Agile Elephant making sense of digital transformation

innovation | digital transformation | value creation | (r)evoloution

  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Google+
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
  • Home
  • Manifesto
  • Services
    • Our Approach
    • Our Services
    • Making Collaboration Work Packages
    • Collaboration Solutions
    • Our Experience
    • Workshops
    • Innovation
  • About Us
    • The Team
    • Why we do what we do
    • Why are we called Agile Elephant?
    • Our Partners
    • Our Clients
  • Get Involved
    • Events
    • Meetups
    • Unconference
    • Newsletter
  • Resources
    • What is Digital Transformation?
    • What is the Digital Enterprise Wave?
    • Our Research
    • Case Studies
    • People We Follow
    • Articles & Links
    • Books That Inspire
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Home Blog
Essential TED Talks – Simon Sinek – Start With Why, how great leaders inspire action

October 1, 2015 By David Terrar

Essential TED Talks – Simon Sinek – Start With Why, how great leaders inspire action

Following on from Sir Ken Robinson on education and creativity, this next TED talk recommendation is about inspiration.  It explains something that is so simple, and yet so powerful.  A vital ingredient that is missing from many of the companies we work with, or work for, or buy products and services from.  An idea that can galvanise action, or if it’s missing can make the message fall flat so that we say – meh!

This talk comes from the independently run TEDx talks rather than the main conference.  It is from TEDxPugetSound which happened on 16 September 2009.  The video was loaded to YouTube a few days later and to date it has 1,382,600 views.  Simon Sinek explains that we should “Start With Why” because that is the way great leaders inspire action.  It applies to marketing, business, politics – anywhere that you need to inspire action.

Simon’s talk doesn’t use fancy graphics.  It’s low tech, using a flip chart and some coloured pens to draw diagrams, but he amplifies the message with some great stories and examples that we already know from history or our daily lives, but he shows us something different, something that should be obvious – like so many great ideas.

His examples include wondering why Apple is so innovative and loved, when they are just a computer company.  He wonders why Martin Luther King led the civil rights movement in the United States in the 60s – many people were involved, but we focus on Dr. King – why is that?  And he tells us the story of the Wright Brothers taking flight.

The Golden CircleThe core of his idea is what he calls The Golden Circle.  Every single organisation in existence knows what they do.  Most of those organisations know how they do it.  Very few know or express why they do what they do, and that’s Simon’s key point – so many companies have forgotten their why.  It’s not about profit, and it shouldn’t be about shareholder value.  Even the great Jack Welch, CEO of GE, said “on the face of it, shareholder value is the dumbest idea in the world”.  Actually when people start companies it is based around a cause or a belief or an idea about doing things better.  Simon’s first example is Apple, and he highlights the difference between those technology companies that just make products against Apple’s “why” which they had at the start and then lost, and then found again when Steve Jobs returned to the company.  For everything they do they believe in challenging the status quo, and that drives them to make beautifully designed products that are easy to use and desirable.  If you ever heard Steve Jobs speak, it was always about why, with much less emphasis on the what and the how.  Simon suggests it’s too easy to start from the outside of the circle and work in.  If you want to inspire people you start from the inside and work out.

He goes on to suggest that the golden circle mirrors the structure of the brain, with logic and language controlled by the neo cortex, but the limbic brain controls feelings of trust and loyalty – that’s where we make our gut decisions (which we then rationalise with the neo cortex part of the brain).

Martin Luther King - I have a dreamHe uses TiVo as an example of a great product which failed because the marketing and positioning never properly explained its “why”, and then moves on to the story explaining why the Wright Brothers were the first to take flight.  His final example goes back to the Civil Rights movement in the US and Martin Luther King’s speech at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington DC.  It was delivered to 250,000 supporters – there were no formal invites, no websites to tell people where to go and when – it was word of mouth and the power of Dr. King’s message that brought the huge audience.  Importantly, Simon Sinek quips:

“by the way, he gave the I Have a Dream speech, not the I Have a Plan speech!”

Simon tells us there are leaders and there are those who lead.  Leadership is not about power and authority – those who lead inspire us.  Simon’s message can help you do the same.  Watch the TED talk and then go to his website for useful (free) resources.  You could also read the book.

If you want to understand more of our Agile Elpehant thinking, check the rest of our blog material and take a look at the Enterprise Digital Summit London in October. We’d love to hear your comments or suggestions or to see you in London next month.

Share this:

  • Tweet

Filed Under: #EntDigi conference, ideas, leadership, resources, strategy

Essential TED Talks – Sir Ken Robinson – Do schools kill creativity?

September 29, 2015 By David Terrar

Essential TED Talks – Sir Ken Robinson – Do schools kill creativity?

As I explained in my “setting the scene” post, this is the very first TED Talk that I saw back in November 2006 (although it was filmed in February 2006).  Titled “Do schools kill creativity?”, it has become the most most viewed TED Talk of all time – 35 million views and counting!  Sir Ken Robinson has been an advisor to the UK government on educational matters, and is a thought leader on creativity and innovation in both education and business. This talk covers ground that you will find in his book Out Of Our Minds, and I would also recommend his more recent book The Element which presents the case for finding what you really enjoy doing, and then turning that activity in to your job. This talk, delivered without PowerPoint slides, visual aids or props, demonstrates what a great speaker and story teller Ken is, as well as showing he has the timing of a stand-up comedian.

Ken talks about our education system and the future.  Nobody can predict what is going to happen in 5 years, yet we need to be educating our children for way beyond that horizon.  All kids start with tremendous talent and we squander it.  In our schools creativity should be as important as literacy – it should be treated with the same status, but today it isn’t.  Through as series of great personal stories and anecdotes Ken highlights how children will take a chance because they’re not frightened of being wrong – if you aren’t prepared to be wrong how can you come up with something original?  But actually in our schools, and then in the companies that we go on to work at, we have systems and processes in place that stigmatise mistakes.  He goes on to explain how the education system in the UK and most other countries around the world were designed in the 19th century for an industrial age with a specific set of priorities, a hierarchy that put mathematics and languages at the top, then the humanities, with the arts at the bottom.  Even within the arts music has higher status than dance.  Maths is important, but so is dance.  He asks what is education for, and worries that the whole set up is designed to produce university professors – is that right?

One of the best stories explains how Gillian Lynne, at school in the 1930s, was believed to have a learning disorder because she couldn’t concentrate and was always fidgeting.  Her mother took her to a specialist who recognised immediately what she was, and sent her in a completely different direction.  Watch the talk and you’ll find that you know of her work.

