world. The trick is, are they collectively the best?”
  • in a system like this, as Andrus’s theory goes, the dots are inexorably drawn together. “Once the intelligence community has a robust and mature wiki and blog knowledge-sharing Web space,”
  • From now on, Meyerrose said, each agency would have to build new systems using cheaper, off-the-shelf software so they all would be compatible. But bureaucratic obstacles were just a part of the problem Meyerrose faced. He was also up against something deeper in the DNA of the intelligence services. “We’ve had this ‘need to know’ culture for years,” Meyerrose said. “Well, we need to move to a ‘need to share’ philosophy.”
  • In the fall of 2005, they joined forces with C.I.A. wiki experts to build a prototype of something called Intellipedia, a wiki that any intelligence employee with classified clearance could read and contribute to.
  • By the late summer, Fingar decided the Intellipedia experiment was sufficiently successful that he would embark on an even more high-profile project: using Intellipedia to produce a “national intelligence estimate” for Nigeria. An N.I.E. is an authoritative snapshot of what the intelligence community thinks about a particular state — and a guide for foreign and military policy.
  • But it will also, Fingar hopes, attract contributions from other intelligence employees who have expertise Fingar isn’t yet aware of — an analyst who served in the Peace Corps in Nigeria, or a staff member who has recently traveled there.
  • In the traditional method of producing an intelligence estimate, Fingar said, he would call every agency and ask to borrow their Africa expert for a week or two of meetings. “And they’d say: ‘Well, I only got one guy who can spell Nigeria, and he’s traveling. So you lose.’ ” In contrast, a wiki will “change the rules of who can play,” Fingar said, since far-flung analysts and agents around the world could contribute, day or night.
  • Intelink allows any agency to publish a Web page, or put a document or a database online, secure in the knowledge that while other agents and analysts can access it, the outside world cannot.
  • Rasmussen notes that though there is often strong disagreement and debate on Intellipedia, it has not yet succumbed to the sort of vandalism that often plagues Wikipedia pages, including the posting of outright lies. This is partly because, unlike with Wikipedia, Intellipedia contributors are not anonymous. Whatever an analyst writes on Intellipedia can be traced to him. “If you demonstrate you’ve got something to contribute, hey, the expectation is you’re a valued member,” Fingar said. “You demonstrate you’re an idiot, that becomes known, too.”
  • So why hasn’t Intelink given young analysts instant access to all secrets from every agency? Because each agency’s databases, and the messages flowing through their internal pipelines, are not automatically put onto Intelink. Agency supervisors must actively decide what data they will publish on the network — and their levels of openness vary.
  • It would focus on spotting and predicting possible avian-flu outbreaks and function as part of a larger portal on the subject to collect information from hundreds of sources around the world, inside and outside of the intelligence agencies.
  • Operational information — like details of a current covert action — is rarely posted, usually because supervisors fear that a leak could jeopardize a delicate mission.
  • “See, these people would never have been talking before, and we certainly wouldn’t have heard about it if they did,” the assistant said. By September, the site had become so loaded with information and discussion that Rear Adm. Arthur Lawrence, a top official in the health department, told Meyerrose it had become the government’s most crucial resource on avian flu.
  • Intelink has grown to the point that it contains thousands of agency sites and several hundred databases. Analysts at the various agencies generate 50,000 official reports a year, many of which are posted to the network. The volume of material online is such that analysts now face a new problem: data overload. Even if they suspect good information might exist on Intelink, it is often impossible to find it. The system is poorly indexed, and its internal search tools perform like the pre-Google search engines of the ’90s.“
  • But Meyerrose insists that the future of spying will be revolutionized as much by these small-bore projects as by billion-dollar high-tech systems. Indeed, he says that overly ambitious projects often result in expensive disasters, the way the F.B.I.’s $170 million attempt to overhaul its case-handling software died in 2005 after the software became so complex that the F.B.I. despaired of ever fixing the bugs and shelved it. In contrast, the blog software took only a day or two to get running. “We need to think big, start small and scale fast,” Meyerrose said.
  • But the agency’s officials trained only small groups of perhaps five analysts a month. After they finished their training, those analysts would go online, excited, and start their blogs. But they’d quickly realize no one else was reading their posts aside from the four other people they’d gone through the training with. They’d get bored and quit blogging, just as the next trainees came online.
  • This presents a secrecy paradox. The Unclassified Intellipedia will have the biggest readership and thus will grow the most rapidly; but if it’s devoid of truly sensitive secrets, will it be of any use?
  • Many in the intelligence agencies suspect not. Indeed, they often refuse to input sensitive intel into their own private, secure databases; they do not trust even their own colleagues, inside their own agencies, to keep their secrets safe.
  • These are legitimate concerns. After the F.B.I. agent Robert Hanssen was arrested for selling the identities of undercover agents to Russia, it turned out he had found their names by trawling through records on the case-support system.
  • “When you have a source, you go to extraordinary lengths to protect their identities,” I. C. Smith, a 25-year veteran of the bureau, told me. “So agents never trusted the system, and rightly so.”
  • What the agencies needed was a way to take the thousands of disparate, unorganized pieces of intel they generate every day and somehow divine which are the most important.
  • A spy blogosphere, even carefully secured against intruders, might be fundamentally incompatible with the goal of keeping secrets. And the converse is also true: blogs and wikis are unlikely to thrive in an environment where people are guarded about sharing information. Social software doesn’t work if people aren’t social.
  • the C.I.A. set up a competition, later taken over by the D.N.I., called the Galileo Awards: any employee at any intelligence agency could submit an essay describing a new idea to improve information sharing, and the best ones would win a prize.
  • The first essay selected was by Calvin Andrus, chief technology officer of the Center for Mission Innovation at the C.I.A. In his essay, “The Wiki and the Blog: Toward a Complex Adaptive Intelligence Community,”
  • For the intelligence agencies to benefit from “social software,” he said, they need to persuade thousands of employees to begin blogging and creating wikis all at once. And that requires a cultural sea change: persuading analysts, who for years have survived by holding their cards tightly to their chests, to begin openly showing their hands online.
    • Christophe Deschamps
      Christophe Deschamps on 15 Jul 09
       
