Planning versus Adoption
SteveRecently, a Twitter conversation regarding the success or likelihood of success of so-called 'Enterprise 2.0' projects made me consider some of the fundamental differences between Enterprise 2.0 and more traditional corporate software project implementations, like ERP.
Traditional
The planning, testing, and prototyping steps are typically quite lengthy, frequently involving many months to even years, but once the 'go-live' date is reached, you have almost 100% adoption rates right away.
If you were to chart traditional ERP project timelines and user adoption levels it would look something like this:
Think of major system implementations for Core HRIS or Accounting. The 'adoption' of these systems is not 'optional' for the vast majority of end users, it is normally an 'all-or-nothing' proposition. The old systems are turned-off, and all users almost simultaneously 'adopt' the new system on Day 1.
Enterprise 2.0
Contrast that timeline to a typical Enterprise 2.0 deployment, where the software tools themselves are dramatically simpler, the time spent planning prior to deployment is usually significantly less, but achieving higher levels of user adoption can be much more difficult and take much longer.
These projects may be internal social networks, blogs, micro-sharing, wikis or idea markets, but commonly they are presented as 'alternatives' to traditional ways of communication and collaboration. Companies, at least initially, rarely 'force' adoption, rather they try to 'build' adoption through training, word of mouth, a visible internal champion, or small pilot programs.
Companies don't get rid of the e-mail or voice mail systems just because a new wiki is available.
Consequently, the length of time required to achieve full or the desired levels of user adoption could actually be longer for these on the surface 'simple' applications. Of course 'time' is not the only important factor to consider in any kind of enterprise implementation, but it is certainly an important component.
These large E2.0 projects are probably not going to be any simpler, faster, and less problematic than traditional projects. But, they will present a whole different set of problems for the organization, the kind of problems that many 'traditional' project managers and organizational leaders may not be prepared to address.
What two or three things can E2.0 project leaders do to try and mitigate these issues?
Reader Comments (3)
Steve - I really enjoyed this post and in the beauty of its simplicity is quite thought provoking. In traditional implementations there tends to be a lot of structure and the "rules of engagement" are likely fairly straight forward. The end user is inputting or extracting data, running queries, etc..... Enterprise 2.0 would tend to be more free-form, human and thus vulnerable. Its definitely more about changing human behaviors than adopting to the technology, which would also imply that company culture will play a large role.
I could see this being a prime opportunity for IT, HR/OD, corp communications and biz leaders to work closely together. They need to have a sense of anticipated acceptance and should engage with people early to get a sense of how people will respond and adopt. As in any project - those who are leading it and have bought in can easily lose site of what it feels like to receive it anew. There needs to be a clear understanding of the objectives, anticipated obstacles and what it will take. This is most likely an endurance game! I also believe that it will be important to have key people across an organization who take the lead, become the early adopters and encourage others. It may even be an opportunity for mentoring, depending on the challenge by company, to help foster in new behaviors and get people comfortable. Lastly, engaging top leaders in the company is always important. If they engage, open up to a dialogue and provide something that is only available through the new platform it will help drive curiosity and engagement.
Susan - thanks for reading and for your very insightful comments. I agree that these E2.0 projects do require different approaches, methods of measurement, and rules of engagement. I worry that many organizations get stuck trying to apply the same, traditional approaches to these new technologies that were previously useful for ERP and the like, but will be wanting in these new endeavors.
Thanks so much, I really appreciate the thoughts and perspective.
According to my investigation, millions of persons all over the world get the home loans from well known banks. Therefore, there is good chances to get a consolidation loan in all countries.