Socialtext case study of a family-owned, industrial company pushing innovation like a dot com


I always like to see examples that show the application of mobile + social + cloud in situations beyond the normal office-based knowledgeworker scenarios. In this case, this Webinar from Socialtext provides a case study on Industrial Mold & Machine who are using mobile access to provide access to their social intranet on the shop floor. The Webinar also features Andrew McAfee, who provides context for the case study.

Terri Griffith provides an overview of the story, concluding:

it may be an example of the next big wave, the “next big thing,” that so many tech pundits are looking for.  This is a hardcore, family-owned, industrial company pushing innovation like the best of the dot coms.  I can’t wait to see what they, and other companies like them, do next.

The legacy of TQM and lessons for Social Business Design

Anyone remember Total Quality Management (TQM)?

By the early 1990s interest in TQM was beginning to fade. Even it biggest supporters in the US, like Florida Power & Light, eventually “slashed its program because of worker complaints of excessive paperwork”. Other simply felt it failed to live up to expectations for improving business performance or return on investment. Of course, it might also be the simple fact that TQM was harder and needed more time than people expected (or were prepared to give). In fact, Robert E. Cole’s 1998 review of TQM concluded that:

The legacy of the quality movement is more than its detractors allow but less than its zealots proclaimed.

Cole identified a number of organisational learning, leadership and cultural challenges to adopting TQM by American firms that in his opinion affected its immediate impact on business practices, which had serious implications for their compeititve position.

This suddenly sounds very familiar, particularly the discussion about the need for evidence:

Management, of course, demanded hard evidence to support counter-intuitive claims [about the relationship between reduced costs and higher quality]. It is a truism that individuals will infer and take action without evidence when the inferences are consistent with their prior beliefs. When inferences challenge existing beliefs, however, individuals want evidence before taking action. The more problematic the nature of the a claim, the more social actors want standard scientific evidence to support it before they act on it. Face with great uncertainty as to the nature and implementation of the new new quality paradigm, management responded in just this fashion. The evidence, however, was hard to come by. Even when it existed, managers did not know the right questions to ask or where to look for it. Moreover, they often rejected what evidence there was.”

The dangerous outcome was that managers preferred to lean on the practices of companies like themselves who were adopting TQM in ways that fitted existing mental models, rather than learning directly from the source in Japan. Following cultural norms (and I would claim, reductionist thinking practices), they attempted “quality by exhortation” and used one-size fits all check list driven methodologies, such as Crosby.

On reflection many of the tools of TQM are eerily similar to social business design:

nine common TQM practices as cross-functional product design, process management, supplier quality management, customer involvement, information and feedback, committed leadership, strategic planning, cross-functional training, and employee involvement. (from Wikipedia)

But unlike the 1980s, where American work practices were threatened by the Japanese, the challenge today is about traditional organisational models versus those of the Web. As a result there are still very few companies to learn from, but they do exist and are changing industries in their wake.

So will managers again turn to solutions that really don’t change anything or aren’t given time to have real impact? Based on the history of management, this is quite likely. But if we are lucky, just like TQM, the legacy of the social business design movement will be more than its detractors allow but less than its zealots proclaim.

You do need a strategy for your enterprise social network, says Yammer


A great post from Stephen Danelutti at Yammer explaining why even if you use viral adoption as a catalyst to get started, you still need a strategy:

“The ease of use and virality of a platform like Yammer can be deceivingly simple and lead people to think that a deliberate strategy is not necessary. That’s a mistake, because without direction and an end goal in mind, the network will simply meander and fail to deliver business value.”

Kick Arse Collaboration Everywhere (with Confluence)

These are my slides from the Atlassian Summit in San Francisco today. I covered three things:

1. What is collaboration and what does successful collaboration look like?

2. Using Personas to understand user’s collaboration needs

3. “Rules to Collaborate By”

My presentation was recorded and Atlassian will share this in due course.

The Intranet Imperative (2005)

I wrote this in June 2005. The history of intranets is one of a slow burn of adoption (or innovation, if you like). But the pace of technology change is increasing, email is being challenged… is it time now to dust off the intranet imperative and think about about where we go next?

What exactly is an intranet?

The nature of intranets is changing. In fact the term intranet itself is rapidly losing meaning as the Internet interpenetrates organisations through a mixture of business-to-business marketing, extranets, hosted application services and of course personal use of the Web at work. The traditionalist view of intranets, one that concentrates on static information built around an impregnable information architecture, creates a risk for organisations that may be oblivious to the rise of collaborative and dynamic “application-nets” that connect users to people, places and things.