      Un point essentiel. Il faut commencer petit technologiquement et grand humainement!
  • Indeed, Meyerrose’s office is building three completely separate versions of Intellipedia for each of the three levels of secrecy: Top Secret, Secret and Unclassified. Each will be placed on a data network configured so that only people with the correct level of clearance can see them — and these networks are tightly controlled, so sensitive information typed into the Top Secret Intellipedia cannot accidentally leak into the Unclassified one.
  • The chat room was unencrypted and unsecured, so anyone could drop in and read the postings or mouth off. That way, Meyerrose figured, he’d be more likely to get drop-ins by engineers from small, scrappy start-up software firms who might have brilliant ideas but no other way to get an audience with intelligence chiefs. The chat room provoked howls of outrage. “People were like, ‘Hold it, can’t the Chinese and North Koreans listen in?’ ” Meyerrose told me. “And, sure, they could. But we weren’t going to be discussing state secrets. And the benefits of openness outweigh the risks.”
  • Fingar says that more value can be generated by analysts sharing bits of “open source” information — the nonclassified material in the broad world, like foreign newspapers, newsletters and blogs. It used to be that on-the-ground spies were the only ones who knew what was going on in a foreign country. But now the average citizen sitting in her living room can peer into the debates, news and lives of people in Iran. “If you want to know what the terrorists’ long-term plans are, the best thing is to read their propaganda — the stuff out there on the Internet,”
  • Beat cops in Indiana might be as likely to uncover evidence of a terror plot as undercover C.I.A. agents in Pakistan. Fiery sermons printed on pamphlets in the U.K. might be the most valuable tool in figuring out who’s raising money for a possible future London bombing. The most valuable spy system is one that can quickly assemble disparate pieces that are already lying around — information gathered by doctors, aid workers, police officers or security guards at corporations.
  • The premise of spy-blogging is that a million connected amateurs will always be smarter than a few experts collected in an elite star chamber; that Wikipedia will always move more quickly than the Encyclopaedia Britannica; that the country’s thousand-odd political bloggers will always spot news trends more quickly than slow-moving journalists in the mainstream media.
  • In three meetings a day, the officials assess all the intel that has risen to their attention — and they jointly decide what the nation’s most serious threats are.
  • The grass roots, they’ve found, are good at collecting threats but not necessarily at analyzing them. If a lot of low-level analysts are pointing to the same inaccurate posting, that doesn’t make it any less wrong.
  • Without the knowledge that comes from long experience, he added, a fledgling analyst or spy cannot know what is important or not. The counterterrorism center, he said, should decide which threats warrant attention.
  • Many of the officials at the very top, like Fingar, Meyerrose and their colleagues at the office of the director of national intelligence, are intrigued by the potential of a freewheeling, smart-mobbing intelligence community. The newest, youngest analysts are in favor of it, too. The resistance comes from the “iron majors” — career officers who occupy the enormous middle bureaucracy of the spy agencies. They might find the idea of an empowered grass roots to be foolhardy; they might also worry that it threatens their turf.
  • The normal case for social software is failure,” Shirky said. And because Intellipedia is now a high-profile experiment with many skeptics, its failure could permanently doom these sorts of collaborative spy endeavors.
  • It might be difficult to measure contributions to a wiki; if a brilliant piece of analysis emerges from the mob, who gets credit for it?
  • “A C.I.A. officer’s career is advanced by producing reports,”
  • Though D.N.I. officials say they have direct procurement authority over technology for all the agencies, there’s no evidence yet that Meyerrose will be able to make a serious impact on the eight spy agencies in the Department of Defense, which has its own annual $38 billion intelligence budget — the lion’s share of all the money the government spends on spying.
  • if the spies do not join the rest of the world, they risk growing to resemble the rigid, unchanging bureaucracy that they once confronted during the cold war.
  • Christophe Deschamps on 15 Jul 09
     
