Microsoft and Microblogging

This week Microsoft announced what they call a 'concept test' of an enterprise microblogging service that they call OfficeTalk.  In this concept test, Microsoft invites a limited number of organizations to participate in testing, and to work with Microsoft to provide recommendations and feedback.

OfficeTalk is a product that has been in internal pilot at Microsoft and is developed by OfficeLabs, the Microsoft lab for testing internally developed ideas. OfficeLabs asks participants to view these experiments as 'Concept Cars', not necessarily intended or promised to become 'real' products, but ones that certainly offer a glimpse at what the massive organization is experimenting with, and potentially might one day market, or as in the case of OfficeTalk incorporate into existing products and platforms.

Microsoft did share a few screen captures of OfficeTalk, the basic features will certainly be familiar to anyone that has used Twitter, or Yammer, the most popular microblogging service designed for internal corporate use.

OfficeTalk users create personal profiles, 'follow' other users, and the Twitter conventions of mentions and tags seem to be present as well.  Microsoft has also built in the ability to see threaded conversations and to shorten URLs in updates.

On the surface the features of OfficeTalk are entirely familiar, and even a bit pedestrian.  Yammer and other similar services like Socialcast and Obayoo have been out for quite some time now offering all of these features and more.

But none of the existing players in enterprise microblogging can compare to the reach, familiarity, and development muscle of Microsoft. One can easily see the potential for Microsoft to integrate OfficeTalk into Sharepoint, Outlook, or Office, and almost immediately become the dominant player in the still very new market for enterprise microblogging.

Whether or not Microsoft actively pursues this market, and eventually releases OfficeTalk remains to be seen, but I think the ability for the service to one day integrate with the existing installed base of MS Office, and to also be installed on-premise (still important to many IT shops), could position this kind of service as a significant and viable competitor in the enterprise microblogging space.

Just like SAP, which is also experimenting with new forms of collaboration capabilities, (see it's recently renamed StreamWork application), Microsoft may be late to the enterprise microblogging and collaboration party, but it probably should not yet be entirely dismissed as having missed its chance to join the fun.

Missing the Health Care debate

Some folks that know me, or follow me on Twitter or Facebook know by now that my Dad has been in the hospital for what is now going on 13 days. 

It started, as many of these kind of cases do I have learned, with what seemed to be a cold, then a bad cold, then a fall at home, then a call to 911, and finally a diagnosis of pneumonia (along with some other assorted issues that have popped up).

As this process has unfolded, his condition has gone up and down, probably a bit more down, as additional issues and complications have arisen in the past few days. In the course of his care, the doctors (and there have been at least five, specialists for infectious diseases, neurology, endocrinology, cardiology, and  psychiatry), and nurses have been very professional and have done their best to help both my Dad and us stay informed of what is going on in what has proven to be a complex, challenging case.

And as the number of doctors, nurses, clinicians, specialists, and other professionals has multiplied, so have the number and frequency of tests, procedures, and medications that have been involved in his care.  There have been really too many to count among the MRIs, CT scans, X-rays, blood tests, and more in the last 13 days. In truth, my Dad's case has been extremely complex, and at times they have not been completely sure what is going on, and as such, several of the tests have been perhaps a bit speculative.

But as this process continues on, I can't help but wonder a few things:

One - had my Dad not had health insurance coverage in the form of some combination of Medicare and insurance from his former employer, just exactly how would all of this played out?  Would any of the decisions and approaches to his treatment actually been any different? Does everyone in his situation get the same comprehensive, and I am sure incredibly expensive care?

Two - Is it entirely normal and expected that the actual costs of treatment are really never discussed with the patient and family?  As each test, procedure, medication, etc. have been ordered, they have been discussed with us in detail.  The goals, steps, process, potential complications are all carefully described.  But not one time has the subject of cost ever been discussed.  Should the cost of care, of each additional test or procedure be a part of the decision making process?  I imagine that the Doctors or the hospital administrators take the costs into account, but to have what has amounted to zero discussion of cost between service provider and service recipient is certainly unusual (at least to me).

Three - These last two weeks, as the US health care reform debate, compromise, and vote has played out on the news, in the blogs, and in social networking, most of the (limited) information that I saw was primarily focused on the macro level.  The many millions of uninsured people that would now get coverage, or depending on which cable news network you prefer, the billions of dollars that would be saved, or squandered as a result of these reforms.  Big picture discussion on percentage of GDP and national obesity rates.

But to me, what is clear as a result of what my Dad and our family is going through, is that any talk of health care reform really starts and stops at the micro level. It is about what happens when Dad or Grandma gets sick and needs intensive, expensive care, (and rehab). It is about what happens if the new baby is born weeks and weeks early.  It is about making a decision, as many people do, to stick it out in a dead-end and soul crushing job in order to cling on to a marginally decent benefits plan, because your spouse has been sick for a long time, the kind of sick that insurance types like to call a 'pre-existing condition'.

I have been really distracted the last two weeks, talking about ventilators, CT scans, catheters, spinal taps, and blood work.  So perhaps I simply have not had the time or attention to think about the big picture, and what these reforms mean to the country, the economy, the workforce, and the next generation. For me, at least right now, these concepts are too vague, elusive, and certainly contentious to fully grasp. 

