David Goldstein's Weblog

Webinar on SharePoint Search and Information Architecture

My colleague Sadie Van Buren is speaking at a webinar--Optimizing Your SharePoint Investment - Through Search & Information Architecture-- next month sponsored by Earley & Associates.  Seth Earley has put together a strong group of speakers for the four session webinar, which starts June 4th.  Sadie will speak on June 11th on "Making Basic SharePoint Search Work."  Sadie is a Manager in our SharePoint practice area and has worked with many of our clients to design and build SharePoint-based intranets and extranets.  She has extensive experience with search, branding, usability, and workflows.

Observations from the 2009 MIT CIO Symposium

I attended the MIT CIO Symposium yesterday.  Overall, it was an excellent event.  The speakers and moderators were strong.  There were several hundred CIOs, IT consultants, vendors and IT managers there.  Here's what I learned:

• Alan Trefler, the CEO of Pegasystems, advised CIOs to focus on process automation (not surprising since Pegasystems sell process automation software).  He told CIOs to promise 50% improvement and deliver 80%.  He also admonished CIOs to get out of a technology only role and move toward adding business value.   Given KMA's experience with workflow automation, I can see how his advice can be valuable to IT managers.  There can be some quick wins and real business benefit from automating business processes.  These cost savings applications are relatively easier to sell in the current downturn.
• Both Trefler and Joseph Alsop, the former CEO of Progress Software, discussed the folly of getting users to sign off on requirements.  Getting sign-off makes IT managers feel better.  They have some proof that there systems do what the user asked for.  The problem comes when what the user asked for is not what they need.  This, unfortunately, is a common problem that both internal IT organizations and IT consultants like KMA face.  We try to mitigate the problem by learning as much as possible about business needs before we build.  We also try to build our applications rapidly.  For many applications, we get much better feedback from users after they interact with the application.
• Alsop reinforced his point by paraphrasing the last verse of a take-off on the poem "Twas the Night Before Christmas."  I found it on the web:

They system was finished, the tests were concluded,
the client's last changes were even included.
And the user exclaimed with a snarl and a taunt,
"IT'S JUST WHAT I ASKED FOR, BUT NOT WHAT I WANT."

• Three academics were asked what the next big thing was for IT.  Tom Malone said it was collective intelligence and mentioned how technology technologies like Google and Wikipedia can change the way we work.  Jeanne Ross said it was digitized platforms.  Companies that develop a unified platform to store and share information can gain a competitive advantage.  Erik Brynjolfsson discussed how organizations that experiment, measure and scale the results will best exploit the power of IT.  All three ideas were very interesting and worth exploring in more depth.
• Andy McAfee led a panel on Enterprise 2.0.  Unfortunately, many of the participants didn't have much to add to the discussion.  The attendees, however, had a great discussion on Twitter about the panel and the panelists.  This really brought the power of Twitter home to me.  It reinforced how Twitter is a great tool for capturing customer feedback.

Overall the conference was excellent.  The topics were timely and the content was good.  I wish there were a few more CIOs as speakers and a few less vendors.

 

 

Interesting Research on the Impact of Collaboration Tools

I attended a session on Friday (May 1) on the value of web 2.0 tools to the organization.   The research was carried out at Mitre by Professors Sal Parise and Bala Iyer of Babson College.  This is the first study that I've seen that attempts to quantify the impact of social collaboration tools.  This topic is very new (from a researcher's perspective) and I found the results very interesting.

Mitre is a government contractor (over 1000 employees?) that has invested heavily in behind the firewall social collaboration tools.  They have been using a shared bookmarking tool (Onomi) for several years and listservs for even longer.  Mitre is also a heavy SharePoint user, but these tools are not tied into Sharepoint.  Maybe the research will serve as a small nudge to Microsoft to include them in an upcoming version.

The researchers collected data about 129 users of listserv and social bookmarking tools.  They measured:

• Who they connected with through listservs and social bookmarking (by examining system data).
• Who was in their social network (through a social network survey).
• How innovative they were in their work (as measured by two peers).

They found that use of listservs and social bookmarking were related to individual innovativeness.  Specifically, they examined the number of unique relationships that each individual had through their social network, through listservs and through bookmarking.  They called this brokering.  They found that people who played a larger broker role with their social network were rated as more innovative.  Also, when controlling for social network broker role, both listserv broker role and social bookmarking broker role were related to innovativeness.  Also, they found no relationship between the frequency of use of listservs or social bookmarking and innovativeness.

What does this all mean to practicing managers?  I'm encouraged to see that these tools had a measurable impact.  The employees that are using them to connect with lots of people from different parts of the organization are more innovative than those that are using them to connect with fewer people or people who are tightly connected with each other.