    Article du NY Times qui décrit en détail le projet Intellipedia, avantages, inconvénients,.... Très intéressant pour l'étude de cas de déploiement d'un projet 2.0. les risques et écueils ne sont pas oubliés. D'autant plus utile que c'est sans doute l'un des plus anciens projets de grande envergure de ce type actuellement. 10 pages.
Christophe Deschamps

How companies are benefiting from web 2.0: McKinsey Global Survey Results - 0 views

www.mckinseyquarterly.com/article_print.aspx

ib entreprise 2.0 enterprise 2.0 Etudes

shared by Christophe Deschamps on 03 Sep 09 - Cached
  • 69 percent of respondents report that their companies have gained measurable business benefits, including more innovative products and services, more effective marketing, better access to knowledge, lower cost of doing business, and higher revenues. Companies that made greater use of the technologies, the results show, report even greater benefits.
  • We found that successful companies not only tightly integrate Web 2.0 technologies with the work flows of their employees but also create a “networked company,” linking themselves with customers and suppliers through the use of Web 2.0 tools. Despite the current recession, respondents overwhelmingly say that they will continue to invest in Web 2.0.
  • When we asked respondents about the business benefits their companies have gained as a result of using Web 2.0 technologies, they most often report greater ability to share ideas; improved access to knowledge experts; and reduced costs of communications, travel, and operations. Many respondents also say Web 2.0 tools have decreased the time to market for products and have had the effect of improving employee satisfaction.
  • ...15 more annotations...
  • Respondents also say they have been able to burnish their innovation skills, perhaps because their companies and customers jointly shape and cocreate products using Web 2.0 connections.
  • The median level of gains derived from internal Web 2.0 use ranged from a 10 percent improvement in operational costs to a 30 percent increase in the speed at which employees are able to tap outside experts.
  • Web 2.0 delivers benefits by multiplying the opportunities for collaboration and by allowing knowledge to spread more effectively. These benefits can accrue through companies’ use of automatic information feeds such as RSS2 or microblogs, of which Twitter is the most popular manifestation. Although many companies use a mix of tools, the survey shows that among all respondents deriving benefits, the more heavily used technologies are blogs, wikis, and podcasts—the same tools that are popular among consumers
  • Similarly, among those capturing benefits in their dealings with suppliers and partners, the tools of choice again are blogs, social networks, and video sharing. While respondents tell us that tapping expert knowledge from outside is their top priority, few report deploying prediction markets to harvest collective insights from these external networks.
  • Comparing respondents’ industries, those at high-technology companies are most likely to report measurable benefits from Web 2.0 across the board, followed by those at companies offering business, legal, and professional services
  • These survey results indicate that a different type of company may be emerging—one that makes intensive use of interactive technologies. This networked organization is characterized both by the internal integration of Web tools among employees, as well as use of the technologies to strengthen company ties with external stakeholders—customers and business partners.
  • As such, companies reporting business benefits also report high levels of Web 2.0 integration into employee workflows. They most often deploy three or more Web tools, and usage is high throughout these organizations
  • Respondents reporting measurable benefits say their companies, on average, have Web 2.0 interactions with 35 percent of their customers. These companies forged similar Web ties to 48 percent of their suppliers, partners, and outside experts. An organizational structure that’s more porous and networked may make companies more resilient and adaptive, sharpening their ability to access knowledge and thus innovate more effectively.
  • The survey results confirm that successful adoption requires that the use of these tools be integrated into the flow of users’ work (Exhibit 5). Furthermore, encouraging continuing use requires approaches other than the traditional financial or performance incentives deployed as motivational tools.
  • They also say role modeling—active Web use by executives—has been important for encouraging adoption internally.
    • Christophe Deschamps
      Christophe Deschamps on 03 Sep 09
       
