Companies Aren’t Communities

By Michael Idinopulos | February 22, 2011, 3:33 pm | 13 Comments

Companies aren’t communities. They aren’t forums.

Companies are companies.

Of course company life has community aspects, and those community aspects can be quite important in getting the job done. But a lot of social software folks seem to forget that there’s a lot more to a company than community. They treat companies as if they were consumer communities or forums that all just happen to have their paychecks signed by the same person.

Why does the difference matter? Let’s look at the numbers. Online communities and forums typically attract very small audiences relative to the total target population: Less than 1% adoption is typical, and 5% adoption would be a grand-slam. That’s fine for the consumer web, but those numbers inside the enterprise aren’t exactly a ringing endorsement.

Successful enterprise implementations of social software have orders-of-magnitude higher adoption rates. For example, yesterday I was in New York meeting with Getty Images. Getty’s Socialtext implementation is seeing 95% active adoption. Those are the numbers we’re looking for inside the enterprise!

So how do we get there?

Companies, by very definition, have reporting structures, established workflows, shared systems and processes, defined roles and responsibilities, and closely managed performance. Those are assets we don’t have in communities and forums, which are typically ad-hoc groups of individuals–mostly volunteers–in a collective endeavor without clearly defined roles, processes, reporting, deliverables, or metrics.

Getty and others achieve the adoption rates they do by integrating their social software into all those structures, workflows, systems, processes, roles, and responsiblities. As Getty’s Director of Learning and Development, Jennifer Fox, told me today, “We no longer going to teach people how to use Socialtext. We are going to teach them how to do their jobs…which happen to require the use of Socialtext.”

I’ve been saying for a few years now that companies achieve adoption and business value when they place social software in the flow of work. The tools achieve real benefit when people do their jobs–not their evenings-and-weekends jobs, but their actual “day” jobs in social software. That’s when it becomes woven into the fabric of a company’s business processes. Adoption is almost a foregone conclusion, because that’s where you do your work. Business impact is demonstrable because business processes are measurable.

What, specifically, does this mean? It depends on your business, but it’s things like:

Your company Intranet is social (i.e., built and/or integrated with social software tools like wiki workspaces, microblogging, and social networking)
Marketing and Product post sales collateral in your social software tool (not in email!)
Customer Support’s knowledgebase is collaboratively maintained in social software (again, not in email!)
The executive team and other key teams keep meeting agendas and notes in social software
CRM, ERP, and Enterprise Learning systems automatically post major events in social software
Quick links to important resources are available–and maintained–in social software
Technical Help Desks and other internal support functions field requests via social software

Contrast that with an online community, like a gaming group or a technical forum. In communities, there is no flow of work. That’s because most people don’t come to communities to do work. They come to get support help, to swap tips, to praise, to complain, to socialize. Even those people who come for professional reasons are casual, sporadic visitors. The only person who really works there day-in-day-out is the forum/community manager.

There are three groups of people who cling to the “company as community” concept: the “kumbayeros” who wish that companies were as open and democratic as communities, public community managers whose consumer-facing experience has shaped the way they view all online social interaction, and community software vendors who are looking to re-purpose their consumer-oriented products for the internal market.

In the enterprise, we need to take a more pragmatic approach. As the old saying goes, “The business of business is business.” Social software fails when it tries to turn businesses into consumer-style communities. It succeeds when it turns businesses into better businesses.

adoption, business value, Enterprise 2.0, in the flow

Comments (13)

