Do collective lessons learned exist?

I'm currently working in a team where we consult eachother and divide work. The team works quite well in my opinion. What we don't do is make short minutes or action notes and so it happens that we rediscuss what was already decided earlier on (everyone forgot). Or someone doesn't do what was agreed (forgot). It's interesting: isn't ending a meeting with action points and write them down and follow them up a lesson we all know? So why don't we do it in this case?

I've also worked in Kenya together with CARE-International on a credit program for female enterpreneurs in a rice area. This was in 1989 or 1990, south of Kisumu. An important principle was that NGOs (non-governmental organisations) are not good in managing credit programs because not thinking in business models and NGO workers are seen by farmers as 'friends' and 'supporters'. A different role than credit officer. So the program was sub-contracted to a credit institute. In 2007 (17 years later!) I visited an NGO in Ghana. They had learnt a lesson from their credit program: that they are not good in recollecting the loans because they are seen by the farmers as an NGO. So they thought of sub-contracting to a credit institute. But the damage was already done.

These kind of observations (I could make a much longer list!) get me thinking about collective learning processes and how difficult they are. The first example shows that there is more to the practice of working together than 'knowing' how it should be done. Probably the group is forming and trying to find a way of working together effectively with as little energy input as necessary?

The second example I think shows how difficult it is to learn collectively within a sector. And maybe that reading about something is not enough- you have to make your own mistakes first. It's like everybody is entitled to his/her own learning process. And if you've read this blog for longer you know I believe in the power of communities and networks to support collective learning. But what is then a collective lesson learned?

I really like the work of Nancy Dixon around these issues. She wrote a blogpost about the value of lessons learned not too long ago. She defines lessons learned at the individual level: "something I learned through an experience I’ve had that will cause me to act differently in the future" She explains the power of reflection in, for instance, after action review processes to stimulate learning and ends with the phrase: "The greatest value of lessons learned is for those who took the action". So should we simply lower our ambitions and talk about collective lessons learned? How easily we say, let's collect the lessons learned with the idea that it will contribute to collective learning. But for a collective learning process much more may be needed like sustained exchange of practices over a longer period of time.

The hardest phase: the coalescing phase in communities

Image via Wikipedia

In a lot of my consultancy work I use a social learning theory- about the functioning and growth of communities of practice. Even when people don't use the term community, but online network, platform, alliance, whatever. As long as learning is one of the goals. Every consultancy is different though- I find it hard to work with blue print materials because every situation is so distinct.

I can discern a red line in my work nevertheless. It is that people tend to underestimate the social capital side of online communities or online platforms. When you look at vibrant online exchanges, it may look as simple as inviting a lot of people by email to sign up, or announcing a new initiative in other online spaces. But this frequently leads to disappointments and leaves people wondering why it works for other online communities but not for their network.

So what are the challenges in the coalescing phase (the phase which follows the first phase when initiators have come together, defined the purpose, a platform has been built and sometimes an official launch has been organised)? I like the chapter in the book Cultivating communities of practice which outlines the following challenges:

• To balance the need to develop relationships between members and trust against the need to demonstrate (practical) value
• To keep the energy level up after a big launch event when everyone goes back to 'normal business'
• To get members to share 'thorny' issues when there is not yet a high level of trust..
• To stimulate private conversations (nothing wrong with those!) yet at the same time bringing private topics into the public community space

It is not an easy phase for coordinators /facilitators but it may help if they are aware of these issues and do not underestimate the art that goes into stewarding connections and knowledge in this phase (where they may feel not enough is happening).... And if the basics are not right- you might be working against the tide.

Social media in organizations: a reality check

Image by Leo Reynolds via Flickr "I prefer to call people"

Last week I facilited together with Sibrenne Wagenaar, a workshop for the training department of a bank. This type of workshop is for us always a reality check. You see level of exposure to social media slowly growing in these groups. There were already a number of people on Twitter and there was a fanatical gamer in the group, but the majority did not know what social media are. They associated it mainly as something that their children use. I had to explain what the word 'blogging' means. After an overview presentation and providing examples as inspiration, everyone started to explore two or three tools on their computer. They had to choose from an RSS reader, wiki, social networking, social bookmarking or twitter. After this, people were asked about their experiences and whether they see any practical application in their work. Here's a list of things that were remarkable in this session and what lessons there are for the use of social media in organizations:

* For the less educated professionals in the Netherlands, English communication is still a barrier. It pays off to look for tools with a Dutch interface (like Ning, you can adjust the interface in many different languages).

* Some people get discouraged upfront by "technical hurdles" and a new way of working, change. If the login does not succeed right away, they see their view that online communication seems hard and difficult confirmed. Many web2.0 services have changing interfaces because they are in development...Hence, there is also some perseverance and experimental interest required from the participants. What can be helpful is to support the first steps from a distance so that people do not immediately frustrated. At the same time promoting an attitude of selfreliance and help them experience that they can figure it out without being disappointed and frustrated.

