Organisation & Transformation in the Digital Age
15 Jun 2015 From Growth to Corporate Hacking!!
It has been a while since I took the time to write a new paper, simply because I have been busy over my head with little time for writing and exploring new ventures. In those two years it almost took me to start writing again, I have seen a number of new concepts emerge, some of the concepts I had delt with became mainstream (internal Social networks, Serious Gaming, Workspace Digitalization), while some are still below the radar.   One of the new business concepts (or role descriptions) includes the so called 'Growth Hacker', which is just another way to say: plug some data analytic tools onto your systems, and see if you can enhance your processes by adapting them given the information you retrieve. This in order to be more efficient and focused in your digital acquisitions. But is there a life after growth hacking? What if you are in a company where you have already plugged your analytics, performed your growth hacking, and are basically on the right business track? How can you still enhance your global performance (and not only your sales efficiency), and moreover are there any other resources you can still leverage on? Moreover, once you have determined your course of action to maximize efficiency in your digital processes, how do you support them? How do you make sure that people underlying those processes are also efficient, and allow you to leverage your data? In other words, can one ripe the benefits of growth hacking without more than setting-up the right analytics tools? Efficiency (and therefore global performance) is a matter of adaptation of your organization to your business objectives. If you have determined that you should change, say your on-boarding process to maximize client engagement on your solution, you need to make sure that your teams are able to follow on this new way of doing. Are they trained? Do they know what their new role will require? If your people are not trained to enforce new methodologies or processes, then you will fall short of succeeding. Where Growth Hacking is about technology, Corporate hacking is about companies’ topography, about their organizational shape, and how to make them more efficient. It is in essence adapting the shape of the company in order to fulfill its objectives. It is as much about organizational growth, adaptation of existing processes or people development, as it is about revenue growth. It is about tweaking the organization and shaping it into a more adapted system. But not all of it! It is not about Change or Transformation, rather about adaptation, about shifting parts of the organization towards new goals in order to create a tipping moment where this new organizational behavior will take hold on the rest of the company. It is done by setting-up dedicated units, departments, new rules of engagement; by setting-up a transformation program which includes a number of innovative initiatives which aim at renewing the way things are done; by enforcing new management rules, new tools and usages, new postures and new mind-sets. But where does the hacking lie as this looks a lot like any other transformation program? It lies in the way change or transformation is addressed. First it needs to be clearly correlated to a gain in operational efficiency, business development, client service, or overall performance. But the objective should not merely be to adapt to new technologies and environments in a reactive mode, but more being proactive about how we want to evolve and shape our organization. Second, it should be enforced at a local level first, in pilot mode for testing, before being generalized to the whole organization. It should leverage on change agents and people heavily involved in the evolution of the organization efficiency, to set a new standard for operational performance. In a way, where growth Hacking evolves Digital Marketing towards a greater efficiency of the delivered message, and better product definition for customer satisfaction, Corporate Hacking ensures the best possible matching between business objectives, and organizational performance. It might consider the implementation of new production tools, new management practices, dedicated units or simply an evolution of already quite efficient processes. A good example which would fall under this category is Zappos, which completely reinvented its internal organization. Are you ready to hack your own organization  to make it better??    ...
