Running at a different pace

Running at a different pace

Been involved in quite a few discussions on how PMO functions in companies use O365 to change the way they run projects. Here is a brief guide (including the addition of some new capabilities) looking at how other companies have used O365 to change the way they run and deliver projects. Generally you would use:

PMO / Project Working
– O365 Groups – individual project team working (shared calendars, Planner, OneNotes etc)
– Teams – persistent chat channel for project teams (linked to O365 Groups – Tip: create the O365 Group first and then link the Team to the group.
– SharePoint Online site – PMO top level site bringing all activities together
– Power BI – creating dashboards from the PMO level

Project Communications / Change for ‘end user’
– Yammer – for enterprise wide awareness, feedback, focus groups, promotion
– Delve / Yammer – finding and recruiting informal advocates for your awareness activities
– Delve – get project members to blog about project progress (or use Yammer)
– Delve – create some promotional ‘boards’ that can be shared enterprise wide
– Forms (new) creating surveys, feedback channels for focus groups / enterprise wide initiatives
– Sway – creating engaging presentations / collateral for digital presentations
– SharePoint Communication Site (new) – formal enterprise wide communication / access to collateral

Advertisements

Big Data on the way YOU work

Big Data on the way YOU work

Totally by accident, something popped up on LinkedIn this morning which turns out was a glorified advert for an IoT/PowerBI dashboard solution which tracks employee performance in relationship to their environment.

http://sapience.net/enterprise/

Personally (and professionally) these types of ‘behaviour’ tracking tools fascinate me. Tech companies spend millions developing capabilities to help us work better and organisations spend millions deploying them but the expected benefits never materialise. There is a big discussion on the whole change / adoption approaches taken by organisations in nurturing the workforce but these types of ‘employee performance’ tools begin to move us to the next steps by exploring the way we as individuals / organisations work and eventually providing solutions, not just around technology but also on behaviours and environment.

Tools like those mentioned in the article above, and others such as Microsoft My Analytics, can eventually tell us how much time we spend on email, in meetings, creating documents, extent of network etc. It could also look at enterprise wise behaviours – i.e. if you project team are spending most of their days in meetings you may have a cultural issue around decision making; if managers are spending too much time in hastily arranged meetings and email there may be a fire-fighting, hero and devolution issue in the culture; if a leader’s network doesn’t extend far enough across the organisation there may be an engagement issue and so on.

So, technology that tracks the way you work and can present remedies from both an individual and an organisation context can be a very valuable capability for companies undergoing digital transformation. You sense its part of the reasoning that companies such as Microsoft are buying training and learning components and LinkedIn so they can begin to link ways of working to job families, skill sets, organisation culture and beyond. It will begin to dramatically change the way organisations look at design, recruitment, technology and the physical environment.

Still a future for Yammer despite Skype Teams

Still a future for Yammer despite Skype Teams

Microsoft are now looking to compete with Slack.

http://www.zdnet.com/article/microsoft-to-beef-up-skypes-team-collaboration-capabilities-to-take-on-slack/

In the article it mentions how they fail to see what the future of Yammer would be and they struggle to see where it fits in. In my eyes they have completely different capabilities.

Yammer is about networking, relationship and community building. It enables discovery, innovation, crowdsourcing and engagement that potentially involves hundreds and thousands of colleagues.

You would struggle to do that with Slack or Skype teams. The key word here is teams. Skype Teams would work well with defined, identifiable colleagues – in essence building around existing hierarchy and structures.

With Yammer you discover and network with people and groups you never knew existed before, creating new ways of working through the diversity that can be attracted through discover.

Something got me started

Something got me started

Like this article which shows the important of building momentum in driving the adoption programme.

People love to be associated with something when they garner a sense that things are happening (remember the Dancing Man) – link below.

So if you’ve deployed the technology and got little response from your colleagues then it’s time to build momentum.

In practical language that means working with some potentially interested colleagues to develop use cases – not abstracts but real ones that are helping to solve their problems and getting work done.

It’s part of a ‘social / word of mouth’ approach that begins adoption through networks and communities rather than larger formal approaches.

http://www.cmswire.com/digital-workplace/how-momentum-drives-social-collaboration/?utm_source=cmswire.com&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=cm&utm_content=nl-daily-160707&mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiWTJWaFpqSTFOVE0zTjJJMSIsInQiOiJMOHJFMEpPams1dHZ1aUpPQU5hazNLcHk0VW1uQ2xEN2JBMmJKejg3ZVk3SDUyblNjMzZSM3lxcWNOWldJSWZ2dVd6ZDIwd1N4Y2d5RDlHb1RMVHFNdDllWVZpMlZpcEE1NzhaZUFuRFhtRT0ifQ%3D%3D

People love to be associated with something when they garner a sense that things are happening (remember the Dancing Man) – link below.

So if you’ve deployed the technology and got little response from your colleagues then it’s time to build momentum.

In practical language that means working with some potentially interested colleagues to develop use cases – not abstracts but real ones that are helping to solve their problems and getting work done.