* Perhaps the way of working online, 'wikily' with a lot of information overload is not for everyone. As a participant at the end said: "It is not something for me, I prefer to call people. I only do it if I'm forced". It is therefore important to allow an array of ways of working and encourage people; not to force the use of a certain technology.

* I was already quite used to the fact that social networking and wikis are more popular in general than social bookmarking. But in this case several people got excited about social bookmarking (to my surprise!). It was exactly the application they needed to pass information between colleagues to about the topic of 'expertise'. This shows once again that it depends on personal preferences and work situation what tools strike a cord.

* In this case there was a chat module introduced at company level - organization-wide. People showed quite some resistance: 'we are not going to use it'. This shows how difficult it is at company level to purchase a package, install it and roll it out throughout the organisation. By offering a wider range of tools and linking the use of tools to practical issues some got eager to get started and explore pro-actively. People prefer to experiment and make a decision rather then be forced to use something introduced in a top-down manner.

Interview with Chris Collison about the role of technology in knowledge management

I saw this video twice already on different blogs, but going to post it nevertheless. It is an interview with Chris Collison about the role of social media in knowledge management.

He states that he used to see technology as an enabler or driver for knowledge management. But social media has become more than that: it can be a disruptor in a positive way. He uses the example of Twitter, the connection to new people invites linking and sharing in new ways. It is not enabling more of the same behaviour, but disruptive because it leads to new possibilities.

Nevertheless, the term knowledge management 2.0 frustrates Chris because it seems like KM1.0 is thrown away. Whereas there are useful lessons from KM1.0 that need to be blended with enterprise2.0 tools.

Well, see for yourself if you haven't seen it yet.

The contraceptive pill and social media

Image via Wikipedia

I'm constantly thinking about the role of social media in changing behaviour/culture in organizations and vice versa (see also a former blogpost). Do you need an open culture before social media will be effective or can you use social media to shift the culture towards more openess?

The contraceptive pill (in the Netherlands we simply say: THE pill).. is an example of a revolutionary technology that changed behaviours. Evert Ketting explains the history of the contraceptive pill and shows it is an example of the right technology at the right place at the right moment. 10 years after its introduction in the Netherlands two-thirds of the women were using it. Twenty years later it had become the norm and a 16-years old girl even thought that it was impossible to have sex without the contraceptive pill, she didn't know it prevents pregnancy. The change brought by THE pill was that sexuality was disconnected from pregnancies.

Ketting argues that there were other contraceptives before the pill like the pessary and condoms. Yet, the pill was different because taking the pill is not connected to the act of having sex itself. And ofcourse it was controlled by the women. Lastly, it was more reliable so that doctors also accepted it.

Going back to social media and organizations: it is likely that social media will work embedded in an ongoing change process. And try to make sure the right type of technology at the right time is chosen...

Facilitating a twitter chat

I've now participated in three Twitter chat sessions. The first time was I late, I arrived on the scene towards the end. The second I could not really follow well, I saw all these separate and short messages. I pulled out. The third time was my lucky time. I used tweetdeck to follow the hashtag, did not continue working simultaneously but devoted myself to the chat. It was the conversation that Catharinus Doornbos, Trainer at Station-to-station and initiator of discussion Tuesday on ICT and education. I liked it. Nevertheless, I had the feeling that you mainly talk with the facilitator and less as a group. I've interviewed Rinus about his way of facilitating a twitter chat.

Why did you start facilitating Twitter Chats?

It started with a movie that I saw about Twitter Tuesday for the U.S. Teachers. By using a hashtag (#) in all tweets, the discussion can be followed by everyone. In these discussions I came to great ideas and got to know lots of useful websites with many resources and tools for education. I wrote an article on the edublogs of Netwijs. I said jokingly, that we could start a twitter Tuesday in the Netherlands. Then I received some positive comments. Because we in our department had just talked about innovations in education and ICT and wanted to devote more attention to it, I asked my colleagues to support my idea.

How have you started your twitter Tuesday ?

I selected a start date and time and almost every day via Twitter communicate these with the use of the hashtag # netwijs. That triggered new responses. The number of active participants now grows slowly. The number of followers too. I notice more participation and a subsequent rise of personal followers after the debate. Yet, the participants are mainly people who in one way or another professional involved in education and ICT, but not teacher. There are few teachers participating. Maybe it is lack of time, perhaps it is by ignorance.

How do you facilitate your own chat?

As moderator I start the discussion with a question or statement. Then I try to ask for responses from participants by probing and bringing in other perspectives. In this respect there is no difference with leading a face-to-face discussion. The added problem is that you have only 140 characters for use in your tweet or actually less, because you must use the hashtag. You must really be to-the-point. The advantage is that you have no other incentives, such as facial expressions, gestures, or people who talk. Everyone is now in an equal position to contribute and free to comment on they want to comment on. I make sure that I have read some materials on the subject and have some nice links ready to throw into the discussion when it is quiet. During the discussion, I am regularly searching the web. During a simple discussion you have that opportunity. Afterwards, you can read everything right back, even what you've missed. This makes it very dynamic.

