#1: The Exchange of Value is Reversed
When we interact with a brand, we are free, independent, and hold all the cards. We may be influenced by our peers, but we don’t have to be. It’s our choice. And we are the buyer; of goods, services, information. But when we interact with an employer, different dynamics come into play. We are, let’s be honest, in a different kind of power relationship. In many states, we are at-will employees. The exchange of value is reversed. We are the goods, and the employer is the buyer. So we don’t have the same independence that we do as consumers.
Point #2: Identity is Known and Constant
On the Internet, your identity is fluid. You can use your real name on Facebook, a handle on Twitter and a different handle altogether on Instagram, Tumblr and Pinterest. It’s challenging for companies to determine who you are, because there is no universal social login. Identity can be as transparent as a first-initial-last-name Twitter handle (@setlinger), as confusing as in the Manti T’eo affair, or completely anonymous. Companies like Janrain, which provides user management and social login services, have made a business out of helping businesses better understand user identity. But in an organization, your identity is known and constant. There’s nowhere to hide.
Point #3: Roles are More Stable
As a consumer, I may be reading the news one minute, shopping for my family the next, and then making business travel plans. Every organization I interact with has a different view of my journey and interests. While employees play different roles within an organization, they tend to have a job focus, be it marketing, compliance, product development or sales. Their role is more stable, and the content they engage with is driven partly by their job description.
For that reason, concepts like “engagement” and “relevance” take on a different meaning when you’re acting as an employee rather than as a consumer. While we always want to promote engagement, the meaning of engagement may vary dramatically depending on the person’s role within the organization. Someone in product development or training may produce and share a lot of content, while someone in HR or compliance may simply consume it. Does that mean that HR and compliance are not as “engaged?” Not at all. It simply means that their need for collaboration varies according to their role.
Charlene Li’s “Making the Business Case for Enterprise Social Networks” includes an excellent framework on page 13 to help you understand how social collaboration creates value for organizations. Here are some thought-starter questions based on her framework meant to inform your thinking about what to measure:
Encourage Sharing
Does participation in social collaboration correlate with employee satisfaction?
Does it promote best practices that lead to quality improvement?
Does it correlate to reductions in issue resolution time?
Does it correlate to an improvement in audit scores or other measures of risk reduction?
Capture Knowledge
Does collaboration shorten learning curves and/or training time?
Does it lead to reductions in onboarding time?
Does it translate to competitive advantage?
Does it reduce operational costs and better leverage employee talent?
Enable Action
Does it correlate to improvement in top-line revenue via customer retention?
Does it enable process improvements that lead to reduced costs?
Does it help speed products or services to market?
Empower People
Does participation correlate with employee loyalty?
Does more collaboration correlate with stronger employee performance and/or promotions?
Does it correlate with advances in innovation?
We are just scratching the surface of social media and enterprise social measurement, but I hope this spurs your thinking about the value of social collaboration to your organization. As always, I value your comments and contributions.
source: http://susanetlinger.wordpress.com/
Nessun commento:
Posta un commento