13 Replies to “Companies Aren’t Communities”
	Hi Michael - While I agree with you generally I will respectfully disagree on many of your points. There are plenty of communities within companies – collaborating together to build communities of practice events even if that is not their direct responsibility, answering questions, volunteering for company organized community volunteer days, planning the holiday party, helping colleagues navigate the political waters, etc. Colleagues often care about each other and they offer their assistance all the time to each other without any expectation of formal compensation/recognition. I also think more than a few non-profit community members would violently object to your statement that there are no defined roles, workflows, or outcomes in volunteer-based organizations. I’m thinking the Girl/Boy Scouts, most churches and yes, even gaming environments (which have high participation rates, roles, and close collaboration). Lastly I think if you discount the volunteer motivations that drive communities in the work context you will be sub-optimizing your social initiatives. Francois Gossieaux talks a lot about social motivations and work in his new book The Hyper-Social Organization. I would say that motivator is one of the primary increases in productivity that an organization would hope to achieve by socializing processes. I do agree that work communities are very different than online forums and consumer communities, which are not necessarily the same thing in my view. As you noted, participation rates can be vastly different and need to be in order to be successful. Some other differences that I see: the participation cadence is different – ideally individuals are constantly in work related social networks vs. irregularly in consumer communities; content looks quite different; there are more small groups within the community to do collaborative work; and community management takes on more of an encouraging role than a moderating role. Just my thoughts having worked with both consumer and enterprise collaboration communities. Cheers - Rachel By Rachel Happe \| February 22, 2011, 6:00 pm
	Rachel, great comments. I agree with you that there are many community aspects to company life. I’m not denying that at all. But if enterprise social software were just about volunteering or planning the holiday party, then it wouldn’t be the game-changer that you and I both think it is. Similarly, I agree that many communities have formal roles, processes, etc. (Indeed, Horace Mann Educational Associates is both a Socialtext customer and a member of the Community Manager Roundtable!) But here again, it’s a matter of emphasis. Most members of public communities don’t have formal responsibilities or processes. So I’m not saying that companies are all process and communities are no process. I’m saying that companies generally have a lot more formal process than communities, and that lends itself to a different approach. By Michael Idinopulos \| February 22, 2011, 6:42 pm
	Isn’t this the point? – that we want our companies to be more like communities. Of course you can use social tools to automate existing processes but so what?, this doesn’t change anything much. To make our companies more like communities is always going to be a much harder task. But the benefit is potentially much greater too. By Jon Ingham \| February 23, 2011, 2:19 pm
	Jon, I am emphatically not saying that we should use social tools to automate existing processes. What I’m saying is that we should make existing business processes social through the integration of social tools and interaction norms into those processes. That’s not old wine in new bottles; it’s a fundamental change in the way work gets done. By Michael Idinopulos \| February 23, 2011, 3:09 pm
	I think I know what you’re getting at Michael. One Web 2.0 technology that lends itself well to melding into workflows and processes is microblogging. And it is for that reason that many consultants have become excited about what TIBCO’s tibbr is offering – http://www.tibbr.com/index.html#what. TIBCO have targeted their enterprise solution to cater to just what I think you are talking about. But it isn’t the only ‘right’ solution. Businesses will be attracted to different vendor solutions depending on their business need. I think companies have to take an open approach to social business, including the CoP approach which Rachel supports, the humanizing of the workplace I believe Jon values, and your view of integrating social tools into business processes. Within my employee community we have many CoPs or groups as we call them (Telligent). One example is a CoP with senior workers who mainly use their group’s forum to field workflow and issue queries from junior workers. An excellent example of peer support, social learning and collaborative knowledge sharing. This group is in addition to the normal Helpdesk used for such queries – social augmenting the usual workflow. By Michael Ricard \| February 23, 2011, 3:46 pm
	Michael, “The business of business is business” is the point of view of the top management. Working in a company that is a comunity is the wish of the majority of the young employees, and their number will raise. I would rather see that as a cultural evolution. Time will certainly fill the gap, and if social tools are not used within the company to make it growth, it will be used outside to speak about it in bad terms, without any possible control. By Bob Inapercu \| February 25, 2011, 8:08 am
	Bob, most employees, regardless of age, want to work for companies where their work has meaning, their contributions are valued, their skills are developed, and the company does well. Those companies, not coincidentally, are also the most successful from a business standpoint. But they still have reporting relationships, business processes, systems of record, etc. The engagement happens within the business context, not outside of it. By Michael Idinopulos \| February 25, 2011, 2:26 pm
	Michael, I like this post on several levels. I’ve researched many failed “enterprise social” implementations. The formula is very quite and almost always the same. If the focus is on the tool the implementation generally fails. If the focus is on people and process the implementation generally succeeds. I firmly believe that any enterprise social implementation should begin by looking across the business at which processes can and should be improved by changing the process to leverage enterprise social capabilities. I also believe that training people to use tools puts the emphasis on the wrong things (e.g., which buttons to click), but that training people on new socially-enabled ways of working is paramount. A company will know they have succeeded in this area when employees independently start to think through processes, issues and challenges in context of what is possible in a socially-enabled enterprise. By Andy Jankowski \| February 28, 2011, 2:12 pm
	Please excuse the error above. The second sentence should read, “The formula is quite simple and almost always the same.” By Andy Jankowski \| February 28, 2011, 8:59 pm
	Michael, Your post inspired my blog entry today >> http://www.enterprisestrategies.com Thanks again for your insight and inspiration. I welcome your comments. By Andy Jankowski \| March 1, 2011, 3:30 am
	irregularly in consumer communities; content looks quite different; there are more small groups within the community to do collaborative work; and community management takes on more of an encouraging role than a moderating role. By air max france \| March 11, 2011, 8:59 am
	With the huge benefits that it can provide to businesses, there is no doubt why the demand for this type of software continues to grow. Fortunately though, this software is not hard to find with all the different vendors currently available online. It’s just a matter of knowing and evaluating the features and functionalities being offered by a website. In short, with social networking you can create a community and community brings profit to your business. Now you can make your own business community and add niche people for your business online. By social community software \| April 5, 2011, 12:16 pm
	[...] Now I won’t pretend that this is going to change all of their views on social media, but if we can solve specific problems across the business using Chatter then we are embedding it as a tool and it becomes a part of their work flow. This is a fundamentally different concept when compared to “Hello! Let’s all join the Company Community (companies are not communities) [...] By Learning to use Social Media at work \| Clearly Learning \| April 9, 2011, 9:43 pm