      Cf le président de Cisco
  • Christophe Deschamps on 03 Sep 09
     
    L'entreprise 2.0 n'est pas qu'un concept et cette étude menée sur 1700 dirigeants le prouve.
Christophe Deschamps

Intellipedia suffers midlife crisis - 0 views

gcn.com/...Intellipedia.aspx

ib renseignement Social software entreprise 2.0 enterprise 2.0

shared by Christophe Deschamps on 19 Feb 09 - Cached
  • The problem? The growth of the collective intelligence site so far largely has been fueled by early adopters and enthusiasts, according to Rasmussen. About all those who would have joined and shared their knowledge on the social networking site have already done so. If the intelligence agencies want to get further gains from the site, they need to incorporate it into their own formal decision making process, he contended. Until that happens, the social networking aspect of Intellipedia is "just a marginal revolution," he said.
  • Established in 2005, Intellipedia, now managed by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence,  has approximately 100,000 user accounts. Open to anyone with a government e-mail account, it has social bookmarking tool, a document repository, a home page for each user, and collaboration spaces.
  • For true change to occur, other agencies must use Intellipedia as their official conduit, at least for some functions, Rasmussen said. Otherwise, it is just creating additional work for contributors.
  • ...4 more annotations...
  • Another problem is that managers may not worry that their employees would not be comfortable contributing information to a social-networking tool. Rasmussen said he talked with one executive who said employees may not want to contribute personal items to their home page.
  • " 'Are you kidding?' " Rasmussen responded. "This is work. We force people to do stuff [they don't want to do] all the time — we make people come in sober and wear clothes. In certain cases top-down may not work, but in certain cases it does."
  • Contributors need to learn to accept "an agency-neutral non-ownership" stance to their articles, he said.
  • "If you bring too many locks into an overly cautious culture, that's all you get: locks," Rasmussen said. He also mentioned that mashups remain to be too difficult for non-programmers to create, and social networks continue to be held, presumably unfairly, by higher standards than other technologies.
  • Christophe Deschamps on 19 Feb 09
     
    Intelipedia, le réseau social des agences de renseignement US mis en place en 2005, connaît quelques difficultés. Intéressant retour d'expérience sur un projet 2.0 déjà ancien.
Bertrand Duperrin

Management and Virtual Decentralised Networks: The Linux Project - 0 views

www.firstmonday.org/...dafermos

collaboration communities coordination decentralization decentralizednetworks interactions knowledge linux management networks project valuecreation

shared by Bertrand Duperrin on 15 Aug 08 - Cached
  • Bertrand Duperrin on 15 Aug 08
     
    This paper examines the latest of paradigms - the Virtual Network(ed) Organisation - and whether geographically dispersed knowledge workers can virtually collaborate for a project under no central planning. Co-ordination, management and the role of knowledge arise as the central areas of focus. The Linux Project and its development model are selected as a case of analysis and the critical success factors of this organisational design are identified. The study proceeds to the formulation of a framework that can be applied to all kinds of virtual decentralised work and concludes that value creation is maximized when there is intense interaction and uninhibited sharing of information between the organisation and the surrounding community. Therefore, the potential success or failure of this organisational paradigm depends on the degree of dedication and involvement by the surrounding community.
Christophe Deschamps