Ken’s talk is a plea to change the way we educate our children in the 21st century and reprioritise our thinking so that ideas, innovation and creativity are brought to the fore.  I’ll use Ken’s own words of conclusion:

“What TED celebrates is the gift of human imagination. We have to be careful now that we use this gift wisely and that we alert some of the scenarios that we’ve talked about. And the only way we’ll do it is by seeing our creative capacities for the richness they are and seeing our children for the hope that they are. And our task is to educate their whole being, so they can face the future.”

If you want to understand more of our Agile Elpehant thinking, check the rest of our blog material and take a look at the Enterprise Digital Summit London in October. We’d love to hear your comments or suggestions or to see you in London next month.

Share this:

  • Tweet

Filed Under: #EntDigi conference, future, ideas, innovation, resources

Essential TED Talks – Setting the scene

September 28, 2015 By David Terrar

Essential TED Talks – Setting the scene

office 2.0 conferenceLet me tell you a story (about story telling).  Once upon a time, back in November 2006, I was working with a couple of friends, Toby Moores and David Tebbutt, on a project connected to commercial creativity.  We were meeting up at Toby’s office in Leicester to discuss our ideas, having just come back from what we (and others like Dennis Howlett) believed was the must attend gig of 2006 – the first Office 2.0 show in San Francisco which had been organised by another friend called Ismael Ghalimi.  Back then we had been bouncing ideas around about how creativity isn’t really taught properly in our schools, colleges and universities and wondering why?  Easy to find a study skills course or module in the curriculum, but where are the thinking skills courses?  There are plenty of tools and plenty of material from the likes of Edward de Bono or Tony Buzan, but why isn’t creativity being given the prominence and status that it should within the education system, and more importantly the workplace?  During our discussions we had been speculating on the nature of a system which was designed in the 19th century for a different industrial age, and which seems to have a set of priorities that don’t match the way the economy works now and how business is done in the 21st century.  We had been working around the way to express these ideas, when the day before the meeting in Leicester I came across a video of Sir Ken Robinson on a website called TED.com and that changed everything. I was so excited to play the video to Toby and David when I got to Leicester. I wish I’d taken note of how many times that video had been viewed at that point in 2006, not many compared to the count now….

Si Ken RobinsonThat video changed and focused our thinking around the backdrop of the creativity project we were working on, and introduced us to one of THE most important resources I’ve found while surfing the web and making serendipitous social media connections over the last decade. As of today The Sir Ken Robinson talk has become the most watched TED Talk of all time, but for me it was just the start of something really valuable.

Back in 2006 it was the first time I had taken notice of TED, a conference on Technology, Entertainment and Design which already had a 22 year history.  It is run by a non-profit, private foundation, started as a one off event in 1984 conceived by architect and graphic designer Richard Saul Wurman, but became an annual event from 1990 onwards in Monterey, California with a strap line of “Ideas Worth Spreading”.  In 2009 it moved to Long Beach to cater for a substantial increase in attendees, and then moved again to Vancouver in 2014.  Originally the three words described the converged topics covered, but over time it has broadened to showcase the best of science, business and smart thinking on global issues.  As well as the main conference there is a more International sister conference TEDGlobal, and independently run TEDx events to help share ideas in communities around the world – for example the other two Agile Elephant founders, Alan Patrick and Janet Parkinson, were heavily involved on the team organising TEDxTuttle, one of the first independent TEDx events to be run in the UK.

By 2015 you will probably have heard of TED.com, and if you haven’t it’s a resource that you need to go check out and mine immediately. “TED Talks” have become synonymous with high quality, have redefined the elements of a successful presentation and the way people approach a talk. The term “TED Style” is often heard as a shorthand.  At the conference speakers are given no more than 18 minutes to make their point.  Some just speak from the heart, some use presentation material and visual aids, but the stature, quality and standard of the speakers that have gone before, and the quality of the audience at the event, mean a TED talk must be outstanding.  There are a number of books that explore the style, but I would recommend one by Carmine Gallo, the presentation specialist, called Talk Like TED: The 9 Public Speaking Secrets of the World’s Top Minds. He has interviewed many of the top TED presenters and distilled things down to the key ingredients and a step by step approach to help you emulate the best.

Some suggest that TED is elitist as it costs $6,000 to attend the main conference.  However, as of today there are over 2,000 TED talks published and available for free at TED.com, viewed by over a million people each day – an amazing resource of ideas and important thinking.  They have even started the TED Open Translation Project to bring the material to the 4.5 Billion people on the planet who don’t speak English.

Of the 2,000, where do you start?  This post sets the scene for a sequence of posts highlighting the best of TEDtalks online – those we think you will enjoy and why.  I’m not sure how many there will be in the sequence – at least 10, maybe 20 or more.  Many have key messages about business and how to be successful at a time of massive digital disruption and transformation for all industries.  One of the sequence that I’ll recommend is, on the face of it, about music but has a profound message about leadership.  The first recommendation, in the next post, will be that talk by Sir Ken Robinson mentioned earlier – it’s about education but so much more.

If you want to understand more of our Agile Elpehant thinking, check the rest of our blog material and take a look at the Enterprise Digital Summit London in October. We’d love to hear your comments or suggestions or to see you in London next month.

Share this:

  • Tweet

Filed Under: #EntDigi conference, ideas, innovation, resources

Bupa’s 6 year journey with their Enterprise Social Network

September 11, 2015 By David Terrar

Bupa’s 6 year journey with their Enterprise Social Network

Del GreenGood social business case studies explaining the advantages of enterprise social networks over long term use are hard to find.  Bupa is a great example.   I sat down with Del Green, Internal Social Business Manager there, to hear about their 6 years of experience and what they are looking to do next.  Del has been involved right from the start and is one of the speakers at the Enterprise Digital Summit on 22 October in London where he will be telling more of the story.

As of today, one of Bupa’s primary ambitions is to become a truly digital business.

Offering health and care services to 29 million customers across 190 countries, it’s crucial that Bupa’s  80,000 employees around the world are constantly connected and have the ability to easily collaborate with one another, sharing ideas, successes, advice and much more.

BL Homepage 270715This is why Bupa Live was created 6 years ago – a multifunctional network enabling colleagues to connect with each other and bring leadership closer to the front line of the business.

With appox 60% of Bupa employees not regularly working with computers, Bupa Live can be accessed via mobile devices at any time.  It can be used in a variety of ways: to start discussions; create blogs; post polls; upload videos; network with colleagues worldwide; and much more.

It’s also used to support key internal campaigns around the business, such as Bupa Thanks, where employees are encouraged to thank their colleagues via e-cards. Thousands of employees have done just that across all of Bupa’s Market Units, highlighting the importance and benefits of collaborative networks such as Bupa Live.