19 Feb 2014 Collaborative platforms. Why users just don't show ?
[...]For enterprise social networks to flourish, organizations must address apathetic employees, deployment challenges, and institutional disincentives to collaboration [...] Users’ engagement is of the essence to get the most of collaborative platforms. Despite the many promises of collaborative work in the fields of innovation, management and general organisation, it seems that the use of appropriate tools is still difficult to implement. In the article I curate today, the author sees 4 clear principles that should be applied whenever implementing such platforms: Empower an executive champion. Build on early successes. Revisit the incentives Encourage Sharing, Support Your Executive Champion and Early Adopter Overall, the use of such tools is linked to the degree of appropriation people have of it. If the tool is merely another 'nice to have bust such a waste of time' thingy, then it will not work. Users have to clearly understand the benefits the use of the platform will have for the organisation, but also for them. And because such tools are about collaboration, reviewing incentive and evaluation techniques is important because you cannot expect people to engage in group work while remaining individually evaluated. there has to be a degree of collective performance evaluation, so that collaborative and individual work remain distinct. Also, it is better to ask end users what they feel about the tool that will be implemented to maximize adoption. Implementing a tool completely disconnected from the realities of your workforce often is counterproductive. People want to have now the same experience with Corporate IT Solutions, as they have with their mobile phones, or other digital devices: simple, easy to operate, user friendly, intuitive, ergonomic.... So giving them yet another labyrinthine system will certainly not favour adoption.  Last, communities are important. You cannot expect people to follow leaders, and give in to some corporate desires of transversality and transparency if they are not exemplar. And in collaboration, it means that they are also responsible for group dynamics in a virtual environment. And that is no easy task. Without communities and leaders (champions), it is almost impossible to successfully implement collaboration solutions. Have you identified your communities? Do you know your change champions? Did you ask end users what they would want as a tool and for what purpose? Read the full article here Marciano Alves...
18 Feb 2014 How to overcome resistance to change...
Despite our best efforts, we do not change easily, and we fiercely resist forces that would drive us out of our comfort zone. Yet change is necessary if not unavoidable, for the only thing that does not change... is the permanence of change. So, how should we address the problems raised by change management? Are we to consider it is just another issue of traditionnal management, or is it a domain of its own? Is there a way to specifically work around change management issues? I believe change is about acceptance. And working on somebody's acceptance of an idea, a project is delicate. It does not involve traditional calculations such as cost/benefit, but a more complex set of interrelations between what is to be achieved through change, the expected benefits, but also how to do it, and the cost of opportunity. I often base my analysis on a simple yet powerful formula: the Formula for Change which was created by Richard Beckhard and David Gleicher. [...]Three factors must be present for meaningful organizational change to take place. These factors are: D = Dissatisfaction with how things are now;V = Vision of what is possible;F = First, concrete steps that can be taken towards the vision; If the product of these three factors is greater thanR = Resistance then change is possible. Because D, V, and F are multiplied, if any one is absent or low, then the product will be low and therefore not capable of overcoming the resistance.[...]. In the original formula, the cost of change was also taken into consideration, but its complexity prevented it from being used as a management tool, like this version does. There are many other ways to address change management issues. This one has the merit of simplicity and allows managers to determine where to reinforce their communications strategy in a nutshell. Have you analyzed your points of improvement for change management? Do you know where your resistance will come from? Marciano Alves  ...
14 Feb 2014 Klout, Pulse, Paper... Latest news on the wall front....
Just yesterday Klout announced officially that they revamped their website, to add new features. Their email claims that: 'This new version was developed with one simple truth in mind: the best way to make an impact online is to share great content.' In the same time, Facebook launched 'Paper', its new mobile app, and LinkedIn launched 'Pulse' its featured news service.  Interestingly, while these companies used to push people's contents publishing, they are now backing and favoring contents monetization, in other words, they want to make a living now. Placing sponsored contents and adds rather than letting people finding their own sources...It is true that due to the multiplicity of 2.0 contents, quality and pertinence have gone down as a whole. It becomes more difficult to find off-mainstream information, most of it has already been shared, reshared, liked and tweeted. It does not mean that it is the best possible information available, that these shared contents are the best... just that they are available, have been published in a way that guaranteed a better visibility,and so are more likely to be shared. In the search for quality information, such apps allow for contents aggregation, some from your traditional sources (social networks, rss feeds...), and some carefully selected (and should I say negociated), mainstream media and contents providers. Institutionnal content, is often pertinent and of quality when it does not come down to pure marketing, but often, it is not properly distributed on networks, not shared and so it remains invisible. Creating great content is one thing, giving them visibility on Social Networks is another. Hence the move by Klout, which allows for multiposting on your different social media accounts (FB & Twitter so far), as well as a scheduling feature. All these features already exist in our app 'Social Dynamite' which allows for the creation of distribution scenarios, through the use of 'ambassadors' accounts who will automatically reshare the information, adding their network to the overall reach of the news. And so this last move from Klout does not surprise us, as we have been advocating the same thing for quite some time now: Create great content, use social media to spread the news and share, engage and develop business and opportunities. Remember, sharing content for the sake of it might be pleasant and a great self image enhancer. But at the end of the day, what counts is how much business and notoriety you have generated.   Marciano Alves ...
