Rewarding social software participation within the corporation

Lots of information have been already distributed through out the net about the Enterprise 2.0 FORUM / Cologne, that took place already nearly two weeks ago. Now we finished cutting and setting up all the recorded video materials – so here we go with the presentation of Suw Charman-Anderson talking about the “adoption strategy for social software”.

Well – actually she was talking about “training a cat” – and how the cat will not do anything without a reward for doing it. So as the first key point of successfully adopting social software she advised to think about a rewarding system. Further aspects she is talking about were

  • the importance of identifying the problem on the day-to-day work of the individual that can be solved by social software
  • the user-centric adoption as bottom-up approach that has more potential to be successful than the top-down approach
  • the need of a leadership by engagement – I would do the reference towards Rod Beckstrom’s catalyst personnas
  • for the implementation of social software projects she proposes a “trojan mice” aproach in the means of small projects introduced into the ongoing organisation (to grow securely)

Many more interesting advices may be taken from the video:

[kongressmedia xxxmk]

Actually the importance of the rewarding system was also a big issues being discussed in the open space session. (I am just working on a transcript of the discussions – will translate this also to English soon!)

There are two aspects regarding the rewarding system I’d like to share with you:

  1. the grade of participation in social software projects must be part of the evaluation by the objective agreement
  2. participation in social software projects must be transparent to be socially acknowledged (means the need for activity streams!).

What advices do you have on this?


  1. Martin Koser says:

    Well, I support the need for activity streams, but it’s tricky: As greater transparency of people’s contributions kicks in we need mechanisms and ways to deal with

    – people that are trying to “game the system of reward”, i.e. by putting on a “show of noise and fog” without real substance. We need more than a simple “liked this”, or “xyz commented x times” in the enterprise for that, given the fact that people might band together to “cheat”

    – people that are making valuable, yet minor additions that don’t show up in the stream of activities. How to reward people that are commenting worthwhile things or finding “stuff” in the first place.

    Just my 2 cents, I guess there are no easy solutions in the reward system/ adoption space anyway


  2. Martin Koser says:

    Well, I support the need for activity streams, but it’s tricky: As greater transparency of people’s contributions kicks in we need mechanisms and ways to deal with

    – people that are trying to “game the system of reward”, i.e. by putting on a “show of noise and fog” without real substance. We need more than a simple “liked this”, or “xyz commented x times” in the enterprise for that, given the fact that people might band together to “cheat”

    – people that are making valuable, yet minor additions that don’t show up in the stream of activities. How to reward people that are commenting worthwhile things or finding “stuff” in the first place.

    Just my 2 cents, I guess there are no easy solutions in the reward system/ adoption space anyway