A Great Big Blog Bundle

I am an absolute slacker in keeping up the blogroll on this site.

But, I am constantly finding and adding blogs to my subscriptions in Google Reader.  So while the 'links' on this site may list 10 or so blogs, I probably subscribe to 100 HR and Recruiting related blogs in Reader.

Thankfully, Google Reader now has an easy way to package feeds into a 'bundle' that can be easily shared in Reader, as well as emailed, or embedded in a blog or website.

This is also a great way to get co-workers, friends, or students started on reading blogs by creating for them an easy way to subscribe to a large number of blogs all at once.

The process is incredibly easy. 

1. In Google Reader, simply click on the link in the left sidebar titled 'Browse for Stuff'

2. Over on the right side of the screen click the 'Create a Bundle' button

3. Add a Title and Description for the Bundle

4. Then drag and drop feeds from your subscription pane over into the Bundle box, you can select individual feeds, or entire folders

5. When finished check 'Add to my Shared Items' to share this bundle inside Google Reader, then click 'Save'

6. Once saved, you can now share the bundle outside of Reader via e-mail, embedding, sharing the link directly, or via an OPML file.

7. To embed the file in your own blog, click the 'Create a Bundle Clip' link, then grab the embed code to copy/paste to your blog or website

Here is a Blog Bundle I set up from the Guests and Callers of the HR Happy Hour Show - Episode 10:

Anyone can now click on the 'Subscribe' link in the clip to be taken to Google Reader to subscribe to the bundle.

I have also set up a 'Great Big HR Blog Bundle' of all the HR Blogs in my Reader that can be found by clicking the 'Blogroll' link on the top of this site.  Now any time I add a new feed to the bundle in Reader, this site will also be automatically updated.

Feed Bundles are a great little feature in Reader and I hope you found this little tutorial helpful.

Who knows what around here?

A week or two back over on the PsyBlog a post called 'Why Groups Fail to Share Information Effectively' caught my attention. The post cited a 1985 research study that found that people trying to make decisions in groups spend most of their time telling each other things that everyone in the group already knows.

This of course leads to ineffective decision making, as people tend to withhold information known only to themselves that may hold the key to solving the problem and making the best decision.

One of the remedies that the PsyBlog piece offers is to make members of a group aware of each other's expertise, so they know (broadly speaking) what everyone else knows. In 1985, there were really no technologies available to organizations to support this 'expertise awareness'. 

Today the problem might be too many options that support finding and contacting 'expertise' in an organization. Software tools that support expertise locating and store employee talent profile Flickr- Omnosinformation seem to by multiplying by the week.

Here are just some of the options available

Core HRIS - This seems like a no-brainer, right?  All the necessary 'core' and demographic data for employee profiles should be a part of the HRIS. And job and assignment history, and potentially information on past performance and training might be in the HRIS. But most HRIS lack really detailed and granular information on competencies, projects an employee participated on, and thinks like interests, goals, and other unique and distinguishing attributes. After all, the main function of the HRIS is to make sure the employees are paid properly, administrative tasks like transfers, salary adjustments, and benefit enrollments can be entered efficiently.  The HRIS vendors do have plenty of opportunity in the talent profile area, but most have not focused heavily in this space.  Recently the Oracle HRMS 12.1 release was expected to include a more robust Talent Profile capability and this does give some indication of what is possible in the profile realm from the core HRIS vendors.

Talent Management Systems - employee profiles that are part of integrated talent management systems can give insight as to the expertise of employees by focusing on key elements like competencies, performance history, and training and development taken. Profiles built inside Talent Management systems might lack some 'core' data from the HRIS like educational background, resumes, and job history however. Some good examples can be seen from Halogen Software and SuccessFactors.