Consider for a moment – what exactly is an intranet? The most simple or basic definition defines it as a restricted, private computer network that uses TCP/IP (Internet) network protocols to facilitate data transmission and exchange within an organisation. But when we look at modern intranets (and extranets), this definition raises more questions than answers – for example:

  • Restricted or private to whom – does this include business partners or even customers?
  • What is the computer network – does it end at the PC on your desk, the mobile phone in your pocket or a kiosk on the shopfloor?
  • Does data include self-service systems, rich media, access to Web – and video conferencing and business intelligence tools that empower staff to get their work done?

Clearly the potiential demands placed on intranets are moving well beyond their original scope of simple access to information and documents. In fact paralleling other changes in our working environments, intranets now need to support always on, always connected access and provide flexibility and interactivity on demand. The technologies to do this already exist and the key challenge for many organistions is how to manage the evolution of an intranet into a multifaceted application-net in a controlled manner.

Of course while you can choose to ignore this imperative, be aware that technology has a habit of winning. You may find your users taking the path of least resistance (like returning to the dreaded network drive) or they will pick their own user-driven tools that will ensure they can get the job done.

The Strategic View of Intranets

Organisations need to control how their intranets will evolve into application-nets. The right approach for achieving this control is a management response that starts with developing a strategic view of their intranet. This strategic perspective does not prescribe the exact future form of the intranet as an application-net, but it provides the basis for creating a system architecture that will facilitate it. The critical point of difference between this new architecture and the old approach is that the intranet imperative forces us to broaden our horizons in order to understand more fully the fit between people, places and things.

This new strategic view should be built from understanding four key elements:

  1. People and Process – understand who the current and future users of system will be, where they are located and what work activities the system must support;
  2. Content – not just documents and information, but the collection of applications and other data in the system;
  3. Infrastructure – The basic technical structure or features of the system (e.g. servers, networks, content management software, etc) and also the human support functions (e.g. helpdesks, trainers, technicians, etc); and
  4. Governance -– the management controls (standards, committees, etc) that deal with the form of the infrastructure and the nature of the content in the system to ensure it meets the needs of the organisation and its users.

But like any type of strategic planning, the application of this strategic view must take into account the overall context of the organisation. Steps for understanding the strategic context and incorporating it into the design of the new architecture include:

  • Business and Technology Analysis – Develop a strategic understanding of the intranet and how this technology, at its most fundamental level, relates to the overall strategy objectives of the organisation;
  • System Audit and Gap Analysis – Complete a review of the people, processes, technology and content that already exists within your organisation to identify the gap between where you are and where you want to be;
  • Manage expectations – Negotiate performance outcomes with your stakeholders to link the evolution of the intranet to the organisation’s objectives; and
  • Innovation – Look outside the organisation to learn from leading practices, understand the different options that are available in the market, and emerging trends.

These steps take us beyond simply asking how users will contribute and access information in the intranet and instead make us focus on the bigger picture, resulting in an architecture that is better aligned to the needs of the organisation.

From imperative to action

The intranet imperative is driven by unstoppable technology advances that affect how people work with and use information technology in the workplace. These include:

  • Blurred lines between people, places and things – the distinction between intranets, extranets and Internet sites is changing;
  • Rich media and interactive content – the scope of content has expanded to includes more than static documents, text and images;
  • Always on, always connected – the working environment and intranets need to be delivered through new channels, such as mobile phone, wireless PDAs, voice and kiosks on the shop floor;
  • Next generation networks – awareness, presence and locality will be built in; and
  • User-driven software – users will take the path of least resistance and will pick less sophisticated tools if they get the job done.

Unfortunately for the average intranet manager or management team these changes will of course increase the complexity of dealing with already existing document-centric challenges such as information architecture, effective search and content quality. For example, expert designed information architectures will need to co-exist with those created by user communities. In practice what this means is that we will see organisations embrace different degrees of control, standardisation and integration in order to align their application-nets with the strategic goals of the organisation. For example, centralised authoring will live along side self-publishing systems such as wikis and blogs because it makes business sense rather that isolated decision to choose one over the other.

What may be worse still for some teams is that the technology of the intranet will no longer be isolated from other parts of the organisation. Under these circumstances the system architecture becomes even more critical as both a plan but also as a process for engaging with the rest of the organisation, both in terms of needs but also to create the right operational linkages. So, applying strategic thinking and designing a system architecture for your next generation intranet represents more that just a nice theoretical step but is instead a critical success factor.


We now understand that the nature of intranets is changing. Unless you use strategic thinking to broaden your concept of what constitutes an “intranet” into a next generation application-net, then you risk losing control as technology leaps ahead without you. You can prepare for this challenge by:

  • Understanding why the nature of intranets is changing;
  • Analysing the strategic context of your intranet today and what will be needed moving forward; and
  • Designing a new system architecture that will facilitate this change so it is progressive, evolutionary and beneficial rather than chaotic, revolutionary and disruptive.