12 Rules For Bringing 'Social' To Your Business - 0 views

socialcomputingjournal.com/viewcolumn.cfm

ib entreprise 2.0 enterprise 2.0 adoption technos 2.0

shared by Christophe Deschamps on 17 Jul 09 - Cached
  • But for most of us to really get strategic value from social business, we'll need to understand the ground rules. In other words, let's ask and answer the tough questions in making this transition: Are social business activities generally better than non-social business activities? How does having a social business help the bottom line and the long-term health of an organization? What, in the end, does "taking a business social" really mean?
  • the network (the Web or enterprise or both) is about who is on it and how involved they are.
  • ...14 more annotations...
  • the transition to social business is about involving and engaging people far more than it is about picking a technology or building the infrastructure.
  • There is no simpler or more effective way to build the connections and your social business fabric than creating conversation.
  • But sitting back and waiting for the world to involve your business in what they do is just no longer an option. Too often, they will just go off to the communities that have already engaged them and that will be that. "Experience share" is your new measure of success, meaning the amount of time that the world interacts with you socially.
  • As I said then, "communities exist to serve the needs of their members" and themselves second if they intend to have a successful long-term relationship, as in most human relationships.
  • Social business doesn't mean we throw open the doors to everything automatically as a public process either. But we are usually so far in the other direction that a step towards this is just the right medicine right now.
  • Social analytics, however, are already here and this story is about individuals anyway. If workers aren't measured by how effective they are at creating value on the network, they will just focus on what they are measured on to get their recognition, raises, and promotions. This is a complex subject that will often have very different ground rules for different organizations.
  • Do not use social channels for traditional push communication. Classic examples: Don't use online communities for distributing press releases, product literature, PR, or spokesperson canned messages.
  • Censorship kills participation. Nothing will stop a social business in its tracks faster than inappropriate censorship.
  • But nothing will remove you from the world of social businesses faster or more effectively. Honest, open conversation is always the better choice and is truly valuable in its own right. Respond to criticism constructively and quickly.
  • If you are working closely with customers, partners, employees using social tools (as well as people are potentially want to be in one of those three groups) the more you do it, the more it will seem as if there is one cohesive community.
  • Where one gets a paycheck and what organization's name is on a business card is less important than the fact that everyone is getting more value than if they were doing things in a non-social way.
  • Everyone involved in a social relationship must get something out of it or there's no reason for it.
  • Being social for it's own sake may generate downstream value accidentally but social businesses will often have a long list of intentional reasons they are being social.
  • There are almost certainly a lot more rules for social businesses, but we're still learning them.
  • Christophe Deschamps on 17 Jul 09
     
    Un "classique" Dion Hinchcliffe
Miguel Membrado

The Business Impacts of Social Networking - AT&T : Enterprise Business : Trends White P... - 0 views

www.business.att.com/...s_impacts_of_social_networking

socialnetworks demailly whitepaper socialtools enterprise2.0

shared by Miguel Membrado on 02 Dec 08 - Cached
  • Miguel Membrado on 02 Dec 08
     
    Very good white from Cecile Demailly about how social tools (aka social networks) will change our corporations, and what we must do to reach this level.
Christophe Deschamps

