Enterprise 2.0 … More Hierarchy or Less Hierarchy ?

Like it or not, successful deployment of enterprise 2.0 will have to come from the top. “Walking the talk stuff” too. Far too much wishful thinking on this whole matter. Coming from a somewhat techie background, the migration or “cutover” will require a compatibility mode some pre-work, a rollback and a “move forward” plan. Not there yet. Did I forget a number of lab trials and pilots?

Jon,

This is a great post, and an issue that’s critical to the growth of Enterprise 2.0. A recent article on BusinessWeek.com looking at a McKinsey survey of Web 2.0 use in global companies finished with this statement, “It’s likely company usage will evolve as employees age. Baby boomers, who still make up the majority of the workforce, are used to picking up the phone. That will change as millennials, the youngest workers who are now in their teens and early 20s and schooled in instant messaging and blogging, become a growing force.” (http://www.businessweek.com/innovate/content/apr2007/id20070417_670567.htm?chan=technology_technology+index+page_top+stories)

I wrote about this recently on the Atlassian blog, in reaction to a debate about the potential impact of Enterprise 2.0 on organizations, and suggested that for the millennial generation these tools are already a given. This fact alone will spur their use in organizations even more, as the debate shifts from a focus on the tools and whether or not to use them to a deeper focus on the new types of information they enable and provide. (http://blogs.atlassian.com/news/2007/04/how_much_can_we.html)

Stewart Mader, Wiki Evangelist

Atlassian Software Systems

I’m sure we’ll see whether you’re right or not …

Thanks, Stewart … and nice that you stopped by.

I think many have written before, more eloquently and knowledgeably than me for sure, about the expectations of the digital natives (under 20, let’s say) and digital hybrids (20 - 30) combined with their deep familiarity with digital tools and linky thinking, as they increasingly populate the work force.

You’ll find a short flash movie on the wirearchy web site (www.wirearchy.com) top right-hand side where it says “Click For The Definition of Wirearchy” that sets out the growing impact of the phenomenon you cite, which dates from 2002 or so.

Here’s another post I wrote about this issue about a year ago … http://blog.wirearchy.com/blog/_archives/2006/9/26/2364104.html.

I have written several others about digital natives, the workforce of the future, the mass customization of work, etc., some of which you’ll find in the Articles section of the wirearchy.com site if you are interested.

I think you (and me) and others are right about those expectations, but I want to keep a modicum of healthy skepticism about linear extrapolations … as the complexity and pace of life and work increase (which I think will happen) and the pressures of adult life press in on the younger generations (as they have with previous generations), I think there’s a possibility that decisiveness and hierarchy may be desired and / or valued by a certain proportion of people who are young and digitally savvy today.

I mean, look at what happened to all sorts of hipsters from the late 650’s and early 70’s … many of them are now senior bankers, or lawyers or some other form of bastions of conservatism today. Who’da thunk it ?

However, given the Web and hyperlinks and the maturing of search, social search, the Semantic Web and various social and economic turbulences (and no doubt other factors you and I can / could imagine), what I am pretty sure about is that the nature of what we know as traditional industrial-era hierarchy based mainly on position and the vertical arrangement of technical / formal knowledge … that I am pretty sure will change pretty drastically.

Culture change in / by organizations is a very interesting and complex “thing” (it’s a large part of what I have done / did for work over the past twenty years or so), and I think that the organizational / culture change that looms in front of us for the next decade or so will be quite challenging in a number of ways. Our current mental models and attitudes about work haven’t changed that much from industrial era thinking .. yet. But I am pretty sure that they will.

Much to think about here thanks Jon including the rich set of links that remind us how long it takes for ideas to spread and be adopted in organizations. 2002 video. Your 2006 post. Intriguing. Helping executives find a comfort level with controls from the top through traditional hierarchy v empowering employees to collaborate and create value leveraging social tools across the grassroots of an oganization offers an “interesting” challenge.

Helping executives find a comfort level with controls from the top through traditional hierarchy v empowering employees to collaborate and create value leveraging social tools across the grassroots of an oganization offers an “interesting” challenge.

First, thanks for stopping by, Jenny.

Yes .. “interesting” is an interesting word in the contaext of this post and your comment. As no doubt you know, the issue of “empowerment” in the workplace (Chris Argyris being one of the key figures), the turning of the org chart upside down (Tom Peters), etc., etc., etc. has been around for a long time .. and what a long, strange trip it’s been, to borrow an old song lyric.