By promoting campaigns internally on a global scale it ensures all colleagues share the same vision and feel as though they play an important part in Bupa’s growth moving forward.

What’s more, Bupa Live helps to bring leadership closer to the rest of the business.  For instance, Chief Executive Officer Stuart Fletcher is very active on the network, participating in discussions, hosting webchats  and getting a feel of peoples’ thoughts around Bupa.

Another example is how Chief Medical Officer Paul Zollinger-Read uses the network to host live webchats with the clinical community, as well as uploading podcasts and blogs on current global health issues – with World Health Day 2015 being a typical example.

Although Del believes Bupa is currently in a great place as it strives to become a truly digital business, he says there is always more to be done.  He said:

“We’re proud of what we’ve created with Bupa Live and it’s great to see thousands of colleagues using it to support each other, share successes and collaborate to help the business grow.  Digital is at the forefront of our minds at Bupa and it’s important we keep moving forward.”

Tools like Bupa Live enable the company to become a truly global, better-connected business.  Bupa operates all around the world, from the UK, Spain and Hong Kong to Australia, New Zealand and Saudi Arabia – and it’s never been more important to ensure its business growth is backed up by its digital offering.

If you want to hear more from Del and the Bupa story, he will be talking about all things digital at the Enterprise Digital Summit at the British Academy, London, on 22 October.   Go here for more details or to book a place.  We look forward to seeing you and we’re hoping Del can tell us more about what’s next for Bupa as well as what works and what doesn’t.

Share this:

  • Tweet

Filed Under: #EntDigi conference, Enterprise Social Network, events

Virtue Signalling – Social Business impact

September 11, 2015 By Alan Patrick

Virtue Signalling – Social Business impact

Last Wednesday night we had our September Social Business Meetup, with Euan Semple being our speaker for the evening (he spoke on Pigs, Lipstick & Dinosaurs – see our summary here, and his relevant blog posts his relevant blog posts here, here and here)

Anyway, in the Q&A&D afterwards, we started to talk about “clicktivism”, and people noted the way Twitter seems to be increasingly being used by people to try and drive “mob opinion”, and even signal they are “more X than thou”. I have seen the effect, and it does seem to be an increasing “thing” on Social Media – but I can’t prove it as it’s very hard to write algorithms to sort genuine opinions from these, so I started looking for a reason as to the “why”.

So, I was scrabbling round the Web to see if there was any information on this, and one term I came across was “Virtue Signalling” and that made me realise that this was covered already in a classic piece of game theory in signalling “weak tells”.

In Game Theory, you can signal an intent – a “tell” in the parlance – that may or may not be genuine. The way you tell if the “tell” is genuine or not is to measure its strength, and this is measured as the cost to the signaller. A “strong tell” is typically by someone who will “put their money (or other assets, reputation, time etc) where their mouth is”. A weak tell is a signal with little cost to the user.

In general, weak tells are easy ways of generating a lot of traffic – they are, for example, the method of choice for “clicktivism” – a low cost of supporting something with little comeback. Facebook “Likes” are a simiar example of a Weak Tell.  I did an analysis on my Broadstuff blog of how this plays out in Social Media, especially about making it harder to measure true intentions and sentiment.

From an Enterprise point of view, as well as making it harder to discern meaning on social media that one may be monitoring, this has an impact on internal social business systems as well, given that similar conditions apply. (And then there is the impact of payoff distortion by non-business goals, as the Dilbert cartoon above notes). But in general, “Virtue Signalling” has 3 main effects:

  • Exaggerates a particular (popular, or advantageous) view
  • Puts off potential for disagreement
  • (Possibly) allocates social capital to the wrong people

The net-net is that certain arguments are overplayed, certain arguments are not made as hard as they should be, and possible the wrong people get allocated resources or authority. This can have a negative impact on performance – studies have shown that suppressing dissent can drive hidden costs such as wasted and lost time, reduced decision quality and decreased engagement/motivation.

To be fair, this is hardly a Digital “thing”, this has happened in organisations from the start. The risk with electronic media though is that the effect is amplified, so the question is how to prevent it. In face to face environments, it is usually the role of a moderator, facilitator or chair to ensure that all voices are heard, but how does one replicate that on a business’s social communication systems? Some thoughts:

  • Good news – the “mob storm” effect is likely to be far less intense, so less social pressure to say nothing
  • More Good News – unilike public social systems, it is possible to “set a tone” on a private network that just cannot be achieved easily on more public ones
  • There are a number of approaches that have worked in allowing a wider set of views to emerge, from suggestion schemes to “rewarding dissent” policies (this is quite a good brief summary from Wikipedia) – all have plusses and minusses, and seem better or worse in certain conditions, but it can be done.
  • However it takes design and ongoing dedication to ensure the network can welcome and handle dissent and unpopular views
  • Chances are, it also needs some form of moderation on occasion, albeit thse can be voluntees rather than full timers

Something to be aware of, at any rate….

Share this:

  • Tweet

Filed Under: Uncategorized

Of corporate dinosaurs, lipstick and pigs (digitally speaking) 

September 11, 2015 By David Terrar

Of corporate dinosaurs, lipstick and pigs (digitally speaking) 

Euan by AddersOn Wednesday night we occupied under the arches of the ICA’s cafe bar for one of our regular Combined Social Business Sessions London meetups.  Our main speaker was Euan Semple (@Euan on Twitter), well known keynote speaker on social business and collaboration as well as the author of Organisations Don’t Tweet, People Do. Eaun probably wouldn’t mind being described as a catalyst for change – he’s been talking around his topic (which he would say is really just common sense, but covers everything from knowledge management through to digital transformation) with organisations large and small for around 14 years.  Wednesday’s meetup was slightly different to our normal format as we didn’t have a projector and screen – no PowerPoints and just talk, which made for a more intimate session with some enthusiastic, top quaity group discussion.