5 Feb 2014 SCARF... What do your employees crave?
We do not all look for the same reward while we work. And when for some money seems to be the ultimate motivator, for others it is a subtle mix of different types of rewards. Dr. David Rock imagined a model built on three simple ideas:  The brain treats many social threats and rewards with the same intensity as physical threats and rewards  The capacity to make decisions, solve problems and collaborate with others is generally reduced by a threat response and increased under a reward response  The threat response is more intense and more common and often needs to be carefully minimized in social interactions. The main idea is that in many work occurences, our brain reacts pretty much in the same way as it does when facing a reward or a threat. And it also sets in motion its automated response to those situations. The model defines 5 types of rewards/threats. Status: oriented employees can be motivated by a possible title change, or having their name attached to more important projects. Certainty-oriented employees are motivated simply by the reassurance that their job is important and they are excelling.Autonomy-oriented employees may need the ability to work from home, or simply slip on their head phones to tune everyone else out.Relatedness-oriented employees are energized by opportunities to socialize with their coworkers — happy hours, softball games, etc.Fairness-oriented employees want to know the playing field is even, and they aren’t being exploited or cheated. They need to hear it consistently.This model can be effectively used for conflict resolution. Because often we are engaged in conflictuous relationships with our co-workers that are based on the type of reward we seek and the threats we perceive. Working in a team where you are the only person needing status or autonomy can lead the whole team to fail because of internal tensions: it is not easy to be working with different motivational factors, and different threats perception. Do you know what your employees are looking for? What do they fear most? Efficiently addressing those questions might help the team as a whole becomemore efficient and driven.   Marciano Alves  ...
28 Jan 2014 The surprising truth about motivation
Dan pink is one of my favourite management authors. He came accross some very interesting ideas on drive and self-motivation, which really help understand many of the motivational issues we face in organisations.   Dan Pink claims that intrinsic motivation is about 3 elements: Mastery, Autonomy and Purpose. Mastery for we strive to become better and more efficient if we are allowed room for change and improvement. In order to capitalize on that sense of accomplishment, organisations should provide an environment where people can progress and contribute more and more. Autonomy, because too many restraints and here goes creativity and lateral thinking out the window. You cannot hope for innovative ideas to spawn under duress or too much guidance. Often creativity comes from the fringe, and guiding it too much just results in its impediment. Last Purpose, because without the sense for a higher common purpose, motivation is personal, and often falls into procratstination. Innovation is a frustrating process of trial and error, mistakes, dead-ends... Higher purpose puts those failed experiences into perspective, and change them from motivational destructors into purposeful events on the way to success. This video I chose to share with you this morning is about motivational bias, and how our incentives might not work, and in many cases fall short of the objectives we were expecting to see accomplished. It gives a useful insight on why certain motivation policies and systems do not work, and how to change them into effective engagement systems. Enjoy!   Marciano Alves Dan Pink's website  ...