Time for Australian government to wake up to mobile?

Less than a quarter of the Australian Government’s regular websites can be considered smartphone or mobile-friendly, according to a survey conducted by iTnews.

A survey by the ITNews concludes that government Websites fail mobile access tests. Actually, lets be specific:

  • They surveyed 21 Australian federal Australian government, plus the mobile version of
  • They used two specific testing tools, a W3C tool based on standards developed in 2008 and another that looks like it was designed to test to baseline of phones like the Nokia 6680 (from 2005).

Personally I think this makes the test results pretty limited, but worth discussing.

(A more recent evaluation tool is Google’s Ready to Go Mo, although I’m not entirely clear what standards it is based on.)

Now, there are some very good examples of government in Australia using mobile. One example that comes to mind (because I used it the other day) is NSW’s live traffic reports site – it comes in desktop, mobile and iOS versions.

Sticking with transport, in some states it is now possible to renew your car registration electronically using a smartphone. So clearly, mobile is being actively utilised as a channel by government. Front-end Websites are just one aspect of government communication and service delivery.

Being realistic about government budget cycles and priorities, I see a couple of issues:

Firstly, the Federal government is currently focused on updating their Web channels to be WCAG 2.0 compliant. One thing I would like to highlight is that WCAG 2.0 is technology agnostic – its actually all about the end-user:

“mobile accessibility is making web content accessible to people with disabilities in the mobile context. This includes users with visual, mobility, hearing and cognitive impairments as well as older users.”

Second, the rise of mobile and demand from consumers (i.e. citizens and other stakeholders) for mobile access in all spheres of life is moving much faster than government planning and technology development cycles – see the latest Australian data from Google [PDF].

So what should government do? Be strategic about mobile:

The agencies and departments that should be thinking about this most are those that have a service delivery element or are involved in public education. The new work in the area of eHealth immediately comes to mind. In the US, the Pew Internet & American Life Project reports there that:

“Among smartphone owners, young adults, minorities, those with no college experience, and those with lower household income levels are more likely than other groups to say that their phone is their main source of internet access.”

I’m sure we would see similar patterns here. Just within my family and social circle I know lots of young adults outside of my industry that only use wireless mobile devices for Internet access a home.

Do you need an app? Do you need a mobile Website? What do mobile users need from your agency? Do your e-government applications work on mobile?

However, at all levels of government they need to start thinking about the impact of mobile. I’m worried about government sites that have just been redevelopment or are about to be redeveloped. They need to think about medium term strategies for mobile.

Also, when setting budgets, the allocation between ‘desktop’ and ‘mobile’ need to be re-evaluated. A mobile first strategy for some departments could actually be a source of savings in the long term, as they focus on content that really counts.

This is a challenge and government needs to respond. But lets look at this in a smart way. I mean, does it really matter in the short term if the mobile experience of isn’t that great?

In the much longer term, I’d like to see government move towards a completely different Web mobile. But that’s a subject for another post!

UPDATE: A great example from the National Library of Australia, who have adopted a proactive strategy – they say in their introduction:

Where opportunity exists, conceptual leaders stand ready and eager to innovate. The mobile web provides superb food for innovation, as evidenced by the immersive Ludwig II app by the Bavarian State Library, which includes augmented reality features like 3D pattern recognition so that historical digital objects appear on the mobile screen, triggered by the physical location of the user.

It’s also demonstrated by NASA, who created a mobile portal to learning about space through their latest images from space, video, news and social media activity. The Eyewitness app acts as a showcase for the best photography featured in the Observer and the Guardian. It showcases the 100 most recent and topical images and includes ‘pro tips’ from the photographers. And it’s seen in Biblion, the New York Public Library scholarly journal reborn as a “multi-linear immersive experience” for the iPad. The inaugural edition (2011) delivers manuscript material, images, films, audio, and essays on the 1940 New York World’s Fair.

Importantly, the achievements of these institutions have been realised against a backdrop of economic hardship and a substantial reduction in funding for cultural and research institutions around the world.

Hat tip to Craig.

UPDATE #2: iTnews reports on AGIMO’s response at a recent Senate estimates hearing, that mobile is something they are looking at but its not a priority. This issue of accessibility was raised, reflecting somewhat my comments above.

I also discovered that DFAT’s Smartraveller site has a mobile optimised version, which is a good example of targeting a specific need. DFAT previously scored a ‘bad’ rating in iTnews’ survey of federal sites. When I ran the mobile version of Smartraveller through the same tests, it performed badly too, which really makes me question the original iTnews piece again. It rated much better on Google’s test (4 out of 5 as a publisher).