Drawnalism_EIP_Pig_and_Lipstick1Euan’s talk was based around 3 of his recent blog posts and was of (corporate) dinosaurs and Lipstick on a Pig – a phrase I love and use often.  Euan related stories from his recent camping trip to Exmoor wondering what Tess of the d’Urbervilles would make of modern farming or watching the corporate types normally hunched over their laptops now hunched over their steering wheels fighting through the holiday traffic to get away from their SAP or other corporate systems to the tranquility of Devon.  Like the farm workers of Tess’s time, todays firms and office workers are facing immense changes with jobs under threat from automation and all manner of disruption of the digital kind. Euan talked about his experiences with Senior Management in these big corporates and sees a shift happening.  The older demographic who were maintaining the status quo, marking time until retirement are now recognising change is happening on their watch and maybe they need to do something about it.  However, he worries if there is a desire for real change when actually the reaction is usually to start some initiative for employee engagement or developing leadership potential. Are these programmes put in place with a desire for real outcomes or just there to demonstrate being “busy”. That’s where the term “Lipstick on a Pig” comes in – are these social collaboration projects just for show, without enough commitment to make real change that helps the bottom line and changes the firm for the better.  Euan’s worried that he’s spending his career trying to resuscitate dinosaurs.  But those are his darker moments – as I said he’s been at it for 14 years and counting, and he’s still enthusiastic about making change happen.  Actually he believes it will happen from “small acts of disobedience”.  He prefers not to talk about top down or bottom up change management programmes, but more about people and their behaviours and encouraging the individual to take small steps, little and often.

Euan Dinosaur meetup discussion (1)

His talk flowed in to some lively discussion with the whole group joining in.  Those of us in the thick of new ways of working, the adoption of social tools inside business (as well as for external communication), or talking digital in its various forms are always expecting change to happen more quickly than it actually does. We’re in the middle of a shift as significant as Johannes Gutenberg and the printing press triggering the Renaissance, the Reformation, and the Age of Enlightenment. Actually we’ve been talking digital for 20 years, and you add to that the current level of connectivity and how many of us now have smart phones.  We also need to remember the importance of more basic mobile phones and cellular networks facilitating banking and doing business in the third world. In discussing smart phones, somebody raised the importance of good design, shifting these devices from expert and geek use, to mainstream and easy, so that now over 3/4 of the UK’s adult population has them and uses them day in day out for internet access, apps, access to social networks (and occasionally phone calls).  We talked about Facebook and social networks.  We talked about the way things have developed from last decade when social media and social networks were more like villages, to their current urban sprawl and focus on content marketing with all of the associated noise.  Euan talked of his kids commenting on the nature of his online friends, but changing their view when they met them “for real” and face to face, maybe on a transatlantic holiday trip.  We talked of the value of these social media friendships and networks that we create, although we also talked of the importance of face to face contact and the extra triggers and understanding you get from more conventional networking and meetings.

Adam Tinworth (@adders on Twitter) live blogged from the event and took some great photos, and he’ll be doing the same at our Enterprise Digital Summit London next month.  Also in the run up to the Summit we plan to have another Meetup on 7 October – the atmosphere under the arches was so great, we will probably be back next month for the same style as this one.

Share this:

  • Tweet

Filed Under: #EntDigi conference, events, future, social business

September 7, 2015 By Janet Parkinson

Changing Dinosaurs & Lipstick on a Pig with Euan Semple: Join Us at our Meetup

Meeting Sliver

As many of you know we host regular Social Business MeetUps in central London.  The idea is to provide a regular forum where we and others in the social business and digital transformation space can share ideas, experiences and models for helping organisations transition to new ways of working and, in doing so, create new connections that lead to community.

We’re really delighted to have Euan Semple as our main speaker to kick this month’s session off with his take on “Changing Dinosaurs and Lipstick on a Pig” in which he states: “Sometimes it feels like I am spending my career attempting to resuscitate dinosaurs and I wonder if it might be kinder to shoot them and move on.”  We’re looking forward to creating some lively debate around this theme! As many of you will know Euan is author of “Organizations Don’t Tweet, People Do: A Manager’s Guide to the Social Web” and is a well known keynote speaker.

After Euan then anyone can speak for 5 minutes so if you feel like it then sign up by adding a comment here against the meeting.  Providing that it connects to social business, digital transformation or the future of work, it can be anything you fancy.  You can have a further 5 minutes for questions.

Our next session will be this Wednesday 9th September at the ICA on the Mall so if you’re interested then please sign up.  We’ll start at 6.00pm in the ICA Bar (in a reserved area located to the left of the Bar entrance under the arches).

Many thanks to our sponsors Kongress Media and we hope to see you there.

Share this:

  • Tweet

Filed Under: #EntDigi conference, events

Transaction Costs in the New Economy – WTF?

September 3, 2015 By Alan Patrick

Transaction Costs in the New Economy – WTF?

I have been following the development of Tim O’Reilly’s “WTF” (Work – The Future) essays as it may be a useful gathering point for a lot of the emerging thinking about the space, which is very scattered right now.

One of the essays is on the replacement of Firm based value chains with networked value chains, the argument as to why this will happen is effectively Coasian. Ronald Coase looked at why firms existed in the 1930’s, and came up with the idea of Transaction Costs, those small frictions in doing business. Coase argued that a firm exists when Transaction Costs make it cheaper to operate a business as a managed entity rather than have to buy from/write a multitude of contracts with mutiple suppliers for every little thing.

The diagram above shows how this works.

The rising Blue line shows the increasing Transaction Cost as the transaction becomes more complex from left to right.

  • Arms Length transaction – buying a coffee – very simple, very low cost to perform
  • Contract – a more complex transaction, something needs to be set up before/during/after a simple transaction
  • Vertical Integration – a very complex transaction, typically used where there is a need for synchronisation with upstream and downstream activity.

The horizontal Green line is the cost of doing any transaction within a  firm, essentially it is a fixed cost of overhead, so any in-Firm transaction costs are in effect the same. Coase argued that the Firm will want to do all the work internally where the Green line is below the Blue, as this costs less. As expected it tends to be the more complex transaction that the Firm will take internaly.

And this is how it has played out to date. As the industrial revolution gathered pace, firstly it was easier to integrate a series of vertical activities in a Factory, and then get efficiencies of scale and automation via unified operation, and we have the modern “traditional” Firm emerging. Small craftsmen and guilds were squeezed out as this process intensified. It also became easier in some industries to contract for someone to arrive at work every day, on a one-off employment contract, rather than negotiate with work gangs every day, so workers were hired on long term employment contracts. There was “peak integration” in the early 20th century when companies like Ford did everything from mining iron to repairing cars, but that was a temporary phase. (This is a subject in itself, for another post, but in essence scale and complexity adds exponentially to transaction costs)

Most company value chains today look like the diagram above, where some work is carried out in Firms, some is contracted out to suppliers and contractors. The impact of 50 years of ICT is that it is continually reducing transaction costs across the value chain, and the argument of some people is (and has been for c 10 years at least, I may add) that we are getting to a “tipping point” today where the gap between today’s transaction costs and how most Firms still work are large enough to create a disruptive movement in the blue line/green line crossover point, far to the right, and we are looking at New Ways Of Working. This view is explained in an essay on the subject by Esko Kilpi in the WTF canon. In essence, the argument is that technology is dropping transaction costs outside the Firm faster than within it, and thus the structure will shift from Firms as intermediaries between customers & suppliers- ie the green line will move to the right, and work will move to a multiplicity of suppliers and contractors in networks, delivering services at lower transaction costs. Kilpi argues:

What really matters now is the reverse side of the Coasean argumentation. If the (transaction) costs of exchanging value in the society at large go down drastically as is happening today, the form and logic of economic entities necessarily need to change! Coase’s insight turned around is the number one driver of change today! The traditional firm is the more expensive alternative almost by default. This is something that he did not see coming.