27 Jan 2014 DRH 3.0: Gérer le CO
[...]"Le monde des affaires se concentre en grande partie sur l’objet et le pourquoi de la stratégie, il prête bien moins d’attention au comment, à la manière dont une entreprise dirige ses équipes et ses structures. En associant des employés et un management responsable, une entreprise peut créer de la valeur en très grande quantité.” [...] extrait tiré de 'Employees First, Customers Second', de Vineet Nayar publié en 2011. Cet article du Nouvel Economiste reprend de façon synthétique les défis principaux qui attendent le DRH. Au dela du constat sur lequel nous sommes tous d'accord (intégration des Gen Y, digitalisation de l'espace de travail, travail collaboratif, développement et formation, guerre des talents, alignement stratégique, motivation et engagement des collaborateurs, performance globale...), se pose la question du mode de management qu'il faudra employer pour réussir cette transformation. Le marketing RH, peu répandu est une solution naturelle au besoin de replacer le RH au centre de la cohésion culturelle de l'entreprise. Considérer ses employés commes des clients, et leur offrir en interne la même qualité de 'service' qu'ils trouveraient s'ils étaient clients de l'entreprise fait sens.  Dans une civilisation de l'usage et plus du besoin, la redéfinition des interactions entre l'organisation et les collaborateurs doit se faire sur des bases nouvelles. Un nouveau contrat 'social' que doivent inventer les RHs afin de 'coller' à l'évolution de l'écosystème de leur organisation. La perméabilité des frontières personelles et professionelles crée des opportunités nouvelles en terme d'engagement des collaborateurs, encore faut-il que les organisations soient prêtes à entrer dans ce nouveau cadre de la relation salariale. Au dela des RHs, se pose la question des rapports que l'entreprise entretient avec l'exterieur, clients mais aussi fournisseurs. Ouvrir des espaces de collaboration permet d'améliorer un produit ou service de façon 'naturelle', c'est à dire organique. Cela permet de faire surgir de l'innovation dans des processus nouveaux, en dehors du champs d'application de la R&D traditionelle. Cela pose la question du rythme du changement et de l'animation des communautés en interne qui permet en créant du mouvement de dégager de nouvelles marges de manoeuvre, de nouveaux territoires à explorer pour encore améliorer la performance globale de l'entreprise en matière d'agilité et de capacité d'adaptation.   Marciano Alves Lire l'article ici  ...
24 Jan 2014 Social collaboration in the Digital Age
[...]Businesses see the benefits of social collaboration technologies and are looking to use them more, but there’s still a lot of room for improvement.[...] In their last study, Avanade, a Microsoft-focused IT consultancy firm claims thaty most companies are looking favorably into the adoption of a Social Network. Problem is, they lack the culture that fully supports its adoption, and therefore fail to get most of the value it could bring in the organisation. Social collaboration is about methods and practices that foster exchange, sharing of information, collaborative work and working together, all of which can be difficult to reach if the organisation is too vertical, too compartmentalized. Mostly, adopting a collaborative culture is about communication. traditional resistance points are of course any cultural bias that favors information retention, like internal competition. It is also about understanding that the overall group performance is greater than the sum of its individual performances.  Hence the need to develop not so much the engagement, but rather the feeling of belonging. And nobody belongs to a company, butu we all belong to communities. So in the end, leveraging on Social Networks, is about leveraging on the power of your internal communities. This in turn allows the organisation to become a social node, a point of convergence and creation of information and contents. Business, Marketing, Future trends, products and services upgrades... plugging an organisation to its many stakeholders' voices and sharing with them is a source of valuable information, that should be transformed into tomorrow's innovations.  So, are your ready to get the most of your communities?      Marciano Alves Read the full article here    ...