Are you satisfied with the results of the chats?

The result so far is that I've expanded my network considerably with people I would never have met otherwise! We share knowledge with each other. In addition, our blog got much more attention. We use the name of our department as hashtag (# netwijs), hence we ensure branding and we reinforce our image, that we have knowledge of education, ICT and innovation.

Social media: the less successful stories

Yesterday I facilited a session for the context masterclass on draagvlakversterking (draagvlakversterking is hard to translate but is something like 'strengthening your supporters base') on the topic of social media. It was fun. After a presentation we did a card game in small groups talking about dilemmas. Then we talked about tips and tricks and we ended with three participants showing some of their work with social media and sharing the intricacies. Here's the presentation if you're interested and here's the link to the wiki.

Nieuwe media voor draagvlakversterking

View more presentations from Joitske Hulsebosch.

A big lesson is that the social media people (including me) tend to focus on the success stories, which makes it look like an easy thing. See how people collaborate on Twitter to raise 119.000 euros for Haiti. Look what Lego is doing to get customers to participate in the design. Often the same stories circulate. But when you look at actual practice it is hard to replicate because the circumstances in these examples were right, people were interested in the cause. One video going viral (we watched where the hell is Matt) doesn't mean your video will go viral too.... Fortunately we had enough space to swap the hard stories. Next time I'll try to include some less successful stories.... A few of the stories I've heard (I am making sure that the organization is not recognisable; I believe it is good to share these stories but understand why these stories don't get shared easily):

• One organisation got excited to start an online community when they heard about all the advantages from an external bureau. The site was built but then nobody had the time to engage with it. The site is (almost) empty.
• After an exciting event a facebook group was created for the participants of the event. However, the purpose of the online group was not discussed and nobody felt responsible. Nothing happened.
  
• An organisation wanted to collect people's signatures for a petition. Hoping it would go viral. It never did, few signatures were collected and the petition never materialized.
• One organisation built a site where people can make profiles and exchange on a forum. People do make a profile but are not exchanging on the forum.
  

It is very attractive to set up something like an online network, online community or group on a social network like facebook. But it is another thing to think through what is needed in terms of facilitation and support and what you really want to achieve with it. It seem a pitfall we are all falling into.

I noticed from participants' reactions that information overload is a big issue for non-profit staff. Not everyone is happy to get an online community to facilitate or to twitter for the organisation because they are already overloaded with information. This reduces the enthusiasm and makes that working with social media is perceived as a burden and time consuming. I don't know what the solution is. On the one hand I think people do need to develop the skills of working with huge amounts of information, on the other hand it might be best to work with the people who are capable (and even excited) to do this. Apparently it is not for everyone.

Lastly it is powerful to be able to do something for the second or third time. We used the evaluation and the interaction with participants from last year's session. I prepared this session together with the facilitators of the course and we were able to keep the elements that were highly appreciated and added some wishes like the need to have more hands-on tips en tricks. Often we move on and new people take over. Having the chance to keep a team pays off (hope participants will notice that too..).

An online forum as a grafitti wall

Note: this is a translation of a Dutch blogpost. I'm thinking how to continue with a Dutch and an English blog. I used to have different content, but maybe I'll just translate? Anyhow here's a translated post:

(foto door cheryljns)
I've started in January with an online course 'Think till you are thin" 'Denk je slank in Dutch' It works I lost 4 kilos!). It is an online training so also signed up out of curiosity to see how they shape the course. The way it is set up is fun, with exercises, text-messaging, videos and a coach, though I miss the interaction.

There is a forum for sharing with other participants. This is a nice example of how you should not use a forum. It is a kind of online grafitti wall where any participant can post on any topic. It is not facilitated (at least I have not even noticed) and it is public, so anyone on the internet can read it. Not all forums have to be private, but if you want to discuss issues related to your weight, it helps when you have some feeling of privacy. As a result, it is a kind of graffiti wall where everyone starts as reporting that the course he started, then the conversation stops. A typical example of a message: "I started the course today and hope I get the book soon! As a result of this type of message, during the course people do not go back to the forum. People look at the forum in the beginning and forget about it.

What can you learn from this example? I see the following lessons:

• Consider carefully whether you should make a forum public (visible to everyone) or private (visible to members only). If the goal is to discuss personal struggles with weight loss (as mentioned on this forum) I would make it private, only accessible to learners.
  
• If you want to bring together people around shared interests and topics you will need to facilitate this and use categories or groups on the forum, so people will get attracted to a particular category or group.
• Working with cohorts of new members, make sure that people from the same batch can find each other and link. Make for instance a group for anyone who starts in a given month.