(Hmmm..Coase would have known the cost is shiftable either way by definition). Anyway, Kilpi argues that the outcome is that:

Accordingly, a very different kind of management is needed when coordination can be performed without intermediaries with the help of new technologies. Digital transparency makes responsive coordination possible. This is the main difference between Uber and old taxi services. Apps can now do what managers used to do.

For most of the developed world, firms, as much as markets, make up the dominant economic pattern. The Internet is nothing less than an extinction-level event for the traditional firm.

There are two major caveats with this line of reasoning, however:

  • Firstly, ”If” – as in “If  the (transaction) costs of exchanging value in the society at large go down drastically”….. This “If” has a rider, which is there will only be a shift Also If the transaction costs of Firms also do not reduce, i.e. are not equally affected by these same technologies. If those In-Firm transaction costs also go down, using the same sorts of technology, then there will not be a great shift to “exchanging values in the society at large”.
  • Secondly, what are these replacement economic entities going to look like when the firm sheds transactions? Who will operate and own them? Will they be bedded in the “society at large” or not? There is an implication in Kilpi’s work that these are not intermediary structures, the WTF essay assumes they will be set in these newfangled Internet networks and called “Plaftforms”. However, if you look at the example given in the essay as a harbinger of the new  – Uber –  it is clearly just another Firm, using t’Internet rather than t’Phone. As to value exchange, it remains a centrally placed intermediary. All links lead to and from Uber. All transactions (logistical and financial) are routed through Uber’s servers, within its own network. If this is a “new” network economy, it is a highly centralised and closed network, with all nodes owned and run by Uber, as any before.  All that “society at large” is doing is supplying or ordering a taxi ride and paying for it at the edge if the network, as it did before, just that now its by App transactions rather than ‘phone or hail ones.

In this case one “traditional” Firm, the original Taxi Company (or in fact many Taxi Companies), have just been replaced with another, newer, one – Uber.  A new Firm has used newer technology to reduce the transaction costs in a well worn existing business model (order taxi – route taxi – pay taxi)  and is now using good old fashioned In-Firm competitive advantage to take market share from existing Firms with higher transaction costs.  Uber only needs a “very different kind of management” insofar as it is managing more machines, less people in its workflow.  It’s network is a good old heirarchical network, just more automated.

Same web, different spider.

So what is the real competitive advantage here? This is not a replacement of today’s intermediaries by some new, paradigm shifted economic entity. It is merely an automation of labour within today’s standard operating model. There are still taxi drivers and customers, needing roughly the same transactions to manage the service. Apart from getting a smoother taxi ordering process it’s just business as usual, there has been no fundamental transformation of the value chain, that a competitor cannot replicate to a “good enough” standard, fairly quickly. Looking closely at the real economic differences, it seems  that some of these transaction cost reductions are due to evading existing labour rights and supplier/customer regulations – a point conveniently avoided in many discussions, but again one has to ask how sustainable this is (see further down the page).

At this point it’s worth introducing another counter-intuitive issue of the new technology is the following – Kilpi is correct when he says that:

“Managerial overheads increase as the organization grows. Whenever the transaction costs inside the organization reach the level of the transaction costs in the markets, markets outperform firms and outperform central planning/management coordination in general.

The Internet, together with technological intelligence, makes it possible to create totally new forms of economic entities, such as the “Uber for everything” -type of platforms/service markets that we see emerging today. Very small firms can do things that in the past required very large organizations.”

However, the corollary is that if a Firm improves its internal transaction costs at a faster rate than than the outside markets, it actually becomes more efficient and thus can bring more functions inside itself. I would argue that baed on current evidence this “Uber for Everything” world is currently not going to evolve to any form of new non-intermediary economic entity, or some form of value sharing network. Instead the trend is towards becoming a line up of lower transaction cost super-Firms, large intermediaries each dominating it’s own industry sector with its own efficient centralised network,  and walled gardens to maximise internal value (you can’t take your reputation from Uber to Airbnb, for example). There is a trendline of huge New Firms establishing sector dominance – Google, iTunes, Amazon, Facebook, soon Uber?

Transaction Costs per se are clearly only a part of this story.

Just follow the money – these UberFirms would not have “Unicorn” valuations if the surplus in the value chain was going to be spread across a host of other small players in a network, their backers are taking a Firm bet on where much of the surplus ends up.

And follow the spend – its all about market growth, including using investment money to undercut incumbents to gain mass market share fast, and increasingly to lobby against forces trying to recreate level playing fields in terms of regulation & employment laws.

In fact the major economic drivers of these UberFirms’ advantage are not the technology driven transaction cost reductions from ICT, but the labour and regulatory savings. And this has been true overall for many a decade. The big driver of outsourcing was lower regulatory and labour costs in developing countries, not the transaction cost reduction from adoption of ICT on every desk and cheap global telephony. What has really changed in UberFirms is who the employees nominally work for, their working conditions, and which regulations the UberFirms believe they can avoid.

However, there is already starting to be pushback from existing competitors, regulators and employment institutions to ensure a more equal playing field. This is why, as these efforts are starting to level the field, some of the Uber-alles plays have already had to shut up shop. Uber’s own model is under attack and it is having to shift more of its resources into lobbying, undercutting competitors and public pressure to keep the arbitrage gap open (….long enough to IPO at Unicorn valuations?).

Where Kilpi is spot on is when he says:

We stand on the threshold of an economy where the familiar economic entities are becoming increasingly irrelevant. Technological advances, like smartphones together with cloud computing, allow people to have a computer in their pocket that is more powerful than any in the world 20 years ago.

But again the impact is counter intuitive. What has happened in effect is that though the processing capability of a “wired” customer or service supplier has gone up dramatically, this typically has not facilitated any major societal value shift or new societal network emergence. If anything, the history of the Internet since c 2010 is an increasing walling off of what were once open societal network areas, even as end user devices have got more powerful. What has happened is that an increasing part of the “hard to automate” workflow is outsourced to the supplier and user at the network edge (via their smartphones) and much within is automated. But whether it’s Google ousting Yellow Pages, Apple iTunes ousting Tower Records (Napster was truly Societal, and look what happened there 😉 ), Amazon ousting the local bookshop or Uber ousting a Taxi firm near you, a Firm is still very much in charge.