The research does not tell you to go out and add a social bookmarking tool behind the firewall.  It starts to provide evidence that when these tools are used to broaden networks within an organization, they can make employees more innovative.  Of course, you could also argue that the employees that are more innovative are the ones that build larger and more diverse networks.

Professors Parise and Iyer should be commended for tackling a complex and important research question and for generating some thought-provoking findings.

Lessons from Soft Skills Training

First, I wanted to say that I'm back to blogging after a winter hiatus.  Spring seems to finally have arrived in the Boston area and it's time to restart my blog.  I thought I'd start with a post that I've been meaning to do for a while.

In November, we invited P.J. Guinan, a professor at Babson College to KMA for an all day 'soft skills' workshop.  She did a great job training our consultants and our managers in listening, better understanding and meeting the needs of our clients. Before the training, she interviewed several of our clients to get a better sense of our strengths and weaknesses.  Through a series of large and small group discussions, case studies, and role playing exercises, PJ made us more aware of how we interact with our clients and how we could improve these interactions.

Much of what P.J. taught us was "Consulting 101."  It was a great refresher for me and a good introduction my colleagues consultants who are new to consulting.

I walked away with three ways I could improve my own interactions with clients:

1. Prepare for initial client meetings.  P.J. pointed out how important it is to understand the industry in which the client operates and key issues the client faces.  In addition, it's critical to learn about all the stakeholders in the project, both IT and business, and their roles in the project.  All too often, I find that I run out of prep time before a client meeting.  I will redouble my efforts to prepare.
2. Listen better to clients.  P.J. focused a great deal on listening skills.   Concepts like showing empathy and paraphrasing can help in both learning needs and establishing a rapport with clients.
3. Follow-up.  When you walk away from a meeting the client is often enthusiastic to pursue the opportunity.  This enthusiasm can quickly wane as they move onto new meetings and unexpected crises.  Overall, we do a good job of following-up to attempt to maintain enthusiasm and bring the project to closing.  It almost never hurts to do more.

I would highly recommend P.J. if you're looking for help with soft skills either in a consulting firm or an internal IT organization.

How 'Close' is Your Team?

A second seminar in the  "IT-Enabled Enterprise Collaboration - Where, When and Why?" at the Babson College Center for Information Management Studies was also noteworthy.  Karen Sobel Lojeski, a Professor at SUNY Stony Brook introduced the concept of "Virtual Distance."  Lojeski developed a measure of the virtual distance among team members and found that it was a strong predictor of key outcomes related both to team member attitude and project success.

Lojeski identified 11 distance measures that group into three factors:

• Physical distance factors include how close the team members are located, how many time zones separate members, and how far apart the members are organizationally. 
• Operational distance factors measure team size, the degree to which the team works face-to-face, the degree to which team members multitask, and the types of collaboration tools and technical support available to team members.
• Affinity distance factors measure the degree to which team members share cultural values, feel interdependent, have other relationships (through other projects or socially), and are at the same level within the organization.

She noted that most of these measures can be collected objectively.  Only a few were subjective perceived measures.  This made it easy to develop a "virtual dstance index," which can be shown on a spider chart.

This allows an organization to easily assess the virtual distance among members of different teams, identify teams that are at risk and take remedial action. 

Teams with relatively low virtual distance were:

• more likely to deliver a project on-time and on-budget
• more trusting
• more innovative
• had higher job satisfaction
• perceived that their leaders were more effective

I liked Lojeski's measurement framework, because it rang true when evaluating KMA-client teams and their relative success.  For example, we ran into problems on a recent project where we had to integrate a contract QA resource with our development team and QA staff, the client's developers, and the business users.  While everyone was physically co-located at the client facility, the coordination was still quite difficult.  In another recent project, our developers worked closely with the client's IT staff (both local to Boston), but the business users were located all over the country.  It was difficult to get feedback from the business users in a timely manner and the project suffered.  We also had a client that moved its IT staff from downtown Boston to a suburb 45 minutes away.  Even though they invested in sophisticated video conferencing equipment, the gulf between the two groups grew, making it more difficult for us to work with both groups.

Moving forward I will be more cognizant of the virtual distance among team members in new projects.  I will take steps to reduce them where possible by scheduling more face to face time with clients, being aware of competing time demands for our consultants, and trying to strengthen relationships between KMA and its clients.  I will also be on the lookout for high virtual distance among client team members and try to add the resources needed to make these higher risk projects successful.

To read more about virtual distance, try Lojeski's book, "Uniting the Virtual Workforce," or this working paper--Making Virtual Distance Work in the Digital Age.

Social Networking at IBM

I went to a seminar entitled, "IT-Enabled Enterprise Collaboration - Where, When and Why?" at  the Babson College Center for Information Management Studies on Friday.  There were three excellent speakers.  This entry discusses David Millen's talk on Social Networking tools at IBM. Millen is a Research Scientist at the IBM Watson Research Center in Cambridge.

