Socialprise

  Apparently, the latest buzzword is yes – “socialprise.” That is social, as in we are humans and we interact to get work done. Seems intuitive, but it is not the first thing that comes to mind when social is used in business.

That may be a moot point as the technology to map workplace interactions and relationships is “now becoming part of standard enterprise computing systems” according to a NY Times piece MySpace Mind-Set Finally Shows Up at the Office – the ultimate mashup. Socialprise was coined by Insideview

But I think we need to make a careful distinction between “social networking” and “social network or organizational network analysis” (SNA/ONA) especially for business. Social networking platforms for business like VisiblePath (now part of Hoover’s) used by sales groups and law firms is useful in mining who knows who, what work was done with what client as people move through their normal trajectories. Insideview’s twist is to marry up search data or intelligence with social data. It certainly enhances the potential for connections if one looks around the existing network.

Social network analysis or organizational network analysis, the easier term for business leaders to accept, can be used very strategically to ferret out connections that might not naturally occur, or if they did would take years to emerge, particularly in networks outside of the organization. Call it the Outsideview.

This is not network analysis for business as usual. Instead think of mapping the intellectual property landscape to find the key contributors in a narrow field – the needle in the haystack. Boston Consulting Group did an intellectual property map for The Myelin Repair Foundation, reported in Mapping the Crowd a Business Week story. The challenge for MRF was to identify the few research scientists with the greatest number of relevant patents in order to accelerate research. The result was a network visualization allowing managers to see both opportunities and key centers or nodes of research they might not have found for years.

Touch Graph software was most likely used by BCG as they openly acknowledge creating solutions for clients – Interpublic Group -advertising, Newforth – M&A, and the British Natural History Museum – biological networks.

As social networking tools become a standard feature of enterprise computing systems for day to day business, they will lose their competitive advantage like all other tools. However to understand why a particular product or service may not have launched as well as expected, or to capitalize on macro network opportunities for technical and science initiatives, a standard platform may not be the optimal approach. Unique ONA applications will still have their place in the socialprise.

~Victoria G. Axelrod

Comments

[Bill Anderson]

Victoria, I want to think a bit about your comment, "As social networking tools become a standard feature of enterprise computing systems for day to day business, they will lose their competitive advantage like all other tools."

I think you are right that some obvious advantages will be lost, or, maybe more correctly, shared by everyone. But I do wonder if our ability to now see our networks and to map and visualize different aspects will actually change how we approach social interaction.

I think that those who can use empirical data to help with decisions have an advantage. Not every organization can do this.

But socially I worry that even with our ability to see ourselves, our friends, and their friends, we're not really changing how we behave or how we see each other. To be blunt: our maps show how we are inter-related and inter-dependent. Our culture ignores this -- being independent is more valued than being inter-dependent. I might be wrong here; I'm expressing a concern. I don't have data other than my own experience to support it.

-Bill

[Victoria]

Bill,

I am in complete agreement with you on people's inability to change behavior by using automated SNA/ONA tools alone. Some folks may reach a level of awarness to explore or understand their capacity to connect, others will not. These platforms are about transactions, why I used "business as usual." Concur with the US in particular being so "individualistic" - nice research project "is there a national culture differentiator in network formation and success"?

To your point "to change how we behave and how we see each other" takes more than an ONA map. It is a good start, but a good human dynamics workshop is the follow-up intervention for personal change in the context of the business. Values in action.

Thanks for your clarity.

Victoria

[Cheryl]

Thanks for the intersting links, Victoria. I too bumped up against the phrase "...will lose their competitive advantage like all other tools".
Like Bill, I am not convinced that it is a tool that gives people the competitive advantage. Surely it is the learning and application of that learning (i.e. behaviour and actions) that make the difference. You can give people the best tool in the world and it won't make a scrap of difference if it isn't integrated into a strategy to adopt new behaviours or apply the learning.
Just like all those interesting "best/good practice case studies" that provide insights but change nothing for the reader and their business.

[Victoria]

Cheryl,

Agree, agree. The tools are given all the press, but we know people are the real competitive advantage.

Having been a senior vice president and head of global best practices for the American Management Association I found that it was not the "best practice" but rather the principle that practice demonstrated that helped a business change. The principle of constructive feedback has a hundred "best practices" - the way your company wishes to practice (behave)is what counts.

Thanks for you thoughts.

Victoria