Right now, for me, the only thing in 'reform' that I care about, is whether reform will affect my Dad's ability (and you can insert your own loved one's here), to get the needed treatment, and walk out of the hospital one day soon.

And I suppose any reform that makes that kind of positive outcome more likely for my Dad, and your Mom, Grandpa, daughter, husband, or friend, is the kind that we can all support. 

The Culture Show - Recap

Last night on a fun and engaging HR Happy Hour show, Charee Klimek from Vocii, and Meghan M. Biro from TalentCulture joined us to discuss organizational or company culture; what it means, why is it important, and how companies and candidates can better understand and leverage culture.

If you missed the show, I encourage you to listen to the replay here:

 

The show brought up quite a few interesting topics, and honestly one hour probably was not enough to cover such a wide-ranging, slightly ambiguous, and diverse subject such as company culture.

For me, a few points really resonated:

One - There has never been more of an opportunity for organizations to communicate the message of what they believe in, how they see themselves, and the kinds of attitudes, behaviors, and values that the people that inhabit the organization exhibit, and by extension what types of people would be good candidates in the future. With all the free and low-cost tools and mechanisms available to organizations, if your message is not getting out the way you desire, either you simply don't care, or you are not really trying hard enough.

Two - Culture is not just about having a cool company blog, or a CEO that likes to Tweet.  There actually were great company cultures and places to work at before Zappos came along, (I am not sure anyone actually said that in the show, but I think it is true).  Culture is woven into the everything the organization does, from what products and services it offers, to the way it deals with its stakeholders, even to the way it is reflected in its physical surroundings, the way it treats the environment, the community, and even the world at large.

Three - And thanks to Mary Ellen Slayter from SmartBrief from the SHRM VIP Tweetup in Washington, we learned that SHRM (at least at this week's Legal-themed event) is doing a solid job promoting fear, restraint, and a firm grip on the status quo with respect to the use of social media.  Rather than rehash it all here, go check out Mark Stelzner's blog for his take.

Thanks once again to Charee and Meghan and all who called, listened, and tweeted!

What wastes more time at work than March Madness?

Today is the start of March Madness, otherwise known as the NCAA Men's Basketball Championship tournament.

And in the grand tradition of lazy editorial calendars everywhere, we see a slew of articles about the 'cost' to organizations in terms of lost productivity from employees filling out brackets, watching the live stream on the internet, and taking long lunches to watch the games.

Sure, some time will be 'wasted' by employees talking, watching, and Horrors! - betting on the games, but no more than is wasted every day by scores of other things. 

So in that spirit, my friend and fellow blogger Trish McFarlane and I have come up with our 'Top Ten List' of things that waste more time and suck more productivity at work than a few days of March Madness can ever match.

So here we go:

The Top Ten things that waste more time at work than March Madness:

10. Paper Jam!

9. 'I'm not sure, just do a search for it on the company intranet'

8. Great news! We are doing an off site team building day at a Ropes Course!

7. Time to upgrade the ERP system - ask me for that report again in 9 months

6. I can't print.  Can you print? I can't print. Is the network down?

Jump on over to the HR Ringleader blog to see items five though one.

Good luck with your brackets!

Now get back to work.

Are you telling a story, or acting in one?

Our man Tiger needless to say, has been in all kinds of trouble, and as the tales of his escapades kept multiplying, his endorsement contracts from some of America's top brands (Gillette, Accenture, Gatorade) starting dropping like the 12-foot birdie putts we are used to seeing him sink. Now that he is coming back to golf, I am sure we will see more and more of him in the coming weeks.Flickr - ATIS547

Tiger may or may not shave with a Gillette razor, never did any strategic or technology consulting, and while he might drink Gatorade, only the most naive among us would conclude that if we too drink Gatorade like Tiger we could become golf champions.

In this new world where everyone's story is easy to share, and our interaction with products, services, and organizations is often laid bare in many cases for the free discovery of anyone that may be interested, (and many who aren't), would many people or organizations care what sports drink Tiger claimed to rely on, or what style of razor he prefers?

For mega-celebrity endorsers, who really believes that the pitch, or the story they are sharing is truly their story that they are telling? Isn't it really just the corporations' story (in the form of an endorsement) that Tiger, or the supermodel or actress pitching do it yourself hair color are simply acting?

But using celebrity endorsers is such a time-honored tradition in advertising and brand building it is still seen as safe, and somehow, despite what common sense would suggest (seriously have you ever chosen a product or service based on a celebrity endorsement?), the expensive practice continues seemingly unabated.

Highly paid and disconnected people, acting in a story crafted by corporations, ad agencies, PR firms, whoever, instead of real, genuine, relatable people telling a story.

I think this same distinction can be made in the communications and messaging that organizations use in their internal settings, or recruiters use when selling the organization to candidates, or even much of the blogging, tweeting, Facebooking many of us engage in every day.

Telling a story is real, authentic, has a kind of history and context, and lets the message take precedence.  Acting a story is kind of shallow, flat, and is mostly more about the actor than the story.

I don't know that there is much of a point to this post, having just re-read it.

Perhaps just this, that I should spend more time telling stories, and less time acting.