Breaking down the discussions about collaborative performance

Underneath the curtain of a static web announcement lots of content-related discussions regarding the program of the Enterprise 2.0 SUMMIT 09 are happening. From a small circle we have now extended our advisory and feedback board to a number of well-known Enterprise 2.0 experts including (in alphabetical order of their lastname) Lee Bryant, Willms Buhse, Bertrand Dupperin, James Governor, Dion Hinchcliffe, Martin Koser, Mark Masterson, Joachim Niemeier, JP Rangaswami, Frank Schönefeld, Luis Suarez, David Terrar, Thomas Vander Wal and Simon Wardley. After this preparation we will enter a more public discussion about the to-be-discussed topics as well as speakers and panelists to get involved at the Enterprise 2.0 SUMMIT – as the idea of the E2.0 SUMMIT on Oct 6-8th is to represent a community and expertise hub for the European Enterprise 2.0 community. This means we want to reflect the common E2.0 discussions esp. from a European viewpoint and to attract big parts of the E2.0 industry members.

A already finalized thought about the E2.0 SUMMIT is the main emphasis on structuring the discussion around the “ROI” (and its synonyms like ROC, RONI, metrics, value/benefits) question of Enterprise 2.0. And we found our own notion for it – we want to discuss the “collaborative performance”. Therefore I already invited Kjetil Kristensen, a Postdoctoral Researcher at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU). He holds a PhD from the Department of Engineering Design and Materials at NTNU, and is focusing on collaborative performance in dispersed teams. He will give us an insight talk to his research results.

But the idea is not to stop the discussion on the conceptional and theoretical level. As Joachim Niemeier has put it in our internal discussion:

“bridging ‘strategy’ and ‘implementation’ by modern (management) thinking is critical. [Discussion the performance and metrics of E2.0 .. ] we should at least start with the classical candidates: Balances Scorecard, Maturity models, (European) Excellent Models, Staged Approaches. Even more: we could organize a ‘metrics workshop’, we could have a look at ‘Wiki visualisation’ and so on.”

Does anybody has some further practical insights on these approaches?

Some other question that is still driving the advisory and feedback circle is the discussion about to what extend we have to discuss the infrastructual convergence and commoditization of Cloud Computing, Unified Communications and Collaborative Systems at the event. If you know Simon Wardley, you know his comments about this in advance – as he argues:

“There is a strong connection between E2.0 and Cloud Computing but it is in the underlying themes.”

My question is not the relevance of the underlying developments in general but the relevance to the corporate world in continental Europe. As I see most of the E2.0 interested corporate people at the very beginning of the E2.0 (r)evolution, I don’t (yet) see this aspect as a more than 1 or 2 sessions covering topic. Or can anybody give me some counter-arguments?

And while we are discussing about E2.0 services – I also have the question about the importance of a “launch pad” for E2.0 services at the event. The boundaries of the enterprise in terms of integrating external application in business processes are very tight IMHO – in continental Europe. But as an industry event we need to leverage the chances for the service provider … so yes or no?

I would be very happy if I could stir up the discussions about the program with this post – so I am eager to read your feedback.


  • enterprise2open

    New blog post: Breaking down the discussions about collaborative performance http://tinyurl.com/ctq4r4

    This comment was originally posted on Twitter

  • Wittkewitz

    Metrics:
    Since the late 90s I listened to the ROI discussions on Knowledge Management. They never were open discussion. They were often driven by approaches that somehow came across the departments led by controllers or even more by multinational external business consulting companies who tried to mask their little experiences in these issues by sticking to their core competences: cost cutting. These approaches in the end led to a new function of financial controlling: it was flow controlling, whereas the information was the subject of control.

    The era of optimizing processes is diminishing fastly, so is the importance of all these old-school metrics like BSC and stuff.

    Furthermore is the notion of control led by thinking based in 19th century. As Weinberger pointed out at the DLD09, in an era of abundance of crap and knowldege on the web, control is somekind surreal, it is not affordable. Coping with new evolutions in using the web and web techniques, facing notions about metrics is an anachronism.