Corporate Social Networks - Software for internal corporate social networking from vendors like SelectMinds, Nobscot, and Jive all have the 'profile' as an essential element of the solution set. In most of these applications, the employees themselves create and maintain their own profiles, and the accuracy and reliability can vary from employee to employee.  The key in these types of tools is for the organization to arrive at the optimal blend of 'professional' vs. 'personal' data in the profile. Some research suggests that it is actually very important to allow and even encourage some levels of strictly personal content like hobbies and other outside interests as they can serve to make employees more approachable and provide a means for new members of the organization to make introductions to more seasoned employees.

Collaboration Platforms - Wikis from Socialtext, community platforms from Tomoye, and Neighborhood America make the employee profile accessible, searchable, and valuable for expertise locating. One of the strengths of housing employee profile data here is that skills, interests, and background can also be combined with specific information on projects the employee has worked on, links to work content (blog posts, wiki pages, white papers, etc.) and visibility to the employee's main connections in the network.

External Social Networks - some companies might consider leveraging external network information that employees have posted on LinkedIn or Facebook. The argument being that since such a rich repository of information exists on these networks that the organization could simply exploit what is already there, and work to enhance the corporate presence and engagement with employees there.

Connecting employees in search of information to the right colleagues that are likely to possess the needed answers as efficiently as possible is increasingly important in today's environment.

Lots of choices, and not easy for the organization to come to the best decision as to 'where' expertise and profile information should be maintained and leveraged.

Are you using expertise locators or talent profiles in your organization?  If so, what type of system are you using?

One discusson, three platforms, twenty peeps

Ok, so that was a bad title, this is really just a little story of how some social media tools facilitated some fantastic dialog and ongoing discussion on real business and Human Resources issues.

Last Friday night Shauna and I did a HR Happy Hour Show about Tattoos, Piercings, and Diversity in the workplace. The show was really a discussion on company culture, and how culture is developed and perpetuated in the workplace.  It was a really fun show, and I encourage you to listen to the archive here:

 Also since there is no live show tonight, this should give you your HR Happy Hour fix until next week.

The next morning, Saturday, the culture discussion continued on Twitter among myself, The HR Maven, and Tammi Colson. We kicked around the idea of culture being a top-down, leadership driven construct versus the notion of company culture really begin driven and enforced so to speak by employees themselves. It was a pretty interesting exchange to have early on a Saturday morning, but definitely very interesting and informative

On Tuesday I blogged here about Technology and Company Culture, mostly riffing the conversation from the show and form the impromptu Twitter chat on Saturday morning. The basic question I asked was can the application of collaboration technology actually drive a change in company culture.  There was some excellent comments and discussion on the post.

And of course the debate carried over to Twitter on Tuesday night, where Beth Carvin, Kevin Grossman, Robin Schooling and I debated the whole Technology and culture issue some more.

So by my count the final tally was one radio show with about ten active participants, one blog post with about eight commenters, and two separate twitter chats involving five more people.

All great discussions, all happening in 'off hours' (heck on Tuesday night I was grilling ribeyes and having a beer during the chat), and all enabled by various social media tools.

And by the way, just some of the 'titles' represented in the various discussions - CEO, VP of HR, HR Director, and VP of Marketing among others. Look the titles don't really mean all that much to me, but I mention them to underscore the point that social media in general and Twitter in particular is not all about inane blather about what people had for lunch.

I probably learned more about company culture in the last few days, from this diverse group of people that I had in the last five years.

Trust in Social Networks

I recently read a paper that studied a major organization's use of collaboration technologies (wikis, internal forums, and blogs) indicated the most commonly stated barrier to employee participation in knowledge sharing using online platforms is the fear that one's contributions were not going to be seen as relevant, important, or accurate.

If we accept that these fears are true barriers, then we must try and examine what causes them, and adopt strategies to mitigate them.