23 Jan 2014 DRH 3.0: DRH/CEO?
[...]La 7e édition de MobiCadres - baromètre de référence sur la mobilité des cadres - publiée par Deloitte et Nomination, révèle que la fonction des DRH a changé. En effet, ces derniers sont de plus en plus sollicités par les directions qui les impliquent davantage dans la stratégie d’entreprise. L’effet sur la mobilité est notable puisqu’en 2013, la proportion des DRH qui ont évolué vers la direction générale est en hausse de 7 points (13 % contre 6 %)[...] La reflexion sur l'évolution du rôle des DRHs se poursuit. Mal aimés, incompris, désireux d'être enfin reconnus comme des centres de profit et non pas de coût, l'opportunité d'enfin effacer cette image qui leur colle à la définition de poste. Ne pas être que synonime de dégraissage, performance à tout va, pression aux résultats, mais enfin devenir force de construction et de cohésion sociale dans l'organisation.  Cette évolution tend à se faire naturellement dans la mesure où les entreprises sont de plus en plus confrontées à des problèmes complexes qui nécéssitent la mise en oeuvre de solutions élaborées collaborativement, et liaison étroite avec la direction générale et les autres divisions. L'émergence de nouvelles pratiques liées à l'irruption du digital dans la sphère professionnelle crée un espace nouveau de compétences stratégiques, qui in-fine devraient incomber au DRH. L'animation des animateurs de communauté en interne fait partie de ces nouvelles missions, transformant de facto le DRH en super community manager, garant de la cohésion culturelle des équipes, communautés, groupes... Ce faisant, la proposition DRH/CEO prend son sens, le DRH étant le pendant  du CEO pour ce qui relève des opérations....humaines! Lire l'article complet ici Marciano Alves  ...
10 Jan 2014 Réseaux sociaux pros : les entreprises toujours en retard
[...]Le réseau social Viadeo et l'ACCE, le Syndicat professionnel des agences conseil en communication pour l'emploi, publient une étude consacrée à l'évolution des pratiques des actifs et des employeurs sur les réseaux sociaux professionnels. Si les premiers ont largement recours à ces outils, les entreprises manquent encore de maturité [...] Les Réseaux Sociaux Professionnels deviennent indispensables dans la course à l'emploi. Mais comment les utiliser? Le besoin pour le candidat d'avoir une vraie stratégie d'utilisation des Réseaux Sociaux se fait crucial dès lors que l'on veut dépasser le stade du CV online pour tirer profit de ce nouveau média en terme d'image, de visibilité, de crédibilité, d'accélerateur de contacts et donc d'opportunités. Mais cela ne se fait pas sans travail. La mise à jour complète de son profil ne suffit pas. Il faut aussi se rendre visible, ce qui est une autre façon de dire qu'il faut se marketer. Recherche d'audience (nouveaux contacts), participation à des groupes de discussion, des communautés d'interêt, exposition de son travail sont autant d'ajouts à la simple valeur du profil, qui permettent de mesurer la valeur d'un candidat, mais aussi d'un consultant, ou encore d'une organisation. La qualité des informations partagées ou relayés, l'implication dans une communauté sont autant d'indicateurs à prendre en compte au delà du profil ou de la page corporate. Au delà du partage d'information, la vraie puissance des médias sociaux réside dans la capacité qu'ils ont de connecter des personnes, dans la poursuite d'objectifs qui ne sont pas limités au recrutement. Les réseaux sociaux sont aussi une source de business entrant, un outil de marketing nouveau, un outil de veille économique, et d'interaction dans l'ecosystème dans lequel se déplace l'organisation. Aujourd'hui plus de 50% des requêtes internet ne se font plus sur Google, mais directement dans les moteurs de recherche des réseaux sociaux. A l'aube de la guerre des talents être connecté à un réseau de compétences devient critique pour les organisations. Pour une recrutement bien sur, mais aussi pour capter de nouvelles idées, explorer de nouveaux territoires, trouver des partenaires, de l'information en direct.... bref, être acteur de son écosystème et donc se positionner au centre d'un réseau d'interactions dont le but est de renforcer son image de marque et in fine.... de vendre! Et vous, avez-vous pensé votre utilisation des résaux sociaux pour en maximiser les effets?   Marciano Alves Article Original Les résultats de l'étude  ...
Recently
Happy 2016....Read more
Best articles of the month
SIRH et développement RH[...]Le deuxième volet du benchmark SIRH réalisé par le Cercle Sirh et publié en décembre...Read more
How to overcome resistance to change...Despite our best efforts, we do not change easily, and we fiercely resist forces that...Read more
France Business School lance son premier MOOC : pensée design[...]A l'heure de la révolution numérique et de l'avènement des nouvelles technologies dans l'apprentissage, France...Read more