Backchannels during presentations

I'm reading the backchannel. A backchannel is an online means of communication between the audience and between the audience and the speakers. The book has very good tips how to use a Twitter backchannel to make presentations more interactive. On the one hand I find it very interesting- how to use the audience thoughts and feelings during a presentation. On the other hand I think a presentation is NOT an very pro-active method, so shouldn't you simply not choose other more interactive methods? You choose a presentation form only when you think there is an expert who can put people quickly up to speed with a certain topic.

Then I found this youtube video from the muppets (through Wilma van den Brink) and I found it explains in a very humorous way what the downsides are of having a backchannel...

Some ideas on Innovation versus creative thinking

Image via Wikipedia

In Wageningen I attended the launch of the Centre for Development Innovation (previously Wageningen International) with a talk by John Elkington, a world authority on corporate responsibility and sustainable development. I enjoyed his definition of sustainable development: imagine the world in 2050 with 9 billion inhabitants and think back what decisions we should make now to make that world possible... He mentioned social enterpreneurs (and social intrapreneurs working within companies) as the key people to drive innovation. In his book they are called the 'unreasonable people'. Innovation often doesn't start within the system, but on the edges or outside the system.

I made me wonder about innovation and the way I use the term. It's probably become another fad word with many different meanings. In the innovation 2.0 group on LinkedIn there was a discussion about 7 months ago about the definition of innovation. One person said: Innovation is the succesful introduction of an 'invention'. A bit the Willie Wortel definition of innovation I guess :). Someone else introduced the term 'social innovation'. And what's the difference between change en innovation? One definition shared was: Innovation differs from 'normal change' because a prevaling thinking pattern is disrupted.

My interest is not so much in innovative products and services but in stimulating professionals to continue innovating their thinking and not to get stuck in their thinking pattern. Maybe creative thinking is a better name for that. An example: this afternoon we played a game in which you have to guess. My daughter had to guess 'pyama's'. She got stuck because she mentioned all the clothes you put in daytime (shoes, sweater, socks) but forgot that you also put on clothes at night. She needed a hint to think about that and it was suddenly so logical for her. In Ethiopia I once did an exercise with a rope, which needs creative thinking to get the solution. One of the farmers was the first to find the solution- not the development workers. That's creative thinking if you don't stay within the limits. Creative thinking is not something you do on your own, but you rather need to be challenged.

In my painting class, there are various forms of painting that stimulate you to paint with a new perspective like:

• Draw without looking at your paper, just look at the model
• Use paper snippets in stead of paint
• Paint in negative (make everything light dark and everything dark light)
• Paint upside down
• Use only lines for shading (form oriented)
  
• Draw with a ruler (teaches you the direction of lines)
• Rotate your drawings and work on somebody else's drawings

A nice toolkit with forms to stimulate this kind of creative thinking (in Dutch) is Samen vernieuwen in de praktijk by Verdonschot, Keursten and van Rooij. Full of techniques and methods to stimulate creative thinking. (also for reasonable people :).

Understanding intercultural misunderstandings

This is a funny video with a strong message. I found it through the blog of Raf Stevens. Watch it first if you have the time (2,5 minutes). It shows what a mental framework or 'schema' is and how it can lead to misunderstandings.



If you can't relate a conversation to your own experiences, it often makes no sense at all. When people talk from different mental frameworks, it is easy to misinterpret what is being said. Did you think it was about washing cloth or did you already have another interpretation?

This type of misinterpretation happens a lot in intercultural communications (intercultural communications can be between people from different nationalities, but also from different neighbourhoods or disciplines..). So any conversation where the mental framework is very different you have to be aware of this possible misunderstanding which is always around the corner. An example (but after 10 years in different countries I have many ofcourse..): I have a close Ethiopian friend who lives in the united states. When we visited her she locked herself out of the house. The way you deal with it, the decisions you make are very much tight to your framework. We prefered to pay a locksmith to allow us to enter the house. She prefered to call a friend and stay there. Only if you are aware of the fact that your reference frames differ so much, you can work through your differences (though you may still get conflicts...) It happened to us too when we did an assignment for a research program. We didn't know the schema from the research program and what we wrote down was misinterpreted, leading to frustrations on both sides. In this case neither party invested in resolving the misunderstandings.

What to do? When you are talking or presenting, assess how different the framework of the others might be.. A management view can also be very different from an employee's view. Try to make your own framework clear, by using stories that illustrate your own experiences. Try to talk about practical examples and try to avoid jargon...

77% of learning = Informal

Jay Cross states that 80% of learning is informal (in his book informal learning). Well, that's a nice figure that I've seen resurface in many places and articles (I even like to quote it myself!). The 80% is backed-up by various sources. However, I wonder how you can really measure this. Personally, I buy this estimation because it links with the way I personally learn. I hardly attend formal conferences and trainings because I get so little out of it. Nevertheless, I guess other people with different learning styles may get more out of it.