IBM has invested significant time and effort in building social networkingtools that sit behind the corporate firewall.  These tools support collaboration within the organization.  More important, they strengthen the 'loose ties' among colleagues within the company.

The most impressive application Millen described was Beehive--an opt-in social networking site.  Beehive is Facebook customized to work behind the firewall of a large organization.  From a Microsoft perspective, its an extended version of SharePoint's My Sites.  Employees can post profiles and share photos, lists and other information about themselves.

The feel of beehive is much more Facebook than corporate intranet.  It's much more social and personal than corporate.  You can find a java expert, but you can also find a jogging companion for your trip to Tampa.  You can learn about the people you're working with, developing stronger ties and hopefully collaborating more effectively.

At IBM and many other large multi-national companies, there is a great deal of collaboration among ad hoc teams.  Beehive should give members a better feel for their colleagues.

The other two applications were Dogear--a social bookmarking site--and Cattail--a file sharing site.  Dogear was based on del.icio.us and other web-based social bookmarking applications.  It allowed users to bookmark web pages both on the internet and behind IBM's firewall.  It is a good way to learn what your colleagues are interested in, track down more information on topics.  Cattail allows you to post files for sharing, see who downloads your files and see how they are shared throughout the company.  The applications interact with blogs and other web pages through mashups and rest APIs.

As a Microsoft Gold Partner, I usually don't blog about IBM.  I made an exception, because I felt that there work opens a window into how large organizations can adapt some of the web-based social networking tools, like Facebook, LinkedIn and del.icio.us.

I think the impact of these tools can be significant.  They can strengthen the ties between co-workers.  This will make it easier for remote workers to collaborate.  They can also strengthen the ties of workers to the company.  Finally, they could become a requirement.  As more new workers enter large corporations, they will expect that the tools that they use on the web will also be available behind the firewall.

The major downside of these tools is there lack of easily measurable ROI.  In the current economic downturn, I would guess that many large companies would not be willing to invest in these tools.

I salute IBM for sharing their research so widely and encourage you to check out their site for a look into the future.  I'm very interested in seeing how Microsoft incorporates ideas from Facebook, LinkedIn and del.icio.us in the next version of SharePoint.

Applying the "Power of AND" to IT Management

Built to Last by Jim Collins and Jerry Porras is one of my favorite management books.  They analyze the differences between companies that perform exceptionally well over a long period of time by comparing these companies to similar ones that are less successful.  One of the concepts that stuck with me from the book is the "Power of AND."  Here's a quote:

A key aspect of highly visionary companies: They do not oppress themselves with what we call the Tyranny of the OR--the rational view that cannot easily accept paradox, which cannot live with two seemingly contradictory forces or ideas at the same time.  The Tyranny of the OR pushes people to believe that things must be either A or B but not both.

Instead of being oppressed by the Tyranny of the OR, highly visionary companies liberate themselves with the Genius of the AND--the ability to embrace both extremes of a number of dimensions at the same time.  Instead of choosing between A or B, they figure out a way to have both A AND B.

These companies can be highly profitable and still be a great place to work or could be innovative and the low cost producer.

I heard John Doucette, VP & CIO of United Technologies Corporation, speak at the Boston CIO Executive Summit last week.  While he did not mention Built to Last, he did an excellent job of applying the concept to managing the IT organization at a large, multi-national.

Doucette described how an IT organization could be effective at providing commodity IT services AND develop innovative IT solutions that support UTC's corporate strategy.  He was able to satisfy Nicholas Carr (Does IT Matter?) AND Warren McFarlan (Why IT Does Matter)!

Doucette described the key IT initiatives at UTC.  They included improving the quality and reducing the cost of core IT services.  These were the first and most important tasks for IT.  You can't really embark on strategic initiatives if your core infrastructure is not always available.

He also discussed two strategic initiatives--a field services engineers automation effort that was used by Otis and other divisions and a CAD project used for Pratt & Whitney jet engines.  Both illustrated a commitment to investing in IT to support UTC's strategy.

From my perspective this was a great example of the "Power of AND."  Doucette's IT organization both ran a cost conscious and high availability service operation and delivered innovative, leading edge solutions that allow UTC to grow.

We see the Power of AND at many of our customers as well.  They are all focused on insuring their infrastructure is available and up-to-date.  They are also always looking for the strategic advantage that comes from cleverly implementing new technologies.  We work with our customers to built a base intranet to make it easier for everyone to find and share information and we will then to use the same intranet infrastructure to build a sophisticated business intelligence or knowledge management system that can help the organization implement its strategy.