It’s part of a ‘social / word of mouth’ approach that begins adoption through networks and communities rather than larger formal approaches.

http://ed.ted.com/on/IgslePtt#review

Finding the right trigger for success

Finding the right trigger for success

I’ve just been reading some conversations in one of the Linkedin Change Management groups I belong to. The conversation is around why organisations are still struggling to get Yammer adopted.

It still amazes me that in 2016 many organisations are struggling to get value from social software despite a reliable ‘recipe’ now being known.

All consultancies both large and small have a framework which is pitched to potential clients that will deliver various degrees of success – but success nevertheless.

Any programme / project manager with an element of common sense could also scan the internet and get a reliable formula to get those engagement / value rates above 55-60% (70% looks to be the saturation point) rather than languishing in the 20%.

Many of the previous comments have articulated the recipe for success, or lack of it, such as…  ‘not aligning to business strategy, little governance, poor planning, wrong use cases at the wrong time, treating change like a IT change programme rather than behavioural change etc. etc. etc.

A couple of areas I would raise which compounds the agony of low adoption / value:

Few of the owners of these platforms appear to be appraised on garnering value. As long as it ‘works’ from a technical perspective the responsibility appears to stop there.

Also too many project managers run traditional change programmes which deliver the rational reason to use the platform, tell them what to do, the how and why. Few look to go further and try to deliver the emotional reasons, activate leaders, shift mind-sets and behaviours or align the formal organisation. And very, very few actually work on finding the ‘triggers’ that will give people the motivation to change.

However, I know Microsoft (and others) are realising that they need to ‘raise their gam’ in terms of preaching ‘change management’ as a key element of garnering business value. Also how that change management is delivered (more open, transparent, inclusive, cross boundary etc.) is also something that needs to be promoted further.

 

However, I know Microsoft (and others) are realising that they need to ‘raise their gam’ in terms of preaching ‘change management’ as a key element of garnering business value. Also how that change management is delivered (more open, transparent, inclusive, cross boundary etc.) is also something that needs to be promoted further.

 

Engagement is ‘nice’ but democracy provides the value

Engagement is ‘nice’ but democracy provides the value

I sense we are still in the early stages of how ‘social ways of working’ can create value. Communications, engagement and knowledge sharing are early ‘adopters’ of ‘social’ but the internal audience’s affection with tools may eventually fade and move on to alternative channels. The real value from these ‘social’ tools comes when we explore how to utilise them for innovation, crowdsourcing, validation and creating more open, transparent and democratic structures within organisations.

By using collaboration and open business tools like Jive and O365 (Yammer) the chance to develop new ways of working is immense. Rapid validation of innovation and and organisational structures are enticing but the opportunity to bring democratic approaches into areas such as product development, strategy and governance can truly change the way colleagues, suppliers, customers and leaders can develop organisations for the future rather than bleak rigid corporations built on ‘war-like’ structures and sound bites.

Pandaemonium

Pandaemonium
716

 

I’m currently reading ‘Pandaemonium 1660-1886: The Coming of the Machine as Seen by Contemporary Observers’ (by Humphrey Jennings, co-founder of the Mass Observation movement of the 1930s)  

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Pandaemonium-1660-1886-Machine-Contemporary-Observers…

It fascinates me to compare the benefits and dangers of the industrial revolution with today’s digital revolution.

Pandaemonium collects texts taken from letters, diaries, literature, scientific journals and reports of the time, and traces the development of the machine age in Britain. Covering the years between 1660 and 1886, it offers a rich tapestry of human experience, from eyewitness reports of the Luddite Riots and the Peterloo Massacre to more intimate accounts of child labour, Utopian communities, the desecration of the natural world, ground-breaking scientific experiments, and the coming of the railways. Pandomonium was originally published in 1985, and in 2012 it was the inspiration behind Danny Boyle’s Opening Ceremony for the London Olympic Games.

Interestingly (for me anyway) is the book is divided into 4 sections:

 Observations and reports

  • Exploitation
  • Revolution
  • Confusion

I spend much of my time looking at how organisations introduce and sustain knowledge sharing, collaboration and communication technology and associated behaviours.  

If we get adoption and adaption right these are disruptive technologies that can assist in changing the nature of the way colleagues engage, communicate, share, learn, nurture and collaborate with each other.

If we get adoption and adaption wrong organisations, and the people / networks within them, go through the trials and pains articulated in the chapter titles above (quick reality check – I’m not comparing the suffering of the industrial revolution with that of an employee who can’t work out the # function on their enterprise social network).

We have seen the observations and reports of how a more open and transparent environment can enhance both employees and organisations.

We are at the exploitation stage where there is a mad rush to social without the analysis or change management processes needed to create the value.

We will soon have the revolution as organisations and employees fight, struggle, resist or forge ahead in the use and value of this new way of working. Many organisations will embrace, while many will fail to get value and asset it’s the technology and / or culture that is the issue.

For those that forge ahead confusion will be created if we lose interest in the on-going stewardship of these tools and behaviours and at worst we see employees burdened with another deafening channel in an already noisy eco-system or technology.