So to conclude, the statement that:

“The Internet is nothing less than an extinction-level event for the traditional firm”

Is true, but is qualified – If:

  • The traditional Firms cannot digitally transform themselves sufficiently to compete well enough, soon enough.
  • The UberFirms can avoid a levelling of employment & regulatory conditions, and afford to undercut long enough, to drive the traditional Firms out of business.

If….

That is the traditional Firm’s challenge…… and some will fail. But it is far from a given that existing players cannot win this game. How an existing player can compete will depend on the sector, but some the obvious things to do are to:

  • Keep the UberFirm at bay while transforming yourself, by persuading authorities to create a level playing field in terms of employment conditions & regulation, and delay or limit entry until this is done
  • Use positional advantages to give customers value from existing asset bases that the UberFirm then has to subsidize
  • Restructure their own operating model where they cannot achieve the above. (This is however culturally often very hard)
  • Adopt the new technology to bring their own transaction costs down to a “good enough” level to retain customers
  • Focus on your market, and the scale really rquired to serve it – do you actually need more than one city to be a great Taxi company?

We will examine the real operating economics of these new UberFirms, what traditional Firms can do in response, and how a genuine networked economy may come about in more detail in subsequent posts.

As an aside, we are running our 2nd London Digital Enterprise Summit on October 22nd – details, speakers & agenda are over here

Share this:

  • Tweet

Filed Under: digital disruption, strategy Tagged With: AirBnB, Ronald Coase, Tim O'Reilly, Uber, WTF

Digital Transformation of the Office – Agile Elephant’s 7E Approach

September 2, 2015 By Alan Patrick

Digital Transformation of the Office – Agile Elephant’s 7E Approach

One of the areas we have been working on is exactly how to implement Digital Transformation projects.   At Agile Elephant we are all old enough to have seen many implementations of software, processes, ways of working etc., and have seen flops, failures, fads that come and go, and even some successes.  One of the things that has exercised us is the best approach for Digital Transformation.  As our approach is to look at “what works, what doesn’t” when designing “what’s next”, we thought it may be useful to share some emerging thoughts.

To no one’s great surprise, we found failure by and large followed the “Anna Karenina Principle” – i.e. there are multiple modes of failure.  But some are more obvious and predictable than others, and one of the major ones is using inappropriate project planning, implementation and progressing approaches.  It’s worth looking at the pros and cons of the main approaches, the relative benefits are summed up conveniently in Wikipedia:

Agile methods Plan-driven methods Formal methods
Low criticality High criticality Extreme criticality
Senior developers Junior developers(?) Senior developers
Requirements change often Requirements do not change often Limited requirements, limited features see Wirth’s law
Small number of developers Large number of developers Requirements that can be modeled
Culture that responds to change Culture that demands order Extreme quality

(Wirth’s law is a computing adage which states that software is getting slower more rapidly than hardware becomes faster.)

To summarise these approaches:

Agile methods  are essentially adaptive, a broad plan is laid and development adapts to situations as they occur – very good for building things that don’t exist, but can go haywire and build up costs fast.

Formal methods mostly try and anticipate plan for every contingency in advance, and do value and risk analysis to prioritise and cater for unknowns, and everything is modelled.  Work well in known environments but often go badly wrong trying to do new things.  They are still essential where cost of materials and people is very high and quality of outcome is critical, e.g. Aerospace.

Plan-Driven is the approach of defining a project plan upfront, then putting a team together to manage it in all its vicissitudes over time.  It lies somewhere between these other 2 approaches.

As Digital Transformation is fairly “new fangled” and many different and relatively new tools are being tested in practic at the same time, one thing that is certainly true is that these projects will be very hard to plan in great detail upfront, will need a lot of change during implementation, and there will be a lot of iteration.  That suggests a need for a strong element of the Agile approach.  Unfortunately, that’s not enough as some of these projects will be of high criticality, and the initial culture will probably be more comfortable with some form of order, so a plan driven approach is important. (My own experience of Agile development is it is very good AFTER you have set up the overarching frameworks, but in more detail than Agile likes. They may change, but at least you have an original yardstick to measure variance from). The highly disciplined Formal approach is probably not appropriate in the majority of cases.

There are hybrid models, trying to allow some form of adaptability within a structured plan.  To us the most useful of these are encapsulated in the term Agile Management, which is essentially the combination of Agile software production with elements of the well tested Just In Time / Lean Operations operating model (or more accurately, the disciplines within it – data transparency, self solving work teams, continuous improvement, designing out errors etc.) and we believe this approach holds the best hope.

But even Agile Management really only focuses on software and methodology development, and not implementation of new ways of working, which is more a change management process.  And if there is one thing any Digital Transformation will have, it’s a lot of new ways of working.  If you look at the lasting principles of change management, any approach must be able to get over the “Machiavelli barrier”, i.e.:

There is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things. For the reformer has enemies in all those who profit by the old order, and only lukewarm defenders in all those who would profit by the new order this lukewarmness, arising partly from fear of their adversaries … and partly from the incredulity of mankind, who do not truly believe in anything new until they have had actual experience of it.

Any plan thus needs to show people why you are doing this and what’s in it for them, that they won’t get shot if they do it, and that it will work – thus, as well as A Plan and a reasonably agile execution approach, there needs to be a WIFM and a WYSIWYG:

WIFM – What’s In It for Me?

Any change programme must have these elements to persuade the “luke-warms”

  • Benefit management objectives (those that align to business realities, anyway)
  • Define measurable stakeholder aims
  • Create a business case for their achievement (which should be continuously updated), and monitor assumptions, risks, dependencies, costs, return on investment, dis-benefits and cultural issues affecting the progress of the associated work.  No can do, no will get resourced for anything more than pilots
  • Effective communication that informs various stakeholders of the reasons for the change (why is this necessary?), the benefits of successful implementation (what is in it for us, and you) as well as the details of the change (when? where? who is involved? how much will it cost? etc.)
  • Devise an effective education, training and/or skills upgrading scheme for the organization
  • Counter resistance from the employees of companies and align them to overall strategic direction of the organization
  • Provide personal counseling (if required) to alleviate any change-related fears
  • Monitoring of the implementation and fine-tuning as required

That’s not enough though – to really effect change, the luke-warms need to know they will be protected from their detractors, and the detractors/resistors/nay-sayers/profiters from the current situation also need to know that it is not a risk-free option to throw tomatoes.  This is important, most people know that many projects lure in the enthusiastic, they are backfilled in the line, and when the initiative is strangled by the Old Order, they have no job to return to or go to and a suspicion they are now tainted anyway.

