△ MENU/TOP △

Holtz Communications + Technology

Shel Holtz
Communicating at the Intersection of Business and Technology
SearchClose Icon

Business leaders are more enthusiastic about social media than IT

A couple weeks back, the Economist Intelligence Unit reported the results of a study that revealed 80% of companies believe the range of technologies that fall under the Web 2.0 label can lead to improvements in their businesses. Since then, a couple companies have announced significant initiatives.

On last Thursday’s “Hobson & Holtz Report,” I talked about Accenture’s efforts to remake the consulting firm’s intranet. The company has already unveiled a Facebook-like employee network and is adding wikis, employee bookmarking (a la del.icio.us), an internal video discovery and sharing service like YouTube, and a Second Life-like environment for employee training.

Now, Wells Fargo is the latest to announce the implementation of these technologies as a means of achieving business goals. And it’s pretty much the same set of tools Accenture employed, according to an article in CMP’s “Wall Street & Technology.” These tools are being applied both internally and externally, as a means of communicating with customers.

“We were building tools to share information inside the company, but they were always these very structured things,” says Steve Ellis, EVP of Wells Fargo’s wholesale solutions group. “A blog is informal—a great way to get away from the corporate thing and let people inside our heads.” The company’s hundreds of blogs have become the most-read nonbanking pages on Wells Fargo’s site. A few groups within the company have even started experimenting with video blogs. Further, the EVP of the bank’s Internet services group holds weekly office hours for team members to discuss new ideas submitted to a wiki.

Despite banking’s obsession with numbers, Ellis hasn’t had to produce a spreadsheet to justify the use of these tools. “I can just go out and tell our boss I know we’ll be better off,” he said, noting that it’s easy to see the value of technologies like RSS, which let employees easily tailor the content they receive so they read “news that matters most to them on the job.”

An InformationWeek survey of IT pros didn’t reveal the same enthusiasm as the Economist Intelligence Unit survey, which which focused its queries on senior executives, not technology pros. Among IT leaders, more than half were skeptical of social media tools; some were amenable to giving them a try but remained cautious. More than 50% of the companies resonding to the survey don’t use blogs, and 41% have no wikis. Among IT concerns: security, ROI, and worries that their staffs don’t have the skills required to “implement and integrate” the tools.

At Wells Fargo, it’s Ellis—EVP of the wholesale solutions group—driving Web 2.0 solutions, while an EVP of an Internet team remains unconvinced, according to the “Wall Street & Technology” article.

It’s interesting, isn’t it, that business leaders seem to have more enthusiasm for social media applications as business tools than their peers in IT. It should serve as a reminder that IT is a service function that should implement business solutions identified by business leaders.  It remindes me of a terrific article from the Harvard Business Review, “Six IT Decisions Your IT People Shouldn’t Make:”

The first three relate to strategy: How much should we spend on IT? Which business processes should receive our IT dollars? Which IT capabilities need to be companywide? The second three relate to execution: How good do our IT services really need to be? Which security and privacy risks will we accept? Whom do we blame if an IT initiative fails?

The article, from 2002, costs only $6 to retrieve as a PDF download.

Comments
  • 1.Shel,

    We just launched the first social networking site for internal communicators and PR pros.

    It's called http://www.myragan.com and we're beta testing it now---and at next week's corporate communicator's conference.

    We're still working out some bugs, but I would welcome any of your readers who want to join.

    Mark

    Mark Ragan | April 2007 | Chicago

  • 2.Shel, great post. Yesterday I was listening to you talk about this on FIR. I love the idea of employees using a Facebook-like social site to share knowledge etc. However, I agree that IT sometimes holds a different mindset when it comes to social media. When I work with my clients, they are often enthusiastic about blogs, RSS, wikis, podcasts, etc., but then are told by IT that they have to wait 18 months for implementation. Or worse, that it cannot be done at all. In my former life, I worked in IT as a systems analyst. I have to admit that some IT people enjoy the role of gatekeeper. Others are so overworked that they just don't want to add anything to their overly full plate. That's an over-simplification, but you get the idea!

    Donna Papacosta | April 2007 | Toronto

  • 3.Thanks Shel. Very useful for some projects I'm working on at the moment. Cheers from the UK.

    Will McInnes | April 2007 | UK

  • 4.At EarthLink, we are looking to expand our internal employee directory to give it more of a facebook social network feel. Among the features, we are hoping to include more tags to make the search function more robust, maps to better find an employee's location, information about the employees' objectives and job descriptions as well as personal information and pictures. It is my hope that this effort will raise the comfort level for social networks and build a sense of comraderie.

    The challenge is not cost or even bandwidth. And ROI issues are not a concern. It is setting a policy of acceptable use. Even though employees will have greater freedom and flexiblity on their personal pages, we are all part of a closed community. We have to make sure that posted material reflects the values of our community, and we take into account rules governing the workplace. I know rules seem like heresy in the blogosphere, but I think is best to go slowly and build consensus from both management and rank and file.

    Dan Greenfield | April 2007 | Atlanta

  • 5.Shel -

    While I know that there are IT people out there that do like their technology muscle, it's not always their excitement about the product that causes their hesitancy.

    Summing up IT as "a service function that should implement business solutions identified by business leaders" is devastatingly outdated. That is everything we are not. It's like saying that corporate communications stops at the company newsletter.

    We are an integral part of every business decision that can be made. Just because management gets on the cool train with the latest hippest idea, does not mean that we have to buy the same ticket. It is our job, it is our duty to look at all aspects of how any new idea might affect the business, the company as a whole.