One premise I have often noodled on … so many good-sized organizations spen boodles on attitude and climate surveys, culture change initiatives, becoming learning organizations, emotional intelligence and communications developmnent for execs and managers … and of course many employess now know of the BOHICA (Bend Over, Here It Comes Again) syndrome. Often (but not always) I’d argue that these types of expensive and time-consuming initiatives would yield to the use of blogs and wikis .. but basically their implementation, monitoring, measurement and management do not co-exist well with gantt charts and protocols. Empowering collaboration for real is a new and different form of organizational sociology, and much “sociology”, especially when first bounded by rigid structures and then “let loose” takes time and feels unpredictable and uncomfortable.

I suspect that eventually the success stories will be too difficult to ignore.

Indeed but I see what else needs to happen is thinking more “Whole Mind” in organizations. I don’t know if you read Andrew McAfee’s poll results on technology v incentives at class end. My concern is that the people focused on implementing social tools in organizations are the technologists. To accomplish true impact all organizational functions need to be engaged. I wonder if your picture from the other side of the pond is any different.

“Indeed, but …”

Jenny, to what does the “but” refer ?

I could not agree more re: a “whole mind” approach as a generalization (I’m a systems thinker and org change / OD person from a long time ago, and have used whole systems approaches and priinciples in quite a few / most of my work for quite a while now.

Yes, the technologists so far are suggesting and leading the implementation. Most of the people who started to notice that blogs and wikis would be useful in orgs were the early adopters, many of whom are technology-oriented at a minimum, if not technologists. Me, I’m an anthro-sociologist if you wanna use a label and guess what .. it’s pretty frustrating for me often enough, ‘cuz with a reasonable number of them if you can’t talk HTML or SaaS to their standard you ain’t of their tribe.

I’m exaggerating, of course .. but this same issue led to lots of tears and a much longer amortization period for the massive investments in ERP software (SAP, etc.) through the ’90’s .. they left the “people” out of the implementyation equation.

This time, the early-adopter technologists and some OD-oriented people (and yes, some buisness line people, but only a few) are leading the charge … but to use a “whole mind” or “whol=e systems” approach many organizational decision-makers and those whose support are required will have to be convinced that it is enough of a positive and necessary culture change / org change initiative to warrant the consideration, time and attention to go down that path.

Right now, I think there’s more of the “we’re worried about letting the rabble play silly with the keys” … there have been paper afeter article after paper for at least three years now, all basically saying “yes all this collaboration and exchange and voice are wonderful, but what if .. what if someone dissents, or says something stupid, or we lose control (see the recent Digg community story) etc.

To make the investment of such a decision, and then the time, attention, effort, etc. required for a whole mind / whole system approach means it has to be seen as really important. So, in the absence of that, I think pilot projects and leadership by social-dynamics-aware technologists will provide more of the critical mass of experience need to show the use of social tools does not necessarily lead to organizational anarchy.

So .. in principle a resounding “YES” to your “To accomplish true impact all organization functions need to be engaged” … I say in principle because sometimes the use of social tools can be focused on a specific issue or type of work (all the usual “yes, but” caveats ;-))

When you say “the other side of the pond” … are you in the UK ? I live in Canada … but, hey I will be in the UK for 5 or 6 days in about three weeks .. maybe we could meet up ?

The limits of hastily written comments. Clearly starting small with new technology implementations to prove the value and letting success spread is a proven way to go. “Whole Mind” mention more about individual thinking, openness, and inspired by Dan Pink’s book, listening to Tim OReilly’s interview with Steve Hargadon, and thinking about Simon Wardley and his responses to my question about open source lessons for organizations. http://swardley.blogspot.com/2007/04/stop-all-that-chattering-im-talking.html

I owe Simon a response but what does one say? Apologies re geography. Somehow I had you in the UK. I’m in the U.S. Enjoy your travels.

Aha … ok. I get you re: whole mind” and agree, of course.

Organizations have been governed throughout th e past century by mechanistic worldviews, and enginerring / technological determinism mental models and hence methods and approaches to major issues, including the “sociology” in the organization.

Yes, I strongly agree that more “whole mind” thinking, and exploration of / decision-making about what to do and how using “whole mind” approaches and more engagement would be very beneficial.