The approach to this that seems to work best is for the business to put out, in game theory terms, Strong Tells – ie signals that This Is Important To Us – for example:

  • Top Management Support….  that is seen to be supportive
  • Real commitment to protect those involved from repercussions, in hard terms (aka career and/or financial protection)
  • Some form of “air cover” from the detractors

WYSIWYG – What you see is what you get

Piloting is critical as well – people need to see that this can work.  There has to be an early demo, pilot, lab, test, whatever – partly to show people it can work, partly to iron out bugs.  How to pilot is usually the thorny issue.  In general, the pilot needs to be:

  • Something that can be “cordoned off” so it doesn’t require root and branch replacement of all the main business systems to make it work
  • Important enough for a lesson, but not so important that failure cripples the whole enterprise

In addition to the above, to quote Steve Denning’s useful summary of the “Do’s and Dont’s” from past change management lessons, there are some “Anna Karenina” basics that one should do to avoid the most obvious types of failure:

  • Do come with a clear vision of where you want the organization to go – and promulgate that vision rapidly and forcefully with leadership storytelling.
  • Do identify the core stakeholders of the new vision and drive the organization to be continuously and systematically responsive to those stakeholders.
  • Do define the role of managers as enablers of self-organizing teams and draw on the full capabilities of the talented staff.
  • Do quickly develop and put in place new systems and processes that support and reinforce this vision of the future, drawing on the practices of dynamic linking.  (Dynamic Linking is Denning’s term for an essentially Agile style planning & execution approach)
  • Do introduce and consistently reinforce the values of radical transparency and continuous improvement. (Radical Transparency is the idea of making a lot of real time information available to all, essentially the white collar equivalent of Japanese, Just In Time style production approaches, without which Continuous Improvement can’t really happen)
  • Do communicate horizontally in conversations and stories, not through top-down commands.

And the critical Don’ts:

  • Don’t start by reorganizing.  First clarify the vision and put in place the management roles and systems that will reinforce the vision.
  • Don’t parachute in a new team of top managers.  Work with the existing managers and draw on people who share your vision. (Agile Elephant Caveat – the “soggy sponge” of resistant managers is a time honoured fact, some replacements probably will be necessary, but let that occur organically).

In large enterprises we have never really seen radical, innovatory change happen “in the line” – there usually has to be some form of “skunk works”, even a remote start up or spin out – the power of the “Big Barons” – those who profit from the Status Quo – should never be underestimated.

A Proposed Approach – the Agile Elephant “7E” Model

7E Model v1We have made an initial approach to combine Agile Management with these lessons, plus our experience into what we call the Agile Elephant 7E Model

It has 7 major components, and, as is the rule with all good consulting models, it is alliterative 🙂

The phases are shown in the cycle diagram above, and in summary are:

Envision – Understanding the factors driving the need for transformation, and describing the post transformation business and model.

Enable – Put into place the resources, processes, plans, ROI’s etc. that will make the transformation possible.  Also decide how/where it will be executed initially.

Engage – Get the people involved and onside, trained and ready to make the transformations happen.

Execute – Break the transformation into bite size pieces, and execute using an Agile methodology.  Pilot!

Evaluate – Continual examination of what works and what doesn’t, to drive dynamic change and improvement and optimise efforts.

Evolve – If things change, or don’t work, then plans need to change.

Educate – Educate, Educate – this is central to the whole process, from the envisioning process through training the teams, continuous learning, capturing information, evaluation and re-envisioning the transformation where necessary

It’s a cycle to demonstrate that continuous and cyclical iterative nature of the process, but also to note that the central hub is Education.

In more detail for each area considered:

Envision

The aim is to create a vision of the future that the project will aim at, as a guide to what is in the right direction and what is a diversion.  Part of this is the creative, no holds barred brainstorming/thinking out the box/lateral imagineering etc. visioning, but part is the testing of this against the pragmatic reality, i.e.:

  • Understand emergent market situation
  • Understand economic drivers of the industry & company
  • Understand impact of new tools & techniques – and their limitations
  • Define new business approach & model (we use the old McKinsey 7S model as it looks at both hard and soft issues)
  • High level economic analysis (Value analysis, set high level strategy to achieve this)

The endgame is a vision that is transformative, but bounded in the reality of the achievable, and ensuring each actor’s part in (and reason for the part) is readily understandable.

Enable

Before jumping into the Agile mode of actually executing, it is critical in any change management process to set up the support infrastructures, especially:

  • Map existing business processes in detail so everyone has a common view of what is actually going on
  • Create a more detailed exposition of the new business model, and how it impacts what exists
  • Define the who/what/when/where will carry out the transformation
  • Define ICT tools to be used, and how they will be implemented
  • Create programme and project plans, at least to an initial iteration.  Yes they will be wrong, but they need to be a “best guess”
  • Define where and how the Pilot will take place
  • Create business case & ROI – no serious business will commit serious resources without one.

As General Eisenhower noted in Word War 2, about the Allied landings on D-Day – Plans are worthless, but planning is everything.

Engage

Before taking any initial steps of actual implementation it is essential to start to bring people on board, to gain support, neutralise opposition, and create a climate for change.  Key steps are to:

  • Understand current skills mix and staffing profile…
  • ….and what changes are required to these.  You need to know what resources you can afford to lose, and what must be retained
  • What approaches will be used to engage staff, get buy in for change…and protect the involved
  • …and where/who the barriers to change are, and what can be done to mitigate these
  • Define new ways of working, new styles of behaviour required, Training / Education
  • Recruitment / retrenchment plans (if any) need to be carried out humanely – and quickly
  • Define the “Shared Vision” – what it is that will unify everyone’s efforts, what people need to do about it, and why it is essential.  As Denning notes above, it has to be a storyline, shared every which way and not a top down dissemination of vague nostrums.

In short unless a critical mass has bought into a “Whats in it for me” and believes they will be OK in the New World, and the major blockers are neutralised, the project will probably fail before its begun.

Execute

The “Go Do” phase – first for the Pilot, and then the Roll-Out:

  • Train & Educate for Agile approach – Agile approaches are probably the best when dealing with hard to quantify/not done before/high iteration work
  • Break project plans into appropriate size work packages as per the methodology
  • Execute Programme via Agile Sprints/other approaches (most Agile approaches use small incremental “sprints” of functionality development, in frequent drops, which – usually – are easy to absorb incrementally.  Usually. Sometimes there has to be a singular “get the system to this state before we cut over” and its important to identify those).

