Work and Networks

Since many organizations have adopted or are considering adopting technologies to facilitate internal employee social networking, naturally research is beginning to surface as to the success of these internal networking projects, and that is also aimed at understanding the enablers and barriers in the technology adoption.

This week I came across an excellent study titled 'Motivations for Social Networking at Work' (PDF link) from IBM Research that discusses the internal IBM social network called Beehive. Thousands of IBM employees participate in the network that is meant to facilitate connection, sharing of interests, and very importantly in a large organization, expanding one's network beyond the immediate work group to colleagues that were previously 'invisible'.Flickr - e.phelt

The IBM Research group undertook an extensive study of participation and usage patterns to better understand the true impact of Beehive in the company, and while there are many interesting findings (I really recommend reading the entire study), I thought it very interesting to focus on a key question; Why do employees share information on the network?

The research revealed three main motivations for employees to participate in the social network that they termed, Caring, Climbing, and Campaigning.

Caring - Connecting with co-workers on a personal level was found to be the most commonly cited benefit to participating in the network.  Particularly in a large, global, distributed organization like IBM, where the opportunity for face-to-face contact with many colleagues is limited, this 'caring' element was critical. Connecting on a more personal level helps engenders affinity, which in turn leads to an increase in collaborative interactions.

Climbing - The researchers used the term 'climbing' to describe individual's motivation to participate in the network to further their career development and aspirations to 'climb' the corporate ladder. By active participation in specific technical topics, people could be seen as 'thought leaders' and could potentially leverage that position to land better assignments, more high-profile projects, and further their careers. In addition, similar to external social networks like Twitter and LinkedIn, simply making connections and building out one's network was seen as a benefit, and in fact necessary to long-term career growth.  In a large company it can be easy to get 'lost', but by actively participating and connecting in the internal social network some employees felt that this was a way to make a name for themselves.

Campaigning - Gathering support for projects and ideas, driving traffic to personal profiles, and project web pages was termed 'Campaigning' by the researchers.  Employees interested in using the social network for this purpose emphasized the ability to get their ideas more visibility with senior managers as an important factor and a major motivator to participate in Beehive. Most notably, the ability to connect with a wide range of influencers and potential supporters outside of the traditional, hierarchical structures was seen as an essential element of Beehive. Users could build coalitions of support for their ideas and projects in ways frankly impossible in the 'old' manner.

What does this all mean to organizations that are considering launching similar projects to give their internal networking projects the best chance for success?

Make it personal - The internal network can't be all business, all the time.  People (most anyway) want to share some personal information with their colleagues. The ability to connect personally has consistently been shown to be an important aspect of ongoing and productive workplace collaboration. Let folks post their favorite about their favorite sports teams, swap recipes, and upload personal profile pictures.  Don't feel like every post, comment, or contribution has to have the 'official' stamp of approval.

Individual value - Employees will only continue to participate and contribute if they see a direct personal and individual benefit. Whether it is easier access to information and expertise to help them solve their problems, or a way to build their reputations as leaders.  Employees will give of themselves and of their knowledge, but they have to see the benefits back to them as well.  Make sure that you build ways for employees to see how participation will truly help them in their current jobs, as well as in their career goals.

The Big Boys have to play - Many technology projects stall, or even fail due to lack of executive support.  Internal social networking projects are no different.  But in addition to the vague concept of 'support', these projects may also require active participation.  When employees see executives and directors as active participants and contributors on the network it can have a dramatic effect on overall enthusiasm and participation.  Just like the company holiday party where everyone wants a little face time with the boss, connecting with leaders and executives on the network can be a really important driver of the overall success of the project.

Definitely take a look at the entire piece from IBM Research, there are lots of excellent insights as to the motivations behind internal network participation.  We are getting past the point of wondering about the right technology to choose for these projects, and arriving at the much harder place of figuring how to make them work.

I would love to hear from you on what motivates or curtails participation in your organization's communities?

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?

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?

Social Network Analysis and HR

Note : I decided to include some content and discussion questions on Social Network Analysis in my HR Technology Class for the first time, and as I was writing the introduction to the topic, it seemed only sensible that I post it all here as well.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What is Social Network Analysis?

