Social Organisation – Definition and Three Advantages

Posted on January 21, 2012

It’s 2012 folks! This year marks the end of era where “average-joe” intranet rules, where SOP is preferred over empowerment and engagement, and where customers keep mum about their dissatisfaction. And this year means screw business-as-usual! Organisations have to transform themselves to be social organisation or face slow-painful-death.

What is Social Organisation (a.k.a. Social Business/Enterprise)?

So what is social organisation anyway? You probably heard of the term and confuse it with social business (social enterprise) - a term made popular by a nobel price winner, Muhammad Yunus. According to Yunus, social business is a cause-driven business ala Tom Shoes (Tom Shoes commits itself to give a free pair of shoes to those in need, for every pair of shoes purchased).

Yunus’ concept on social business is beautiful. The world certainly needs Yunus’ social business model to beat poverty. Too bad, the IT and KM folks use the same term to mean organisations that use social technology, i.e. social media and social intranet, as competitive advantage (for examples, case studies, and definition, please read how IBM consulting describes social business).

For the sake of clarity, in this blog, I will use the term social organisation to refer to businesses empowered by social technology. I will avoid using the term social business/enterprise - unless I want to talk about Yunus’ version of social business (very unlikely as microfinance is not my passion. Social technology is). I suggest you do the same too.

Alas using the term social organisation doesn’t end the confusion. Some experts like two Gartner analysts: Anthony J. Bradley and Mark P. Mcdonald, use the term to refer to organisations empowered by social media application to business. Others like a Forbes contributor: Fred Cavazza, use the term to refer to organisations empowered by both social media and social intranet.

So, which version of social organisation is correct? It depends on what you believe in. I believe corporate (internal) and consumer communications are converging, and thus I think social organisations have to be supported by social media and by social intranet. So I agree with Fred Cavazza’s definition of social organisation.

I also think the main purpose of social technology is to build communities. Combining these thoughts, I get the following definition of social organisation:

Social Organisation is organisation that maximises the use of social media (technology) and social intranet, to improve consumer and employee engagement and to build communities for innovation.

Why Organisations Have to Be Social Organisations?

Three big benefits underpin the need to become social organisations:

First, improved ability to engage employees, esp. the gen-Ys. Gen-Ys are moody bunch. This generation was brought up with a belief that the sky is the limit. They have a high (often unrealistic) sense of entitlement to pursue their dream/passion. The Millennials demand empowerment and bask in entrepreneurship working environment. Social organisation offers them such environment – an environment where they can be engaged and have the freedom to pursue their passion.

Second, improved ability to build communities. Social technologies are great community-building tools. They allow people with similar passion to “gather” and connect beyond the physical limitation, i.e. geographical boundaries and time difference. In other words, social technology is a catalyst for community-building. And we all know that passionate communities are breeding grounds for collective learning and innovation.

Third, ability to build relationship with social customers. Many people use social media like Facebook, Twitter, not only to improve the way they interact and live, but also to give recommendations and voice-out displeasure. Organisations would be wise to maintain presence in social media, to engage the social customers, to capture their testimonials, and to address their concern real-time.

Any thoughts? Write them down in the comment box below.

Recommended Readings:

Bradley, A., J., and McDonald, M., P. (2011). The Social Organisation – Chapter 1: The Promise of Social Organisations. Harvard Business Press.

Cavazza, F. (2012). The What and How of Social Business. Forbes.

N.A. (n.d.). Social Business. IBM.

Neisser, D. (2011). Move Over Social Media; Here Comes Social Business. Fast Company.

Why SMRT Has to Be More Empathetic and Be a Social Organisation (Part II)

Posted on December 28, 2011

This is the part II of Why SMRT Has To Be More Empathetic and Be a Social Organisation (read the part I). In this blog post, I’ll discuss SMRT’s poor understanding of who the social customers are, and what they want. I’ll also convince you that SMRT has to transform itself to be a social organisation, to deal with the social customers.