Now Jay Cross has a great blogpost with convincing arguments. At a company, Sara Lee, 20 employees were asked to list work-related learning activities (the exercise took place in 2002). They compiled a list together and were then asked to estimate how much time is spent on each activity. This was the list:

- Experiences on the job 45%
- Manuals and instructions 2%
- Training programs 8%
- Networking 30%
- Mentoring & coaching 3%
- Special assignments 2%
- Workshops 10%

You could say 77% is highly informal (experiences on the job, manuals, networking) and the rest is more formal. This is a strong case for strengthening informal learning and supporting people to optimize their own informal learning processes, for instance by helping them to use social media to set up their own learning activities, for instance reflecting on experiences on the job in a blog, networking via Twitter, etc.

Communities of practice in organisations: Interview with Wenger

On the learning conversations blog I found a video interview with Etienne Wenger in which he answers quite some basic questions about communities of practices in organisation. What they are, when not to foster them (they are not a panacee), how sponsorship of communities in an organisation differs from managing communities. Highlights: think about communities when there is a dynamic knowledge problem. Practitioners need to be in the lead. When there is a clear knowledge gap, just produce a manual. When there is a problem with an organisational process, don't try and solve it with a community of practice. And when there is really no-one who is passionate about the domain, forget about it too. Watch it if you have some 15 minutes and are interested in communities.

Communities of Practice from Multi Media Vision on Vimeo.

Internal micro-blogging for knowledge sharing within a department

Godfried Knipscheer works as digital communications advisor to the Flemish government in Belgium and is project leader of a social media project. I interviewed him about the use of Yammer as an internal microblogging tool.

At our department with 50 people there was a need for more knowledge and news to share. There are many meetings, meetings and seminars, but knowledge was not structurally shared. What have people learned in a conference or meeting? What valuable experiences do we have at work?

We have created a site with a blog and wiki functions (using Drupal). The site's name is Quagga. We have tried to find a name that people will remember. Quagga is an extint zebra species by the way. To ensure that people regularly visit Quagga and see what happens, we have put in Yammer. Yammer is a internal sort of Twitter. If you put something on Quagga, you can use Yammer to share it and visit Quagga.

How have we implemented it? In an information session for one hour, we explained the whole system: what is it, how it works and why we have chosen these web2.0 tools. We have also made a number of agreements for the use. It is now obligatory if there is an important meeting to put a report on Quagga. If anyone has been to a conference Quagga is used for sharing. If you have any read something fun and professionally, we find it valuable if you share, but it's not an obligation. In addition, a small group that has the role to encourage people to use Quagga. It was not necessary to encourage use of Yammer, which was very easy to use, the threshold for use of Yammer is very low. And we have communicated everything in a very practical manner, for instance, we said Yammer is a kind of chat whereby everyone can join the chat. The combination of compulsory and voluntary contributions has also worked well.

What are the results? Actually very good. Yammer has been played the role of an internal Twitter. People post little news, interesting sites, and there is sometimes an intense discussion. I myself feel that it works for team bonding. We have not evaluated it, but people are definitely more active knowledge sharing. Some people, such men that are building the stands, are now more visible. Joining a conference is less binding. You win not so much efficiency, but it improves your quality. There are a number of people who do not participate. Some indicate that it is not for them. Others have an excessive workload, such as the editors of the magazine staff. They don't find the time to read articles on Quagga.

Facilitating networks and communities: balancing between design and emergent

I live in an area which is relatively newly populated (10 years old) and the shopping center has been opened only last year. Unfortunately most of the roads are designed with cars in mind, rather than cyclists, overlooking the needs of cyclists and people walking. As a result you can see people taking their own roads... (this picture was taken before the snow, currently this path is white from snow and ice!)

I once read a story about architects on a campus waiting to see where the students pass and then building their pathways, rather than designing pathways and then making sure the students stay on those paths. (forgot where..)

Facilitators of networks and communities have a similar dilemma: you have to design and lead, but you also need to see what emerges. The natural self-organisation tendency of networks and communities is very strong. It doesn't mean however that nothing can be designed upfront, but find a right balance.

End of last year I had to write a plan and budget for two networks without really knowing a lot what the pathways of these networks are going to be. I ended up trying to create some flexibility to be able to respond to new pathways. For instance, instead of budgeting for the current online platform a network is using, also take care of other tools that may be needed.

It may also be a task of a facilitator to notice the new pathways.. currently there are many developments on Twitter. Maybe your network is taking a new path on Twitter?

PS. there are two bridges that are going to be redesigned.. the design of the bridge didn't take into account security in traffic and created dangerous situations. I wonder if this wouldn't have been foresee-able and this is not a case of emergent insight but overlooking known facts...

Netsquared thinktank: My best blogpost of 2009

I really enjoy Netsquared's thinktank blogging questions sent out to several bloggers each month.. it forces you to think about a topic and you read the other contributions with more interest (I don't read them beforehand). But when I look at my starred mails, there are four invitation of Amy Sample Ward that I didn't respond too. This month it's an easy one she said: What was your favorite, most read, most tweeted, or most commented on blog post from this year? This is your chance to bring it back into the spotlight!