Obtenir des résultats grâce aux réseaux sociaux - 0 views

www.duperrin.com/...tats-grace-aux-reseaux-sociaux

ib entreprise 2.0 enterprise 2.0 SocialSoftwareNetwork

shared by Christophe Deschamps on 18 May 09 - Cached
  • Il est donc plus que jamais temps de comprendre que : • Business (or corporate) Social Netwoks have nothing to do with General Public  Social Networks on the web.
  • • Le réseau social n’est pas né avec les logiciels du même nom qui ne sont que des catalyseurs. C’est la manière dont travaillent effectivement les collaborateurs depuis longtemps. Votre entreprise est truffée de réseaux sociaux quand bien même aucun collaborateur n’aurait d’ordinateur à sa disposition.
  • • Le réseau social n’est pas quelque chose de figé et stable que l’on “met en place”, c’est quelque chose de mouvant, de vivant, dont l’activité interne n’est pas prévisible.
  • ...4 more annotations...
  • • Le réseau social n’est pas un enchevêtrement de personnes qui se “lient” et échangent (ou non) de l’information. C’est une manière de travailler afin d’obtenir des résultats. On parle trop de Facebook alors que le concept même de réseau social en entreprise n’a rien à voir, a des règles et des objectifs qui lui sont propres
  • En effet ça n’est pas parce que ces réseaux sont pas définition informels que l’entreprise doit les négliger, ou pire, les combattre. Il y a des méthodologies permettant de comprendre le fonctionnement des réseaux internes à l’entreprise, d’en identifier les acteurs clé, d’identifier les circuits de création de valeur afin de pouvoir en tirer le meilleur. Et essayer de les développer là où ils sont nécessaires.
  • la contribution d’un individu à la création de valeur n’est pas forcément liée à son poste mais peut résulter de son rôle central dans un réseau ou entre deux réseaux.
  • Je suis d’ailleurs surpris du nombre d’entreprises qui se lancent dans des projets de réseaux sociaux sans avoir pris la peine de comprendre leur rôle actuel dans leur organisation et essayent de développer des réseaux en partant de rien et en recopiant leur organigramme tout en négligeant totalement de procéder à une analyse de l’existant.
  • Christophe Deschamps on 18 May 09
     
    Compte-rendu de l'ouvrage Driving Results Through Social Networks de Robert Cross.
Bhaumik Mehta

Marketing Strategy on New Facebook Graph Search - 0 views

www.casestudy.co.in/...20

marketing strategy facebook graph search

shared by Bhaumik Mehta on 20 Feb 13 - No Cached
  • Bhaumik Mehta on 20 Feb 13
     
    Facebook is preparing to introduce its newest feature, the Graph Search. The social network already has several great tools available to help you analyze content, build apps and get closer to your target audience. The Graph Search is another offering that has the potential to improve your social media marketing strategy.
Eric Salviac

Gartner Identifies New Approach for Enterprise Architecture - 0 views

www.gartner.com/...page.jsp

gartner entreprise2.0 architecture

shared by Eric Salviac on 18 Aug 09 - Cached
  • Gartner has identified seven properties that differentiate emergent architecture from the traditional approach to EA: 1. Non-deterministic - In the past, enterprise architects applied centralised decision-making to design outcomes. Using emergent architecture, they instead must decentralise decision-making to enable innovation. 2. Autonomous actors - Enterprise architects can no longer control all aspects of architecture as they once did. They must now recognise the broader business ecosystem and devolve control to constituents. 3. Rule-bound actors - Where in the past enterprise architects provided detailed design specifications for all aspects of the EA, they must now define a minimal set of rules and enable choice. 4. Goal-oriented actors - Previously, the only goals that mattered were the corporate goals but this has now shifted to each constituent acting in their own best interests. 5. Local Influences: Actors are influenced by local interactions and limited information. Feedback within their sphere of communication alters the behaviour of individuals. No individual actor has data about all of an emergent system. EA must increasingly coordinate. 6. Dynamic or Adaptive Systems: The system (the individual actors as well as the environment) changes over time. EA must design emergent systems sense and respond to changes in their environment. 7. Resource-Constrained Environment: An environment of abundance does not enable emergence; rather, the scarcity of resources drives emergence.
  • Eric Salviac on 18 Aug 09
     
    Enterprise architects must adopt a new style of enterprise architecture (EA) to respond to the growing variety and complexity in markets, economies, nations, networks and companies, according to Gartner, Inc. Analysts advised companies to adopt 'emergent architecture', also known as middle-out EA and light EA, and set out definitions of the new approach.
Miguel Membrado

2009 Deloitte LLP Ethics & Workplace Survey | Sharon Allen - Deloitte LLP - 0 views

www.deloitte.com/...407%2526cid%253D263022,00.html

socialmedia metrics study survey socialnetwork reputation onlineidentity ereputation deloitte

shared by Miguel Membrado on 25 May 09 - Cached
  • Miguel Membrado on 25 May 09
     
    Very insteresting survey about what companies and employees are thinking and doing with corporate information in social networks.
Christophe Deschamps