In the last 10 years or so scores of research papers and several books have been written on the subject of Social Network Analysis (SNA), which simply stated is the study of how information flows in organizations, with whom are employees most connected, to whom do they turn for information or advice, and identifies the roles individuals and departments play in the overall social network of the organization.

It is a way of quantifying the answers to questions like:

"When faced with a complex problem, who do you typically ask for assistance?"

"Who would you turn to when discussing a new or innovative project?"

 "Who are you most confident will give you accurate and truthful information?"

Why study Social Network Analysis?

Why is Social Network Analysis important for the HR professional?  To help answer that question, lets take a look at two charts.

First, the organization chart of a division of a typical company:

Source - Saba/HCI - Tapping the Power of Social Networking to Manage Talent

 And then the Social Network Analysis diagram for that same division. For example purposes, assume that this is an 'Information' network analysis. That is the connections in the diagram represent requests for information needed to perform a person's job requirements.

Source - Saba/HCI - Tapping the Power of Social Networking to Manage Talent

The key conclusion from the analysis of the SNA diagram is that while employee Mitchell occupies a relatively low position on the 'official' organization chart, she is central and highly connected in the SNA diagram. Many, many employees turn to her for information in the course of performing their jobs. Generally speaking, Mitchell is more more crucial to the overall efficiency and operations of the organization than say, Avery who is higher up on the organization chart, but on the periphery of the SNA diagram. This is just one, really simple example of the value and insight that you can gain from Social Network Analysis, but even this simple example is powerful, and helps illustrate the importance of SNA to the organization.

How can HR leverage Social Network Analysis?

There are several important aspects of Social Network Analysis that can be leveraged by Human Resources departments.

1. Organizational Design - If the SNA reveals a lack of communication and information flow due to too strict adherence on formal organizational hierarchy, some re-design may be in order to try and help facilitate more cross-organization communication

2. Succession Planning - SNA can assist tremendously in the identification of key employees, ones that either have a central, highly connected role in the network, or that serve as the primary or only 'connector' between different departments or offices. HR would likely want to take steps to insure that an adequate succession strategy is in place for these individuals, who are not necessarily 'high' on the official organization chart.

3. Job Description modification - sometimes SNA reveals certain individuals are 'too connected', meaning there are far too many demands on their time, and too many other folks in the organization looking for their insights.  Many times this leads to bottlenecks, that can disrupt the flow of information and ultimately detract from productivity. If this situation occurs, HR can assist in an intervention to modify the position roles and responsibilities, removing or re-aligning certain duties to promote a better balance, and hopefully reduce the information bottlenecks.

4. Training and Development - SNA can help identify and analyze the makeup of the networks of the organization's top performers.  It could be that the structure or patterns of high-performer networks could be replicated to others in the organization, potentially leading to increased overall personal and network effectiveness. HR can be instrumental in developing learning opportunities to help educate the workforce on these approaches that top performers utilize.

5. Internal Social Networking technology - Conducting a thorough SNA for an organization typically reveals areas that need improvement, either a need to increase collaboration and communication overall, desire for better inter-departmental processes, or more widespread organizational changes. Internal or corporate social networking technology is one tool that can be brought to bear to attempt to address these challenges.  Platforms ranging from internal microblogging, blogging, wikis, activity streaming, or more robust platforms that encompass all of these functions are becoming more common in organizations, and HR departments, armed with information from the SNA, should be in an excellent position to drive these efforts.

Additional Resources

If you are interested in reading more on Social Network Analysis, I recommend the following two books

The Hidden Power of Social Networks - Rob Cross and Andrew Parker

Driving Results Through Social Networks - Rob Cross and Robert Thomas

In addition, Jon Ingham at the Strategic HCM blog and Mark Bennett at Talented Apps frequently write on these topics.

The topic of Social Network Analysis, while not exactly new, is getting more and more attention, and new tools and technologies to assess and improve internal networks are emerging all the time.  It is an important area for the HR leader of today to become more familiar with, and to leverage in their quest to improve organizational performance.