I realized I didn't have a way to find our which blogpost was most often read, though I notice my 10 online icebreakers are often linked too. Through the communities and networks connection site, which aggregates several blogs including mine, I was able to click on my own name and see the best of. My best of are written in 2006 and 2008... But there is one surfacing from 2009:

Can you shift your organisational culture by introducing social media? It's a question by which I'm still intrigued. So here we go:

image through ericmackonline.com

This post may be a little chaotic as I'm using it to get a grip on some of my ideas about social media for organisations. Tomorrow I'm going to write with Sibrenne Wagenaar; we are writing a booklet on social media for learning and collaboration. We start with social media for professionals (individuals), then teams, then organisations. It's the organisational chapter that needs much more thinking. I once asked on twitter whether the exchange on twitter is not similar to the chats with your co-located workers. Someone replied that is it not, that on twitter people are far more open to sharing and helping each other. This started me thinking about the fact that introducing an internal twitter system would NOT make people share. The term enterprise2.0 is often used. But is that an open, creative organisation or is it an organisation with web2.0 tools? In my opinion, an organisation with less web2.0 tools could be more 'enterprise2.0' in terms of culture than an organisation that has a lot of web2.0 tools but lacks the culture.

One confusion is brought by the fact that organisations can embrace social media from so many different angles. I see a higher emphasis on social media from a marketing perspectives than from a learning perspective. If you jump on it for marketing purposes, you will have a different focus and process than when you want to explore how social media can stimulate learning and knowledge sharing processes. But probably in both cases, it has to match your organisational culture too.


Tools and culture: is your organisational culture ready for social media or do you want to shift the culture by introducing social media?. I'm re-reading Schein: organisational culture and leadership. Schein explains very well how cultures are created and reproduced. And that it's possible to influence cultures in organisations. At times I hear that an organisation is using wikis. Or uses Sharepoint internally with the blog function. An organisation seems enterprise2.0 enough because it has tools like blogs, wikis and social bookmarking. However, the juice of social media is far more in the culture of openly sharing knowledge, collaboration, and engaging in co-creation. Having the tools does not mean you have improved the collaboration between your professionals. So what is the actual change that you are envisioning? Can social media play a role in this? But what are the other interventions that are needed to help change the organisational culture? I see a lot of potential for change management professionals to help organisations with this process. On the other hand, there may be organisations that are already having an open culture in which social media fit neatly. But probably these organisations do not need any accompanying change process or at least a different process? So you'd have to start with assessing the culture of the organisation and see whether there is a match or a mismatch with social media cultures.


Another dilemma is how to balance individual preferences and creativity versus uniformity in tools. Back to the original question: what organisational processes do you feel can really be supported by social media? What is the organisational change that you envisage? I don't think there is any organisation that is completely enterprise1.0. I'm sure there are employees engaging in social media individually and that most do use wikipedia for instance. But a real enterprise2.0 is an open, collaborative, creative organisation that leverages the tools to the advantage of the functioning of the organisation. In this organisation: do professionals choose their own tools and are proficient in using them or do they work with the preferential toolset of the organisation?

By the way a nice guide of where to start with social media can be found here on the technotheory blog. However, this is also written from the assumption that you use social media to promote your organisation or products, not to stimulate internal learning processes.

Monitoring and evaluating communities of practice

We did a research for the IKMemergent program on monitoring and evaluating knowledge management strategies. The full publication will be up soon, but I already discussed the results in a teleconference in CPsquare and had a nice discussion how this relates to assessing results of communities of practice.

There are quite some challenges to overcome in monitoring and evaluating the effect of knowledge management strategies and interventies.

- One of the challenges is dealing with the time lag between the intervention and the impact. Sometimes benefits surface quite rapidly. We once had a new member who picked up an idea for elearning in the community, went back to her organisation and started implemented it organisation-wide. In other cases, ideas need greenhousing and it takes time for things to materialize or practices to change. On the other hand, the sponsors or donors may be eager to see results.

- Another challenge is quantifying the unquantifiable. You can measure whatever you can measure and use whatever data you have available, but you need stories to understand reality and how the community may have influenced the figures. You collect stories to understand the relationship between the figures: “this is where I took the idea and this is how I implemented it”. This will also help to prevent story-telling turning into success story telling.

- Yet anther challenge is to match inherent evaluation goals with extractive goals. An inherent evaluation is for people involved in the community or other effort, an extractive evaluation is for outsiders. At times a donor or manager starts asking for an evaluation at the time when doubt about the effectiveness has arisen. This is not the best time for an honest and open process. The question to be asked then is : does an assessment of results in itself imply a lack of trust in the leaders or the strategy?

In the end we realized that these dilemmas can not be solved by choosing a good method. It is the decision-making about whether or not to monitor and evaluate and ho wit will be done that matters. Therefore we wrote down 12 decisions that need to be taken in the form of answers. Hopefully that will guide people who are starting up a new initiative to improve knowledge management leading to innovation. You will find the 12 questions in the presentation. You will find the slides below.

Monitoring and evaluating knowledge management strategies

View more presentations from Joitske Hulsebosch.

Learning from masters and across disciplines

Image by daskar via Flickr

It is much easier to learn from practitioners who are doing similar things and are working in similar ways as you do. But maybe are slightly ahead of you in some ways.

Weggeman in his book 'Leiding geven aan Professionals? Niet doen!' about managing professionals recounts the story of a famous violist. The story illustrates at the one hand that there may be masters who may find it hard to explicitate their knowledge in words. On the other hand, it show that it is hard to learn from someone who is not a practitioner with a similar knowledge base. Here's the story:

A journalist asked him what the secret was of his success. He thought for a while and then said: "I think it is the way I use my bow, look, this is the way I do it. And this is the way a lot of my colleagues do it." The journalist didn't understand it and couldn't turn it into any sensible information. There was a masterclass pupil of the violinist who had heard the interview and was busy for about half an hour to try and explain to the journalist what the famous violinist had meant.

The journalist did not have the same basic knowledge about playing the violin as the masterclass pupil had. As a result the journalist could not understand the explanation. the pupil was able to understand it and make sense of it.

This bites the idea that you can learn and innovate by working across disciplines. The potential to learn from other disciplines may be high- but the risk that you never understand a thing is very high too.. It may explain for instance the sometimes apparent closedness of the development sector. You hear complaints that the sector is not open to learning from other sectors. It probably needs brokers like the masterclass pupil to make sure that learning is possible at all.

Learning that Sinterklaas doesn't exist = double loop learning

Image via Wikipedia

Sinterklaas time again in the Netherlands! Even though my children are getting bigger and we don't go to the intocht by boat, I enjoy this period quite a lot.

My youngest daughter is eight years old. At this age, you are not supposed to believe in Sinterklaas, hundreds of years old, coming by boat from Spain and bringing all the presents. At school, the children are not invited to the Sinterklaas celebration, but have a new type of celebration where you draw lots (lootjes trekken). You buy a present, make something nice and write a poem for that person.

My family is surprised though, that my daughter still believes in Sinterklaas bringing the presents. An intelligent girl, how come she doesn't see that the beard is not real? That the presents in her shoe are not brought by 'zwarte piet' in the night?

I think this is an example of double loop learning. Single loop learning involves the detection and correction of error. You want to do something and learn how to do it. Double loop learning, however, in contrast, involves questioning the role of the framing and learning systems. In other words, single loop learning takes place within the framework of existing belief system, double loop learning questions the belief system. It takes a lot more for double loop learning to occur.

My daughter has always been told, by friends, family and the media that Sinterklaas exists. She has seen him arrive by boat. She has seen the presents he brings. This has become part of her belief system. Even though there is now evidence against this belief: friends telling her he doesn't exist, buying your own presents for friends, the belief is so firm that it will take more to change this belief. Probably if I'll tell her that he doesn't exist... But let's wait another year, because it is a lot of fun to hide the presents and surprise them!

I want to facilitate online discussions but how do I choose the right platform?

Photo: participants in our workhshop on online facilitation

In many situations non-ICT specialists want to organise some online conversations and are looking for a good online space. A discussion forum functionality is key for this purpose, other things are nice to have but often blur the decision about the forum to choose.

Situation 1: You're looking for an online platform for your sailing club or for your family to prepare for the yearly family reunion. You make an easy choice and open a ning or groupsite. It is free (with ads), you do not have to install anything, it is easy to manage, so you're ready in a few minutes.

Situation 2: Now at work. You work for a company and may be asked to guide the process to develop a platform. There has been an intranet and an agency that has built the intranet. Now you're probably going into process to build a platform on your intranet.

In these two different situations seem as if the choice is made by the circumstances and often the choice is made for a platform that people are familiar with. It is very difficult to see the trees through the forest with all the tools.

But what are really the options you have for online community platforms and how you do it right choices? In this blog post I want to outline various possibilities especially for non-ICTers in organizations (like me) because it is a question I'm often asked. First it is good to know that many many online platforms offer similar functionality: a discussion forum, the possibility of personal pages, one page with the members, a document sharing tools, the ability to create subgroups and management tools for administrators. In order of increasing investment required I will present five practical options. The book Digital habitats of Etienne Wenger, Nancy White and John Smith has been an input, as well as the blogpost by Christian Kreutz: a starter for development organisations engaging in online networks.

Possibility 1. Opening a group on an existing social network sites such as Facebook or LinkedIn.

What is it? Most major social network sites such as MySpace and LinkedIn have the opportunity to start your own group. You can invite people to join your group. Often there are good functionality including announcing events, hold discussions and news announce.