Enterprise 2.0 Vs Diffusion of Innovation - 3 views

ceciiil.wordpress.com/...2-0-vs-diffusion-of-innovation

ib entreprise 2.0 enterprise 2.0 management adoption technos 2.0

shared by Christophe Deschamps on 18 Feb 10 - Cached
  • Relative advantage : what value does it bring ? Compatibility : how much effort to transition to this innovation ? Complexity : how much learning is required to apply it ? Triability : How easy is it to try the innovation ? Observability : How visible are the results ?
  • None of these intangible assets (human, organizational and informational capital – i.e databases, Information systems, networks, technology infrastructure) has value that can be measured separately or independently.
  • Mc Afee still recommend to build some kind of business case with the following elements
  • ...10 more annotations...
  • Costs and time lines
  • Expected benefits
  • Technology footprint
  • People make relative evaluations Reference point is status quo People are loss-adverse : a prospective loss of X is 3 times more painful that a gain of X is pleasurable.
  • These elements lead to the fact that we value what we have far more highly that what we could have instead. The result is what Gourville calls the 9x effect : people rate what they have 3 times more than their actual value and prospective items three times less than what they’re actually worth. A new item must therefore be at least 9 times better to justify the (perceived) effort required for the adoption.
  • As a result, McAfee quotes Gourville and recommends not to oversell the collaborative platform and make it clear that the adoption will be a long phase.
  • The objectives is to help them realize that these tools are the root cause of many of their daily work frustrations
  • So a 30 days trial might not be enough to see the full benefits of such solutions. However it can still proves how easy it is to use them.
  • A good strategy to make the results visible is to locate some teams of social networks enthusiasts (IT or HR departments might be a first good guess). And start to deploy the solution on such narrow teams.
  • In a transparency and observability purpose, it might be a good idea to monitor the knowledge workers perceived value of their tools and measure the progress. Preparing a questionnaire with a set of questions around the subject of collaboration, innovation, productivity and knowledge management could be a good starting point.
  • Christophe Deschamps on 18 Feb 10
     
    Revue du livre de McAfee par @ceciil
Miguel Membrado

Social Media Case Studies | The Parallax View: Social Media inside the Firewall / Enter... - 0 views

theparallaxview.com/social-media-case-studies

shared by Miguel Membrado on 24 Feb 09 - Cached
  • Miguel Membrado on 24 Feb 09
     
    A list of case studies about social media and enterprise 2.0 on-going projects
Christophe Deschamps

destinationCRM.com: The 7 Evolutionary Phases of Enterprise 2.0 - 0 views

www.destinationcrm.com/...s-of-Enterprise-2.0-51489.aspx

enterprise 2.0 entreprise 2.0 pkm

shared by Christophe Deschamps on 10 Nov 08 - Cached
  • Islands of Me — the beginning of organizational use of personal computers in which there was a culture of protectionism within facets of an organization; One-Way Me/Enterprise 1.0 — coworkers ask each other for information, but still only on a "need-to-know" basis; Team Me — employees understand their own individual power within their work community, but it does not expand enterprisewide; Proactive Me/Enterprise 1.5 — the ability to always be connected as workers could be distributed globally; Two-Way Me — communities are explicitly and purposefully created, and collective intelligence is beginning to surface -- albeit not in an automatic way; Islands of We — focus is on a larger team level and explicitly looks at how networking and community development can drive benefits to the entire organization; and Extended Me/Enterprise 2.0 (still in the early-adopter phase) — utilizes different information systems in order to foster transparency, has developed a participatory and engaged community, and has the agility to quickly adapt to changing environments.
Christophe Deschamps

Why The Big Fuss Over Microblogs? | The View from Forrester Research | ZDNet.com - 0 views

blogs.zdnet.com/forrester

entreprise 2.0 micro-blogging twitter

shared by Christophe Deschamps on 08 Oct 08 - Cached
  • I believe two factors are at play: Mobility makes us omnipresent, but short on time. Microblogging appeals to those who use mobile devices. It provides a channel that honors our thumbs and encourages us to say just a few words. And we can connect to the intranet from anywhere. For some, this is true power. The list of people I “follow” may be interesting to you. Although Web 2.0 tools present information, their use becomes increasingly more interesting when we look at the network of people who generate and care about the information. In the case of the microblog: my “follow -list” may be more interesting to you than my micro-posts.
Christophe Deschamps