    How many man hours will be put into this idea? Besides IT, what departments would be involved in bringing the project to fruition? Realistically, what cost is involved? Can the idea peacefully co-exist on existing hardware, or will purchases be involved? Do we have the programmers necessary to make this happen or do we need to hire? What security risks are involved? What server space is involved? How many man hours will be involved in not only developing this idea, but testing and re-testing it? What other projects are in the wings that might need to get done before we can attempt something like this? (i.e. hardware or OS upgrades) What other projects are already in the hopper and using up all of our time? Does this ultimately fall within the policy of acceptable use we already have in place? What training will be involved once the plan is implemented? Who will do that training, write that documentation? Do we have the manpower to support this idea once it's in production? How will changes happen? Who can determine what changes need to take place? The list is long and goes on and on, and never ends, even when the project is live. Is management answering or even asking these questions?

    And frankly, some business solutions are poor ideas. Very poor ideas. I have had the cool train come to my door many, many times blowing the whistle, full of steam. In the end, the idea was not a cost-effective solution. Hell, it wasn't even a smart, business-minded solution. And I pooh-poohed it whole-heartedly. But it did get me thinking about different ways to fill that void, that need in our business. And in the end we worked together to find a way to make everyone happy.

    While I completely respect and value your charge into using all technology mediums to their fullest potential, none of what you do or what any company does, would be possible without geeks - not providing a service - but working with you, around the clock to develop, maintain, and protect you, your content, and your business.

    Rebecca Crum | May 2007

  • 6.God Rebecca,
    what a typical gatekeeper you prove to be with your comments. Nuff said. Roadblock...gatekeeper. As if you know ultimately what is best for HR, Marketing, PR, Communications...
    Not that you don't know what's best from a security, infrastructure, overall web strategy POV...but don't assume that Shel or any of the rest of us "evangelists" in technology for the betterment of a particular business unit...namely communications, are "charging" into using all technology mediums to their fullest potential" as you state.

    The beauty of today's web environment is the devaluation of IT professionals like yourself. Silos can operate independently yet maintain a corporate "brand". Web content management is no longer a "mystery." Geeks you say. You're not as mysterious or valuable as you once were...a Manager or Director-level professional in a non-technical business unit can know manage their own initiatives and content without your involvement.

    Throw back the black curtain...the Wizard is an old white guy with a booming voice...

    Dee Rambeau | May 2007 | Denver, CO

  • 7.Dee - please don't assume you know anything about me. Devaluate me? Please. What's so bad about saying you are charging into using technology mediums to their fullest potential? You are. And I said I respect that. My users have frequently come to me with ideas and mediums that I didn't even know about.

    I never said I ultimately know what's best for any of those departments. What I said was that I absolutely do know what's best to implement the programs and ideas those departments may be developing from every standpoint of IT, including the parts they haven't even considered. Why do you purport to know what's best from an IT standpoint? If I implemented everything cool I ever read in a tech mag or saw at a tech show, my company would be broke and I would be working 120 hour weeks.

    I won't stoop to your level of turning this into a personal attack...I suggest you re-read my post with an open mind from a standpoint of understanding and trying to get two sides of the playing field to work together.

    Mysterious? Who ever said we were? Geeks aren't valuable? What is wrong with you that you are responding to my post with such malice?

    Rebecca | June 2007

  • 8.Rebecca, I think you've made some inaccurate assumptions about communications as a function. No, we don't just produce newsletters, but we align our work directly with organizational strategy and do not make unilateral business decisions. We counsel organizations and their leaders on the approach to take, but don't force anybody.

    What irks me about some (and I emphasize, SOME) IT departments is that they make these unilateral decisions without the benefit of a business ROI or cost-benefit exercise. I cannot tell you how many times I've heard that an IT department blocked access to content that includes material employees need, or rejected an approach because of cost without any effort to determine if the cost was justified by the return on the investment.

    Again, I note that this far from ALL IT departments, but they are out there causing irreperable harm to their organizations.

    I work extremely well with IT departments and enjoy it, most of the time. But IT is still a function that exists to support the IT needs of the business and needs to be aligned with business goals, not function as a feifdom with absolute power...and I've experienced IT departments that do just that.

    And yes, geeks are invaluable to organizations, inside IT and out.

    Shel Holtz | June 2007 | Concord, CA

  • 9.I'm not sure where I ever said I had any assumptions about what communications is or isn't. I took what I believed to be an inaccurate assumption about IT and compared it to an inaccurate assumption about what corporate communications is: newsletters. I haven't really talked about communications at all, I focused on IT and how IT people think about new projects and proposals.

    I completely see your point (and rightly so, you would know) about what corporate communications is within an organization.

    I don't believe that you don't get along with IT and that you don't work well with them or that you think they are invaluable. None of that was directed to you. My previous response was to Dee, who did say those things.

    It is truly unfortunate, but I know that there are IT people out there like you describe. Bad people exist in every aspect of business...bad CEO's, bad speech writers, bad IT, bad communicators, bad accountants...my hope is that no bad seed (or seeds, or whole departments of seeds I would like to sweep under the rug) represents the entire group. I feel you have a real voice here, a lot of people read what you write and take it to heart. So when you focus on IT as a "business service only" repeatedly here and on myragan, I feel you're fanning the flames of misconception rather than looking at it as an opportunity to learn more about what IT actually does, can do, and how the good ones view their jobs and their role within the larger business picture.

    rebecca | June 2007

Comment Form

« Back