Why might an employee 'fear' contributing to an internal collaboration platform, or social network? Some potential reasons:

1. Confusion - I don't know what the heck to post on here anyway

2. Uncertainty - I'm not sure if this is even right information

3. Lack of confidence - I don't think anyone would care about this

4. Doubt - Can I even find important information here?

5. Pride - I really should know this answer myself, I can't ask such a dumb question

It seems that a lack of trust is the underlying cause of these issues.  But there are really two kinds of trust that factor in here, and it is important to understand the difference.Flickr - Salty Grease

One - I trust that you know what you are talking about

When I read your posts, comments, and answers to submitted questions, I have belief in your expertise and authority.  If I rely on your information to help make important decisions, I won't get burned.

Two - I trust that you won't make me look foolish for asking questions or posting information that is incorrect

Communities need a balance of those providing information with those seeking information. Seeking information in online collaboration platforms frequently involves explicit posting of questions, or leaving comments asking for more information or clarification on posted content. In an open, company-wide system this can certainly be intimidating for many employees that would prefer the 'protection' of phone calls or e-mails when seeking information.

Both types of trust have to be in place in an organization for a collaboration platform to take hold, grow, and thrive as an imortant resource.

So what steps can an organization take to help instill this trust, and enable participation in light of the barriers described above?

1. Confusion - I don't know what the heck to post on here anyway

Set some clear guidelines about what kinds of content are meant to be posted on the platform. Enlist some early 'power users' or champions to help seed content of the type and format that (at least initially) the platform is intended for.  Be very firm and clear about what content the organization deems inappropriate for the platform.

2. Uncertainty - I'm not sure if this is even right information

Encourage employees to share first, and question themselves seconds.  Let the community members themselves help guide newer, or less confident employees.  An environment where members comment, modify, and otherwise help to shape content is the key. Give employees the freedom to contribute 'part' of the answer, and not feel pressure to know everything on  given topic.

3. Lack of confidence - I don't think anyone would care about this

This is where a strong feedback loop inside the community is important. When it becomes a standard practice for others to comment on, enhance, and promote or rate contributions, you can start to mitigate the feeling of 'why would anyone care what I post'.

4. Doubt - Can I even find important information here?

Employees will only consult the community if they have success in finding either the information they seek directly, or a way to easily locate and connect with other members of the community likely to possess the needed expertise to help solve their issues.

5. Pride - I really should know this answer myself, I can't ask such a dumb question

Here is where Trust in the organization is really critical. Employees have to feel that content contributions can be made and questions asked in a 'safe' environment. That is not to say that incorrect or irrelevant information should be allowed to remain intact, but that criticism or comments be made in a positive and respectful manner. It is similar to a student that is reluctant to ask a question of the instructor in front of the entire class, but instead approaches the instructor privately, after class to ask the question.  Sure, the student may feel more comfortable, but the rest of the students do not get the benefit of both the question and the answer.  Better still, one of the other students may have had the answer for her in the first place.

In conclusion, organizations considering adopting tools for collaboration, or evaluating why their current projects are stagnant, need to take a very close look at these barriers to participation to see if they are present.  Selecting and deploying a tool is part of the solution, but creating and supporting an open, trusting environment to ensure its success is another matter entirely.

What methods might an organization use to encourage open participation in online employee communities?

Can Technology Change Culture?

On the last HR Happy Hour show we talked quite a bit about organizational culture, and how culture influences the acceptance of 'alternative' appearance and attitude.

The culture discussion carried on via Twitter the next day as well, and since I have to put a Technology spin on things, it led me to this question:

Can the application of technology, specifically technologies designed to increase employee communication and enhance collaboration actually change culture?Flickr - Pinheiro

Or does an organization's shared culture and their norms drive what technologies are adopted and how these technologies are used?

If you take the position that culture, values, mission and organizational priorities drive the design, content, and implementation of technology, then only those companies that already possess an open, transparent, and collaborative culture stand to benefit from the application of the literally hundreds of new technolgoy solutions meant to help foster these objectives.

But if you believe in the power of these tools, then potentially even the most closed, insular, and hierarchical companies can see benefits in their implementation.

So the question is, can collaboration and 'social' technology transform company culture?