Enterprise Web 2.0: Building the Next-Generation Workplace - the Driving Force behind J... - 0 views

www.marketwatch.com/...story.aspx

entreprise 2.0 etudes knowledge workers

shared by Christophe Deschamps on 07 Oct 08 - Cached
  • Building on the somewhat vague and yet particular usage of the term 'Web 2.0', 'Enterprise Web 2.0' describes a fresh, and some would say new, approach to the design and provision of business applications that incorporates aspects such as social networking, collaboration, and real-time communication. In addition, Enterprise Web 2.0 focuses a great deal of attention on the user's 'experience' or 'joy of use' -- something of a novelty in enterprise IT these days. By comparison, when Butler Group talks about 'Enterprise 2.0', we are focusing on the composition and architecture of the IT ecosystem, and the associated business models that will support Enterprise Web 2.0 applications.
  • Enterprise Web 2.0 is very much concerned with the user experience of corporate systems and applications, and on extracting business value from the social contributions and interactions of the organisation's various stakeholders.
  • The management of customer relationships continues to remain pivotal for most organisations, and so the social aspects of Web 2.0 are mirrored in the corporate world of Enterprise Web 2.0
  • ...8 more annotations...
  • Workforce mobility and changing communication patterns are two more trends that are driving change at the infrastructure layer, and so unified communication and collaboration requirements form an important part of Enterprise 2.0 strategy.
  • Enterprise Web 2.0 might be about putting the user (i.e. employee, customer, or stakeholder) first, but in order to do so it also requires supporting technology. And so at the IT infrastructure level, Enterprise 2.0 means Internet Protocol (IP) everywhere -- voice, video, and data. Enterprise 2.0 also means, 'open' standards rather than proprietary or 'closed' systems. Furthermore, Enterprise 2.0 technology means user-driven technology and not IT-driven technology.
  • Having accepted the fact that 'processes' means 'people', then we have to look for ways in which these people (i.e. processes) can self-organise and reference one another. Then, where possible, we need to somehow incapsulate the processes into a set of business services. One day (we might call it Web 3.0), Artificial Intelligence (AI) will enable organisations to do with computers that which they do via human beings today, but until that day arrives, organisations must do more to aid interdepartment and inter-company collaboration. Workflow has not yet figured largely in the consumer-oriented world of Web 2.0, but Butler Group sees this as pivotal when considering Enterprise Web 2.0.
  • Today applications that embody processes are built by IT professionals, but tomorrow they will be built by a new breed of power user, using mashup builders, software agents, and other Web 2.0 technologies.
  • Business and IT managers must therefore prepare themselves for the new generation of power user who will be creating mashups and situational applications that have a far broader impact than the typical spreadsheet macro of yesteryear, and that if organisations are to avoid a proliferation of unmanageable, siloed, micro-applications, then they must blend the power of personal productivity with an appropriate management layer and a degree of central oversight.
  • Web 2.0 is no longer PC-centric.
  • It is clearly a mistake to think that Web 2.0 is all about technology, and likewise Enterprise Web 2.0, but it is also a mistake to dismiss the technology altogether. Therefore, selecting and implementing enterprise social software solutions, next-generation collaboration solutions, and Rich Internet Applications requires careful thought, consideration, and planning.
  • The driving force behind just about every aspect of Enterprise Web 2.0, is of course, the user -- something that has not always ranked highly on the list of priorities for corporate IT mangers -- and so the challenge for all forward-looking organisations is to refocus on this aspect of their IT strategies.
  • Christophe Deschamps on 07 Oct 08
     
    Nouvelle étude de Research & Markets. Pas mal d'infos dans cette synthèse. User-centric
Christophe Deschamps

"C" Words - 0 views

www.theappgap.com/c-words.html

entreprise 2.0 knowledgemanagement

shared by Christophe Deschamps on 07 Oct 08 - Cached
  • Generation of KM Where Knowledge Lives Type of Knowledge Implications First Generation Artifacts Explicit Create the infrastructure for capturing, collecting, refining, and re-using artifacts Second Generation Individuals Tacit Focus on collaborative behaviors and person-to-person knowledge sharing Third Generation The network Emergent Provide the conditions for enabling knowledge and action to emerge.
  • Christophe Deschamps on 07 Oct 08
     
    Résumé de l'intervention de Dave Pollard lors du salon Enterprise 2.0
1 - 20 of 43 Next › Last »
Showing 20▼ items per page