13 Replies to “Companies Aren’t Communities”

Hi Michael -

While I agree with you generally I will respectfully disagree on many of your points.

There are plenty of communities within companies – collaborating together to build communities of practice events even if that is not their direct responsibility, answering questions, volunteering for company organized community volunteer days, planning the holiday party, helping colleagues navigate the political waters, etc. Colleagues often care about each other and they offer their assistance all the time to each other without any expectation of formal compensation/recognition.

I also think more than a few non-profit community members would violently object to your statement that there are no defined roles, workflows, or outcomes in volunteer-based organizations. I’m thinking the Girl/Boy Scouts, most churches and yes, even gaming environments (which have high participation rates, roles, and close collaboration).

Lastly I think if you discount the volunteer motivations that drive communities in the work context you will be sub-optimizing your social initiatives. Francois Gossieaux talks a lot about social motivations and work in his new book The Hyper-Social Organization. I would say that motivator is one of the primary increases in productivity that an organization would hope to achieve by socializing processes.

I do agree that work communities are very different than online forums and consumer communities, which are not necessarily the same thing in my view. As you noted, participation rates can be vastly different and need to be in order to be successful. Some other differences that I see: the participation cadence is different – ideally individuals are constantly in work related social networks vs. irregularly in consumer communities; content looks quite different; there are more small groups within the community to do collaborative work; and community management takes on more of an encouraging role than a moderating role.

Just my thoughts having worked with both consumer and enterprise collaboration communities.

Cheers -

Rachel

By Rachel Happe | February 22, 2011, 6:00 pm

Rachel, great comments.
I agree with you that there are many community aspects to company life. I’m not denying that at all. But if enterprise social software were *just* about volunteering or planning the holiday party, then it wouldn’t be the game-changer that you and I both think it is.
Similarly, I agree that many communities have formal roles, processes, etc. (Indeed, Horace Mann Educational Associates is both a Socialtext customer and a member of the Community Manager Roundtable!) But here again, it’s a matter of emphasis. Most members of public communities don’t have formal responsibilities or processes.
So I’m not saying that companies are all process and communities are no process. I’m saying that companies generally have a lot more formal process than communities, and that lends itself to a different approach.

By Michael Idinopulos | February 22, 2011, 6:42 pm

Isn’t this the point? – that we want our companies to be more like communities.

Of course you can use social tools to automate existing processes but so what?, this doesn’t change anything much.

To make our companies more like communities is always going to be a much harder task. But the benefit is potentially much greater too.

By Jon Ingham | February 23, 2011, 2:19 pm

Jon, I am emphatically *not* saying that we should use social tools to *automate* existing processes. What I’m saying is that we should make existing business processes *social* through the integration of social tools and interaction norms into those processes. That’s not old wine in new bottles; it’s a fundamental change in the way work gets done.