Advantages: If all your participants are accustomed to this social network (and often already logged in), they do not get used to the technique. Since you appear in the list of groups, it is easy to attract new members, spontaneously. It's free. It's easy to set up.

Disadvantages: It does not work for participants who are not members in this social network (or you have to convince them they should become a member). Also, you do not have many possibilities to get the look and feel to suit your own organization. It feels like you are in the pub of this social network. This is not bad if everyone feels at home there, but it gives less the feeling of a home for the community or group. Also you have to do with the features available. Your information is stored externally.

So you can use this property for a group with a clear goal where almost all members already are a member of this social network, and it is not so important to create an 'own' online place for the group. The basic functions are sufficient for your group. It may also be strategic if you want to attract member who are frequently on this social network.

Option 2: A (free) Create email list like google group, or a yahoo group

Advantages: This is a way of communicating online that anyone who can email can handle, and is very low threshold. The advantage over email is that you have an archive, and a list of members you can share documents online. It is easy and free.

Disadvantages: It is limited to one single simultaneously discussion. Everyone follows (or does not follow) this discussion, but you can not run multiple parallel discussions. It does not look attractive.

This is still a great opportunity for groups who are not used much online to exchange email and do not have a need to feel part of a larger organisation. There is no learning curve (or a small learning curve). If you can email, you can do this. If you want to set up several online communities for an organizations, it may be less appropriate, unless you link the spaces.

Option 3: Your own social network platform like Ning, group site, grou.ps, Socialgo, collectivex, MINDZ.

What is it? There are web2.0 services for building your own free social network for your group can make. This is a revolution compared to the 'old' way of building a platform, with huge development costs. It is often free if you can cope with advertising, but you pay if you don't want advertising or other paid services. You can often host your own domain (redirect to a different Web address) or support for some payment.

Advantages: It's an accessible way to see if this type of exchange is working. If not so, then the platform can easily be deleted without having invested a lot of energy and money in developing a good platform. You lift on the success of a social network concept which is designed with the idea of strengthening relationships. It is common that every member has their own page. These services are often very well developed in the social aspect. It is easy to use even for administrators.

Disadvantages: You can not change everything to suit your own needs, and you are dependent on a number of choices that are made by the service. Nevertheless, you can customize some aspects, such as the number of tabs, or a number of features you want or not, etc. Content is hosted externally.

If you have a small budget, this is a good choice. For professional use you can get started with it too, if you want to experiment first and don't know yet how your interaction will flow. Compared with the first 2 options can include creating a clearer sense of group together because you have a special place online. It is also possible to invite a graphic designer to create and apply so that the appearance you want. It is important to make a comparison of the different platforms if you choose this option. Ning for instance doesnot have an easy file sharing possibility and groupsite does.

Option 4: Community software which is designed for knowledge sharing and interaction. Examples are Winkwaves, Tomoye, icohere, etc. or open source software like Drupal, Joomla or elgg (moodle is also used, but is actually optimized for Education)

What is it? Community platforms are software packages designed for use by online communities. In other words, the software is designed with the aim of encouraging online networking, sharing, online discussions, knowledge sharing. There is also open source software that is compatible for this purpose. It is often necessary though to have technical knowledge to install the software and adapt the open source software to the demands, but there are standard modules that you can use. Often there is the possibility to host the platform on your own server, but you can also host it externally.

Advantages: The advantage is that the functionality already fully developed and tested for optimal interaction in an online community. You take advantage of the experiences of others. You can use the software and customize the look and feel, choose the modules you want or not, so it is easy to customize to your needs.

Disadvantages: This is a more expensive option than the previous options. It requires more technical knowledge and the necessary support must be well thought through. The design process is longer.

Just as with option 3 you need to compare the software packages before you choose software for your situation. You should also study the pricing system. With open source software is useful to look at the experiences of others, the software is already well developed? It is good to find developers who have experience with this particular software.

Option 5: Build your own platform as an extension of existing software systems in use throughout the organization (eg. sharepoint)

What is it? You can also create your own discussion forum within existing intranets or other software used in the organization. You build it yourself to suit your own needs, with the help of the host and support of the other software. This requires an investment in the design process and the development (construction) costs.

Disadvantages: Often the existing software is developed for other purposes, such as data storage and document sharing. It is not optimal for social purposes and knowledge sharing. It requires a good design in close collaboration with an IT development company.

Advantage: It can be easy because you already have contacts and experience with you software support company. You do not have to find new external support. Also there is the advantage that people may have developed some routines like logging in to the system.

This is an option you can consider when people are very enthusiastic about the existing software and use it very actively. It is good to list all the technical functionalities that you would like to see upfront and asking whether it is possible to get all the features working. This prevents subsequent disappointments after everything has been built.


NB. It is also possible to combine different options. To create a Web2.0 platform AND create a google group email list. There are also options that offer the possibility to have conversations without having a discussion forum as the key tool, like twitter exchanges, or using the comments page of a wiki.