But there also needs to be an override to make sure the “sprints” are going in the correct direction rather than all over the field, key tasks will be to:

  • Define Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) that each work package is required to hit to be accepted
  • Conflict/Resource resolution
  • Priority setting when there are multiple operations and limited time/resource (the norm for all organisations in the real world)

Evaluate

Just as there is iteration in the Execution phase, there needs to be an iterative Evaluation phase, incorporating:

  • Progress reporting data generation
  • Impact assessment – actual v planned
  • Quality Assurance
  • Human factors impacts
  • Cost monitoring

At a minimum it measures actual vs predicted, and some form of examination into the “why” of any major discrepancies, to predict future problems so the surprises are seen as soon as possible.  Given a Transformation project will, by its nature, not go according to plan it is essential to accept this and have a strong acceptance of the need to adapt.

Evolve

This process looks at the tasks as they are executed and examines “what works, what doesn’t” and sets up the changes to define “whats next?”:

  • Review process – what works, what doesn’t & why
  • Are the tasks moving towards the strategic goals? Are those goals still realistic?
  • What still needs to work even though it doesn’t?
  • What has changed?
  • What is no longer important?
  • What is now important/urgent?
  • What’s next?

There is some criticality in the frequency of these reviews – Weekly/Monthly/Quarterly/ 6 monthly/ Annually – too frequently and the execution phase is overwhelmed by producing reports and interference, but too rare and major problems can sink a project before they are even surfaced.  There are quite a few useful lessons and approaches from Lean operations that can be used.

Educate (Educate, Educate)

Essential before the project, during the project, after the project. Some key requirements in each phase are:

  • Envision – Basic education of senior team, core project team; key organisational players
  • Enable – Educate wider group involved in process mapping and new process design
  • Engage – Education and communication throughout enterprise
  • Execute – Training
  • Evaluate – Understanding of data, what it means, how to analyse it
  • Evolve – Training in analysis and decision making e.g. Value Analysis, Continuous Improvement etc.

Continuous Learning is necessary in an environment where change is the constant.  What is learned throughout any cycle is re-diffused back into other areas – it is continuous.  Learning by doing becomes a continuous loop.

End Notes

And remember, to quote that great sage of complex project execution, Norman Augustine of NASA, that at all times the chances are that things will be worse than planned:

Ninety percent of the time things will turn out worse than you expect.  The other 10 percent of the time you had no right to expect so much.

…i.e. put in contingency.  Even Agile is not immune to this, to paraphrase Augustine again:

Rank does not intimidate systems.  Neither does the lack of rank.

So in summary, we see a lot of the discussion around Digital Transformation putting too much emphasis on technology, or on organisation change, or on an approach that adds digital as an ingredient, rather than recognising that change will be necessary across the whole of the business and the business processes.  We see an agile management approach as the only one that is viable, but it needs to be addressed holistically.  That’s why we are recommending the 7E methodology, and why education, at all levels, is the lynchpin to successful change.

Share this:

  • Tweet

Filed Under: agile business, change management, digital disruption, digital transformation strategy, social business Tagged With: Agile, agile business, change management, digital transformation, digital transformation office, digital transformation strategy

An integrated social workplace to connect at Vodafone

September 1, 2015 By David Terrar

An integrated social workplace to connect at Vodafone

Smart organisations want to make the most of their people.  Five year’s ago Vodafone’s leadership team recognised that their SharePoint based Intranet had too much one way communication, no real social element, was hard to use and things were difficult to find.  Their aim was to cut costs, share knowledge and help his people find experts to answer questions internally without having to go outside of the organisation.  Vodafone could see the social media sharing culture that was going on in the wider world and they wanted to bring that style of culture inside the company.  I sat down with Stanley Awuku, Vodafone’s Internal Digital Experience Manager, and one of the speakers at our upcoming Enterprise Digital Summit, to hear more about their story.

Stanley Awuku - VodafoneAlthough Stanley wasn’t around at the start of the project he has been heavily involved for the last 3 years and understands the journey that Vodafone have gone through.  They still have Hub, their official global Intranet for publishing corporate news, but they created an Enterprise Social Network they call Vodafone Circle.  This uses a software product called Beezy that sits on top of SharePoint but hides the complexity and gives a very easy user interface for people to find each other, connect with them, create public or private groups and workspaces so they can collaborate, manage projects, and interact.  Before Circle (and Beezy) this social element just didn’t exist, but now activity feeds from Circle are shown on the Hub home page and the social network has really expanded.  Vodafone have more than 90,000 employees spread across 22 countries.  Back in 2010 they started small with a proof of concept around what they call a “town hall meeting” for the senior managers to have a question and answer session with a group of employees online – similar to what IBM calls a Jam.  They’ve expanded from that simple use case, and encouraged more and more use over time.  They have heavy users of Circle in their legal department, the technology team, and in HR, but right across the organisation so that they now have over 80,000 registered users and regularly average 18-20,000 unique visitors per month.

Vodafone Circle _communityAs well as the workspaces and groups they’ve added a video portal called  Vodafone Tube, their own internal version of YouTube and mHub, a mobile application that gives employees access to Circle from their mobile devices.  Stanley speaks regularly at employee induction sessions and talks about Circle as if it’s a bank.  He tells new starters that, just like a bank, the more information you invest in the system, the more you get out in the long run.  Stanley will be telling more of the Vodafone story along with their best practice and key lessons learned on 22nd of October at the Enterprise Digital Summit in London. Go here to find out more or to book a ticket to hear this and our other great case study stories.

(Disclosure – Beezy are a main sponsor of Enterprise Digital Summit London)

Share this:

  • Tweet

Filed Under: #EntDigi conference, #EntDigi interview series, collaboration, knowledge management

« Previous Page
Next Page »

The Agile Elephant blog – thought leadership, ideas, news and discussion around digital transformation, business strategy, new business models, new management thinking, enterprise social networks, social media, social collaboration, knowledge management and the changing nature of the workplace.

Subscribe by email

Enter your email address to receive notifications of new posts by email.

My Tweets

Subscribe to our Blog by RSS

About Us

Agile Elephant is a new kind of consultancy designed to help companies embrace the new digital culture of social collaboration, sharing and openness that is changing business models and the world of work.

Contact us to find out more!

Our founder's blogs:

broadstuff

@DT on Medium

Technotropolis

Our blog:

The Agile Elephant Blog

Site Log In | Site Log Out

Subscribe to Site RSS

Subscribe to our Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe

Copyright © 2025 ·Streamline Pro Theme · Genesis Framework by StudioPress · WordPress · Log in