By Michael Idinopulos | February 23, 2011, 3:09 pm

I think I know what you’re getting at Michael. One Web 2.0 technology that lends itself well to melding into workflows and processes is microblogging. And it is for that reason that many consultants have become excited about what TIBCO’s tibbr is offering – http://www.tibbr.com/index.html#what. TIBCO have targeted their enterprise solution to cater to just what I think you are talking about. But it isn’t the only ‘right’ solution. Businesses will be attracted to different vendor solutions depending on their business need.

I think companies have to take an open approach to social business, including the CoP approach which Rachel supports, the humanizing of the workplace I believe Jon values, and your view of integrating social tools into business processes.

Within my employee community we have many CoPs or groups as we call them (Telligent). One example is a CoP with senior workers who mainly use their group’s forum to field workflow and issue queries from junior workers. An excellent example of peer support, social learning and collaborative knowledge sharing. This group is in addition to the normal Helpdesk used for such queries – social augmenting the usual workflow.

By Michael Ricard | February 23, 2011, 3:46 pm

Michael, “The business of business is business” is the point of view of the top management. Working in a company that is a comunity is the wish of the majority of the young employees, and their number will raise. I would rather see that as a cultural evolution. Time will certainly fill the gap, and if social tools are not used within the company to make it growth, it will be used outside to speak about it in bad terms, without any possible control.

By Bob Inapercu | February 25, 2011, 8:08 am

Bob, most employees, regardless of age, want to work for companies where their work has meaning, their contributions are valued, their skills are developed, and the company does well. Those companies, not coincidentally, are also the most successful from a business standpoint. But they still have reporting relationships, business processes, systems of record, etc. The engagement happens within the business context, not outside of it.

By Michael Idinopulos | February 25, 2011, 2:26 pm

Michael, I like this post on several levels. I’ve researched many failed “enterprise social” implementations. The formula is very quite and almost always the same. If the focus is on the tool the implementation generally fails. If the focus is on people and process the implementation generally succeeds. I firmly believe that any enterprise social implementation should begin by looking across the business at which processes can and should be improved by changing the process to leverage enterprise social capabilities. I also believe that training people to use tools puts the emphasis on the wrong things (e.g., which buttons to click), but that training people on new socially-enabled ways of working is paramount. A company will know they have succeeded in this area when employees independently start to think through processes, issues and challenges in context of what is possible in a socially-enabled enterprise.

By Andy Jankowski | February 28, 2011, 2:12 pm

Please excuse the error above. The second sentence should read, “The formula is quite simple and almost always the same.”

By Andy Jankowski | February 28, 2011, 8:59 pm

Michael, Your post inspired my blog entry today >> http://www.enterprisestrategies.com
Thanks again for your insight and inspiration. I welcome your comments.

By Andy Jankowski | March 1, 2011, 3:30 am

irregularly in consumer communities; content looks quite different; there are more small groups within the community to do collaborative work; and community management takes on more of an encouraging role than a moderating role.

By air max france | March 11, 2011, 8:59 am

With the huge benefits that it can provide to businesses, there is no doubt why the demand for this type of software continues to grow. Fortunately though, this software is not hard to find with all the different vendors currently available online. It’s just a matter of knowing and evaluating the features and functionalities being offered by a website. In short, with social networking you can create a community and community brings profit to your business. Now you can make your own business community and add niche people for your business online.

By social community software | April 5, 2011, 12:16 pm

[...] Now I won’t pretend that this is going to change all of their views on social media, but if we can solve specific problems across the business using Chatter then we are embedding it as a tool and it becomes a part of their work flow. This is a fundamentally different concept when compared to “Hello! Let’s all join the Company Community (companies are not communities) [...]

By Learning to use Social Media at work | Clearly Learning | April 9, 2011, 9:43 pm

Enterprise Social Software Blog

Companies Aren’t Communities

About This Blog

Weblog on gaining business results from social software.

Separating the Nice to Have from the Must Have Technology

That Was Easy: Using Social to Find Answers to Questions

How to Help Your Employees Overcome the Fear of Change

Socialtext’s Growth Leads to Corporate Expansion

Meet Rich Szeto- Socialtext’s Newest User Experience Designer

A Social Story: How a Group of Passionate Software Testers Used Social to Write a Book

Building a Team the Social Way

Socialtext Featured in Recent Article: Enterprises to Show CRM the Money

Socialtext Featured in Articles on the Yahoo Telecommuting Debate

VPN Logs? Seriously, Yahoo?

Try Socialtext Today