 

A Good Explanation of Twitter and the Social Networking Phenomenon

I'm over 50 and have had a hard time understanding why some of my younger colleagues at KMA are so excited about Facebook and Twitter.  The idea that I should share my experiences multiple times a day in 140 character miniblog entries seemed like a waste of time.  As did the idea of reading these entries from 100s of acquaintances.  Yet Twitter is really popular and is being used in business as well as social settings.

There was an excellent article in the New York Times Magazine a few weeks ago.  "I'm So Totally, Digitally Close to You," by Clive Thomson appeared in the September 7 issue.  Thompson describes Facebook's News Feeds and Twitter as ways to keep track of friends and have them keep track of you--where you're having dinner, the latest pictures of your family, how you're feeling.

These technologies greatly expand your network by letting you keep in touch with your loose acquaintances, people you met at a conference or at a business meeting.  I collect dozens of business cards of people who I then loose complete touch with.  Maybe using Twitter or friending them on Facebook, or linking to them in LinkedIn will change this.

Thompson notes that these "weak ties" can be really valuable when you need to solve problems--hiring a SharePoint Architect, finding an Access developer as a referral to a client, or tracking down the answer to a tricky technical question (e.g., can I embed an InfoPath form in a PowerPoint template?).  Your strong ties tend to know more or less the same people and the same things you know.  You have many more weak ties and they know many more and different things.

Can I make better use of LinkedIn, which I now use only occasionally?  Should I start a Facebook page?  Should I start tweeting?  I'm not sure, but I know it's important for me to grow my network to allow me to better serve our employees and our clients and to help KMA grow.

I also am struggling with ways to make the Boston SIM Consultant Roundtable more valuable to its members.  Can we use social networking to enhance our weak ties and better keep us in touch?  We meet only four times per year.  You'd think a bunch of technology consultants could figure this out!

You can see I have more questions than answers on this topic.  I'll revisit it when I try these technologies and know more.  Let me know if you can help me figure these things out.

Limiting Loss of Knowledge from Retirement and Turnover

At KMA, our focus is typically on building systems to help companies organize and share knowledge.  Sometimes these systems help mitigate the impact of retirement or turnover, by making it easier for employees to find key information.

Our systems rarely help with the potentially larger problem of knowledge that leaves when the employee leaves.  This problem is critical in areas like IT and for companies like KMA.  We have analysts and developers with detailed knowledge of how are Mekko Graphics software works and how we have implemented SharePoint at client sites.  We need to insure that this knowledge stays at KMA if key employees move on.

I attended a talk at Babson's Center for Information Management Studies entitled,"Sustaining Critical IT Workforce Capabilities: Framework for Action."  Dave DeLong an Adjunct Professor at Babson and author of Lost Knowledge presented the talk.  Dave was also a colleague of mine at MIT's Center for Information Systems Research in the early 80's.  He presented a strategy for assessing what knowledge is at risk when people leave and then how to develop a strategy for the knowledge.

Dave's focus is on the aging workforce and issues with retirement, but his ideas also hold true for companies that experience lost knowledge through turnover.  He made me consider our strategy in several areas:

• identifying key knowledge that is at risk
• developing plans to insure that risk is minimized if employees with this knowledge leave KMA
• identifying plans for retaining all employees, with a focus on ones with key knowledge
• refining our recruiting strategy to insure that we have enough slack resources to spread key knowledge among our employees.

 

A Few Business Books Worth Reading

I am very picky about the business books I read.  I find that many have at most 1-2 good ideas buried in too many checklists and case studies.  I wanted to share with you some of the books I think are worth reading and why:

• The Search: How Google & Its Rivals Rewrote the Rules of Business & Transformed Our Culture by John Battelle. This is an excellent review, from a management perspective, of how search works. It can be valuable if your organization is considering implementing search software. It also provides a good history of the search business and how Google grew to be the major player in search.
• The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable by Nassim Nicholas Taleb. This book was recommended by a CIO. The author makes a strong case that rare and highly unpredictable events (black swans) have a major impact on business and the economy. 9/11 and the current financial industry crisis are prime examples. Taleb argues that our personal investment models are based on assumptions that don't take this into account. A one paragraph explanation does not do this book justice. It's worth tracking it down and learning more.  You might want to rethink your investment strategy.
• Supercrunchers by Ian Ayres. Companies and governments are collecting large data sets on individual behavior. This book outlines how they are being used to in applications like airline ticket pricing and medical diagnosis. The author focuses on the use of regression analysis and randomized trials. It seems like all the math I learned in grad school is becoming significantly more useful given the increased computing power available today. As an IT manager, you might want to be aware that some of the data you are storing can be of real value of analyzed systematically.
• Predictably Irrational by Dan Ariely. The author does an excellent job describing how the economists assumption that we behave rationally is wrong. Further, he describes how the ways we are irrational are predictable. This is an interesting book, but probably does not have a lot of relevance for IT managers.

 I'll try to add to this list as I come across more books worth discussing.