    Cloud Computing, SaaS, ASP and relatives:

    I ‘ve heard this notions in terms of OpenSource and E 2.0. A business and technical analyst told me, when it comes to E 2.0 and OSS, it’s is a matter of infrastructure. Only the E 2.0 basic infrastructure has relations to OSS. He didn’t get the point, that the role model for OSS in terms of organization is predemocratic and social media has more in common with democratic led states, because the structure serves the people not the other way round. If cloud computing will be more successfull than his ancestors ASP and stuff, than only if a flat organizations is already installed inside a company. The commodization of this market is now led by internet and app providers like box.net or eben ning.com. The very point in hitting bullseye with CC and E2.0 is only driven by evolving process-driven management to a task-driven management – similarities to SOA are not accidentally – and everyone knows about the possibilities to realize SOA-goals with CC&E2.0.

    So the most important topic would be: What does it take to persuade companies like McKinsey, BCG and others not to follow the 19th century priciples anymore. Who else should do the persuasion job with all these big organizations led by rotten antiquated principles that – to certain extent – are still causing all these problems we are facing.

    my 2 cents

    Joerg Wittkewitz

  • Wittkewitz

    Metrics:
    Since the late 90s I listened to the ROI discussions on Knowledge Management. They never were open discussion. They were often driven by approaches that somehow came across the departments led by controllers or even more by multinational external business consulting companies who tried to mask their little experiences in these issues by sticking to their core competences: cost cutting. These approaches in the end led to a new function of financial controlling: it was flow controlling, whereas the information was the subject of control.

    The era of optimizing processes is diminishing fastly, so is the importance of all these old-school metrics like BSC and stuff.

    Furthermore is the notion of control led by thinking based in 19th century. As Weinberger pointed out at the DLD09, in an era of abundance of crap and knowldege on the web, control is somekind surreal, it is not affordable. Coping with new evolutions in using the web and web techniques, facing notions about metrics is an anachronism.

    Cloud Computing, SaaS, ASP and relatives:

    I ‘ve heard this notions in terms of OpenSource and E 2.0. A business and technical analyst told me, when it comes to E 2.0 and OSS, it’s is a matter of infrastructure. Only the E 2.0 basic infrastructure has relations to OSS. He didn’t get the point, that the role model for OSS in terms of organization is predemocratic and social media has more in common with democratic led states, because the structure serves the people not the other way round. If cloud computing will be more successfull than his ancestors ASP and stuff, than only if a flat organizations is already installed inside a company. The commodization of this market is now led by internet and app providers like box.net or eben ning.com. The very point in hitting bullseye with CC and E2.0 is only driven by evolving process-driven management to a task-driven management – similarities to SOA are not accidentally – and everyone knows about the possibilities to realize SOA-goals with CC&E2.0.

    So the most important topic would be: What does it take to persuade companies like McKinsey, BCG and others not to follow the 19th century priciples anymore. Who else should do the persuasion job with all these big organizations led by rotten antiquated principles that – to certain extent – are still causing all these problems we are facing.

    my 2 cents

    Joerg Wittkewitz

  • Andreas

    Hi! Nur zur Ergänzung: Ed Brill wird per Video zugeschaltet ist also leider nicht vor Ort! Viel Spaß nächste Woche, bei bis zu 20° ….

    This comment was originally posted on frogpond

  • Martin Koser

    Hallo Andreas,

    nun ja, ich werde dennoch da sein, aber schade ist’s schon 😉

    Und hoffen wir dass die 20° Realität werden, wäre der Straßenfestathmosphäre zwischen Friedrichsstadtpalast und Kalkscheune ja sehr zuträglich …

    This comment was originally posted on frogpond

  • hrmnetwork

    entrerpise2Open : Breaking down the discussions about collaborative performance http://tinyurl.com/ctq4r4

    This comment was originally posted on Twitter