Poor understanding of what the social customers want

Let’s face it. SMRT wouldn’t be in a rut like they are in today, if the MRT broke-down incidents happen 10 years ago. Most customers are just going to complain verbally with their buddies in Kopitiam (Singapore-style coffee shop). A few would probably bother to write to the print media. SMRT can quietly do their work, i.e. fixing the damaged rail way and the trains, and the public will soon forget the whole incidents.

Alas the customers today are not the customers 10 years ago. The customers today are equipped with Facebook, Twitter, blogs, and other social media tools that give them the power of media. So the customers today are in fact some sort of amateur journalists / publicist who can distribute contents at will. There is a term for this new breed of customers: social customers.

Social customers are on the rise and they are very vocal in the new media. In the case of train disruptions, many young Singaporeans have vented their massive displeasure/criticism of SMRT online – severely denting SMRT’s reputation. SMRT’s brand-and-credibility heads further south when one of their staff sent an insensitive message to SMRT cab drivers, telling them of “income opportunity” due to the incidents.

Let’s find out how bad the online sentiment against SMRT is. On 17 Dec 2011, I did a quick check on online sentiment for SMRT, using Twendz and Socialmention (both are tools for online conversation tracker). Here is the result:

1. Twendz reveals negative sentiment against SMRT. The negative mood grows 18%, in 8 minutes of Twitter conversation. See the following illustrations for further details.

First caption. On 17 Dec 11, at 4:23 p.m., here is the online sentiment for SMRT: 43% negative vs 39% neutral vs 19% positive.

Second caption. On 17 Dec 11, 4:31 p.m., here is the online sentiment for SMRT: 61% negative vs 26% neutral vs 13% positive.

2. Socialmention also reveals a negative trend against SMRT. Within 15 minutes of Twitter conversation, the positive:negative ratio decreases from 3:1 to 2:1 (about 17% decrease).

On 17 Dec 2011, Socialmention shows decreasing positive vs negative ratio (highlighted in yellow) for SMRT.

SMRT’s response to address this issue? In my view, they did two major things. First, SMRT created a corporate Twitter account (@SMRT_Singapore) to improve information flow to customers. Second, SMRT conducted a postmortem and announced that they will revise their SOPs.

Sadly the two responses above wouldn’t be able to satisfy the social customers’ needs. What these smart, young, and vocal people want isn’t a better SOPs (who cares about the SOPs – which were created by the same people who messed up – anyway?), or a one-way-communication tweets from a corporate account that sounds stiff, cold, and super boring (see the following screen-shot and you’ll know what I mean).

one-way-communication tweets from SMRT_Singapore on 18 Dec 11. A classic example of how NOT to use Twitter to promote your brand.

What the social customers want is engagement. Yes, they want to be involved. They want to be part of something. So what SMRT needs to do is actually engage the social customers. When they conduct a postmortem, get some opinions from the social customers. And when SMRT tweets, ask for feedback, or “talk” to the social customers. Twitter isn’t an information panel. It is a two-way communication platform.

Engagement, both online and internal staff engagement, is something that SMRT has to learn urgently. To be successful in engagement, SMRT has to let go of its command-and-control culture / Taylorism (i.e. an outdated management theory that emphasises high-level management control over employee work practices and standardisation of work (read: SOPs)). A manifestation of SMRT’s Taylorism, other than the SOPs, is the do’s and don’ts list for the public. Would anyone bother to remember the list?

And SMRT has to transform itself to become social organisation. Social organisation invests in social intranet – so that poor internal communication/coordination among staff can be minimised, and in social media – so that the organisation can engage its social customers and can crowdsource new ideas to solve problems or to innovate (these days, no organisation can claim they have all the solution to meet customers’ complex needs).

