As a part of me embarking on Harold Jarche’s workshop in Personal Knowledge Mastery (PKM), I decided to expand my use of a social network. Last time I took the workshop (yes, it is awesome), I focused on Twitter. That move has led to a much smarter ways of handling Twitter, including using lists. During this year’s workshop, I decided to become better at using LinkedIn.
It all started with upgrading to LinkedIn Premium to see if that gave me better insights into my professional network plus access to training via Lynda.com. I combined that with engaging in more posts and groups, and so far it is working well. I do, however, think that LinkedIn could be even better at what it does. Therefore, I have the following suggestions on how to improve the platform:
These recommendations would surely make LinkedIn a pleasure to use. Today it is somewhat of a mess where I feel I miss valuable posts, but LinkedIn can transform this into something good.
All companies are going through changes, and must handle them in some way. Things are no different where I work:
One way to handle changes such as these, could be to be worried, complain, and lose valuable sleep. Of course, that is of no use. It is simply impossible to know where all the above lands and we must handle these changes constructively. Meanwhile, many companies approach it the wrong way:
What if everything we have been told about Change Management over the course of the last few decades was all just … plain wrong?
Luiz Suarez hits the nail on the head in his blog post “When Context Transcends Change Management”. 70% of company change initiatives fail to achieve their goals, meaning companies are bad at handling change. Meanwhile, there is a multitude of consultants who want to take our money since they have figured it out, they say. Most of the time, they haven’t. Just look at the numbers. If they were truly good, the results would say far more change initiatives succeeded.
Among other things, Luiz highlights parts of the analysis made by Dave Snowden in “Towards a new theory of change” such as:
But the real change in organisations is when you change the way that people connect, and the most profound way in which that connection can be achieved is through small actions that change perceptions in an evolutionary way. People argue that it is easier to change an individual that to change the system and that may be right. But if you want systemic change there are simply too many individuals to change to achieve it and it is a lot easier to change the interactions and allow people autonomy over what they are.
Small actions that change perceptions in an evolutionary way. Sounds far more intriguing that the standard grand change management PPT. For those interested, even more myth busting is presented in “Debunking the myths of organizational change management”. Yes, it is presented by Accenture, a consultancy firm, but their presentation is based on a rigid set of data spanning 15 years. For example, it is not the change that causes organizations to go off track. The changes instead just expose what is not working – things you should pay attention to.
So, how do we move away from the massive set of bad change programs? There are of course many ways, and I can only mention a few here. Two models that might work are these:
“When is the urgency rate high enough? From what I have seen, the answer is when about 75% of a company’s management is honestly convinced that business as usual is totally unacceptable. Anything less can produce very serious problems later on in the process.”
For an introduction to the difference between change management and change leadership, see:[x_video_embed type=”16:9″][/x_video_embed]
Soon, 10 years have passed since the above articles were published. Still, companies fail to change fast enough, and the world that has accelerated even faster during the decade. My advice is to pick a model that makes sense, the above two or not, and then just start. As we heard, status quo is totally unacceptable.
I have worked in the communications and learning areas ever since the 90’s, and my current job is as a communications manager. One thing that has struck me is how the communication landscape has changed the last couple of years. For many, being a good communicator traditionally meant being good at writing. No matter the subject and its complexity, you could turn it into a well-tasting and beautiful dish, that was easily digested. I still see some professional communicators who seem stuck on this “write for the web” island. Now, I would argue this is not enough if you want to be a good communicator.
I recently arrived back from London, where I was invited as a speaker at the Interaction Conference. Luckily, I was also invited to be part of the panel discussion with Gerry McGovern, James Robertson, Sam Marshall, and Andy Williamson. This discussion made me think more about how the role of communicators is changing. Below are some things I think are vital for any communicator, besides the basic writing skills.
As a communicator, you should also know:
I am in no way fully trained in the above areas, but at least they are on my radar. Every day I am taking another step towards being more skilled in these regions. Hopefully, it also makes me a better communicator.
This week was the first after the lovely Swedish summer. Once back, I learned that two companies want to buy Haldex. One company, ZF, is now left and we need to wait and see what happens. If they buy us, we take one road, if they don’t, we take another.
Meanwhile, I turn up the sound on the car stereo and have as fun as possible going forward. There is still so much to do to transform our technology into really supporting humans. No matter in which constellation I will work, creating a humane digital workplace is at the center.
Last week, I was honored to be invited as one of the speakers at Intranätverk. The conference, held a few times a year, attracts people who want to talk about intranets and the digital workplace. My talk was (no surprise here) about culture and the intranet: Digitalization and culture – From flirt to proposal. The culture and the technology can flirt all they want, but we must also make sure they walk hand-in-hand.
At Haldex, we make sure we don’t just talk about our culture and the 5Cs. Among other things, we also make sure our intranet serves as a concrete evidence of them. There, we do a number of things to remind employees that our 5Cs are at the center of what we do:
If Communications is excluded, the workplace can be filled by badly written and overly long PPT files nobody will grasp.
If IT is excluded, people have no access to the tools they need to work effectively.
If Human Resources is excluded, the rest don’t know what to emphasize.
If all play nicely together, we are taking steps to a better workplace tomorrow.
For those who are interested, my full presentation is available at Intranätverk’s Slideshare channel.
One of the things that attracted me to Haldex, was the focus on building and maintaining the strong culture. Above, you see an introduction to our culture and its relation to our strategy, as described by our CEO and our VP of Human Resources. Meanwhile, for several years I have been interested in building the digital workplace, but felt that something vital was missing. Why the focus on the digital per se? Why not focus on the goal of building a digital workplace? And how do we incorporate more of Harold Jarche's Personal Knowledge Mastery, Jane Hart's Learning in the Social Workplace, and John Stepper's Working out loud?
When I bought Amanda Sterling's book "The Humane Workplace - People, Community, Technology", the road ahead seemed clearer. In my mind, of course we are aiming to create a more humane workplace, and all companies need to do it their way. That is why the above culture movie is an important start in this work: If culture eats strategy for breakfast, then all efforts to improve a company must start with the culture.
In the coming weeks, I will work more with mapping the typical digital workplace measurements (thanks Digital Workplace Group) to our culture. It is an experiment, but most probably worth doing. Hopefully, other professionals want to join me on this journey.
Social media has been around for a long time. It has been everything from ridiculed to mind numbingly praised, but still we seem to lack the ONE tool to rule them all. Why?
Basically, working with posting to, and covering, social media channels should be a breeze. But so far, it seems I need to use at least two tools to get my job done professionally:
Hootsuite needs no introduction and it is an awesome tool for covering social channels. I tend to view it as awesome for Twitter, even though they say it is good for everything. Follow and unfollow, use tabs, lists, replies and posts, yes it is all there. I love it for keeping track easily of everything Twitter. But the scheduling function? And the graphical layout? Well, please update.
The other tool is CoSchedule and I heard about it first via Michael Hyatt’s “The one tool you need to master social media“. It looks super cool, works flawlessly, integrates with WordPress and more and is a wonderful gift for global teams. But still it lacks what Hootsuite gives us: Complete listings of social channels.
So my advice for the two companies is: Please marry. Add CoSchedule’s gorgeous layout and scheduling with Hootsuite’s very effective listings and you have a winner. You are both very good at engaging customers via courses, tips and tricks, but you are still two tools.
I also wish all the other tools could find each other, instead of being “91 Free Twitter Tools” just for one channel. Great article, but I need less tools, not more, to be effective.