Further readings:

SMRT was fined S$387,176 in January 2008. http://sbr.com.sg/transport-logistics/interview/interview-saw-phaik-hwa

MRT train disruption affects 17,500 commuters. http://www.straitstimes.com/BreakingNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_654092.html

SMRT fined $7,851 by LTA for not meeting taxi targets. http://www.straitstimes.com/BreakingNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_714749.html

SMRT fined S$200,000 for security breach. http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1160140/1/.html

1400 Passengers Affected by Circle Line Disruption. http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1171290/1/.html

North-South MRT Line Breakdown Hits Thousand. http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1171573/1/.html

MRT breakdown “extremely serious”: Lui Tuck Yew. http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1171821/1/.html

SMRT CEO Apologises for MRT Breakdown. http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1171733/1/.html

Commuters’ reactions to SMRT’s apology over train disruption. http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1171797/1/.html

More training for train drivers to improve communication: SMRT. http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1171785/1/.html

Why Smart Organisations Use Social Intranet

Posted on August 21, 2011

To win in today’s business competition, you need a social intranet. I’m dead serious. The future belongs to organisations who can use the power of social intranet for employee engagement, productivity, collaboration, and innovation.

Yep, practically all the things that the management wants. So what is this social intranet? Social intranet is an intranet with social technology tools like social networking, blog, discussion forum, comment box, wikis, etc.

If this sounds like social media stuff, it is! Social intranet is about using social media within the organisation. There is a subtle difference between social technology and social media. Social media is usually referring to Facebook, Twitter, Linkedin, or any other web 2.0 tools in the internet. Social technology, on the other hand, is a more generic terms that cover the whole array of web 2.0 tools in internet and in intranet.

Smart organisations are investing in social intranet rather than simply allowing the use of social media in the organisation (I know it is difficult to stop people from using social media at work, thanks to the ubiquitous iphone and other smart-phone devices).

Here is why. Employees can make use of their free time to share ideas and to connect with their colleagues in social intranet – rather than in social-media sites. The big idea is, to contain the sharing of ideas and social networking within the organisation.

Why not use social media? Social media isn’t ideal because people can ”inadvertently” share sensitive information to the public. And it is impossible to link employees’ social activities in social media to the benefit of the organisation.

I know what you are thinking. You are probably going to criticise me for not embracing the concept of Open Innovation, i.e. collectively innovate through idea-sharing with the public, competitors, amateurs, etc. I gotta tell you this: I’m an advocate and ardent believer of open innovation. Yes, I’m.

But, I’m also a very practical person. I don’t think organisations can entirely open-up their business processes, or can crowdsource strategic decision-making to outsiders. Open Innovation and Crowdsourcing can be used in situations where the organisation is exploring something new that it has no expertise in.

Okay, enough of open innovation and crowdsourcing. Let’s get back to our discussion on using social intranet in organisations.

With social intranet, you can:

Increase employee engagement. Work is no longer boring, when part of your work is to pursue your professional interest/passion, and to build your personal brand within the corporate intranet. Plus, you get the chance to connect with cool people in the organisation (people who have similar interests with you).
Increase productivity. Looking for corporate information or contents owned by your colleagues? Well, it’s going to take awhile if you are using traditional intranet. But with social intranet? Seriously, you can get it within a blink. That’s because in social intranet, contents are tagged using corporate taxonomy and your own tags (social tagging or folksonomy) – which means you can retrieve contents faster by refining your search according to those tags. And if you have a very good social intranet like Sharepoint 2010 (Too bad microsoft don’t pay me for endorsing their hot-selling product), you can search contents based on social distance, i.e. your “friends’ contents” get prioritised in the search engine. So, you can jump straight to contents authored by people whom you trust.
Improve social collaboration. It’s hard to collaborate using email, because you are often get confused on which version is the latest and on whether the document has been vetted by the bosses. In social intranet, you can use collaboration space as one-stop centre for collaboration. You and your co-workers can add, edit, amend, or delete contents at easy because every changes made is recorded. You know which version is latest in collaboration space. Plus, you can create a workflow to route documents for approval.
Increase innovation. In social intranet, cultivating communities of practice (CoP) is easy. Employees have more opportunities to find like-minded colleagues and to start building a community around a shared-passion. When employees have supportive-environment (the CoP) and the means to experiment with their ideas, there will be more innovations in the organisations.

Does your organisation use social intranet? Tell me whether it has made an impact to your work or how it has benefited the organisation.

Further Readings: