Most of us go through life knowing that we’re expected to learn from our mistakes and improve. Those who are more conscientious about learning and personal improvement usually reap greater rewards.
It might seem logical that companies behave in the same way. Think again. Most corporations have poor records for learning and improvement. It’s astonishing, when you think about it, because companies are rewarded on the basis of their performance.
The uncomfortable truth is that many companies learn only after a severe setback. But even a catastrophe sometimes isn’t enough. Frequently, the powerful instinct to deny mistakes, or swing into “damage control” mode, overwhelms any willingness to admit error and learn. Even when there is learning, it tends to be ad hoc. Once fires have been put out, learning is rarely carried forward -- and almost never assimilated into the knowledge cortex of the company as a whole.
There are exceptions, of course. It was encouraging to read in The Wall Street Journal that General Electric recently initiated a corporate learning exercise to encourage executives to grasp the lessons of the recession and promote “more flexible ways to manage.”
The WSJ described the GE learning exercise this way: “Executives discuss their business units in small groups, looking at how to prepare for crises, and do exercises to bolster listening skills and humility.”
That’s a start. But corporate learning entails much more than crisis management and classroom exercises. As with individuals, corporate learning should be a continuous process inscribed into a company’s operational DNA.
Web 2.0 tools have given companies techniques to integrate learning. In my research, I’ve found that Web 2.0 tools can facilitate learning, both internally and externally, in three primary ways.
First, Web 2.0 collaborative tools like wikis decentralize information-sharing and assign status on the basis of genuine expertise and knowledge. In most corporations, employees are invited to meetings thanks to their title or position within a vertical hierarchy -- not necessarily because they possess genuine knowledge or expertise. Not only does this undermine optimal decision-making, it also frustrates organizational learning by excluding valuable inputs. Web 2.0 collaborative tools resolve this by encouraging open and inclusive participation that seeks, and finds, expertise and knowledge wherever it is located.
Second, Web 2.0 tools promote open and transparent collaboration that can be archived and made accessible. This is markedly different from traditional methods of information-sharing -- meetings, files, and phone calls -- which are closed, opaque, and difficult to render accessible over time. The virtue of wiki-based collaboration is that, because information is transparent and accessible over time, institutional knowledge can be transferred from one generation to the next. Web 2.0 collaboration thus transforms information into institutional learning. Knowledge doesn’t evaporate when key executives leave the building.
Third, Web 2.0 tools not only make learning collective, but also continuous through constant engagement. Most companies spend large sums of money on surveys and market data to learn what consumers think about them. But this knowledge is usually an ad hoc snapshot. Continuous learning allows companies to respond quickly -- for example, in product development or recruitment -- to new information inputs. A good example of this is the increasing use of Twitter for customer relations management and social sentiment mining. The implications for Business Intelligence and Human Resources, needless to say, are powerful.
In sum, Web 2.0 tools decentralize information-sharing to optimize expertise inputs; make information transparent and accessible to facilitate institutional learning over time; and allow companies to make learning continuous through constant engagement with their employees, partners, and customers.
True, learning doesn’t produce fast results that can be measured in the short-term. But companies must understand that learning -- even from failure -- makes an organization more open to change and improvement.
— Matthew Fraser is a Web 2.0 strategist, an adjunct professor at the American University of Paris, and senior fellow at INSEAD.
i think these tools are great and will help the managers that are willign to use the tools....the problem is that corporate culture drives the mistakes to happen again and again. Corporate culture is one of the hardest things to change within a company....corporation that are flexible and allow change to take place using the tools will succeed and hopefully reduce the times mistakes are repeated.
Good points, Kurtkeys. I fully agree. The tools are only as good as the quality of management.
The technical capability, in actuality, brings on greater accountability and begs for transparency.
Effective leaders will use these tools and the corporate learning to empower the individuals and "critically" challenge how the company operates. The leaders that want to continue to use it to "control" and "manipulate" the results to keep things status quo and make it look good, will misuse the tools.
I think the current economic times, and the demand for greater accountability, may tip the scales in favor of effective leaders. There's too much at stake anymore.
An interesting and thought provoking message. However, one word stuck out in my mind. Humility. That word is so out of place in a discussion of Corporate Management and Executive Decision makers, that it floored me. I have never read it in a job description, Help wanted post or resume for any position. Especially a CEO, COO, CFO or any other decision maker position.
Most fact finding meetings I have had the displeasure of attending were more like blame finding than fact finding. Thje only lessons learned were how to wiggle out of the spot light and blame an underling.
As long as corporations live in the cut-throat world of CYA, it won't matter what tools they have for learning. The only lesson they are motivated to learn is how avoid being held accountable.
Along with humility, they must add ethics. Neither of which can be taught. Or bought. But without them no usable lessons are achieveable.
I think Web 2.0 can certainly help in the struggle for continuous improvement, but for some reason, it never ceases to amaze me how much people (employees) actually care about a topic like Corporate Learning and Improvement, but then they go and turn it bassackwards around or drop the ball and run back to embrace the tired, beaten, worn down status quo. It’s very frustrating how organizations (and PEOPLE) cannot or will not learn from mistakes and how pathetically run many (most?) companies are. Along the lines of Paul J’s thinking - a lot falls into the discussion however: the corporate missions and quality of the people at the VERY top, the corporate culture that flows from that; the quality of employees brought onboard (ahem, to their Titanics); and most importantly to me - the quality of management at all levels!
Companies are like sports teams - managers are like coaches. You can have the best, most talented employees in the world – but if you have lousy coaches, the team won’t win.
Corporate culture. Specifically, a culture that allows or punishes mistakes, and a culture where senior management acts with accountability. After all, people create environments and cultures, and senior managers are most accountable for it.
I've been in organizations with wikis, IM, Share Point sites, and town hall meetings - all to foster greater collaborative and enterprise-level learning. I've seen, first hand, in-situ and post-mortem lessons learned analysis and presentations. But none of it will be useful without senior management acting with accountability (and culpability) and creating an environment where people at all levels of the organization are allowed to fail and learn.
Tools can help a good organization, but the same will not help a bad one. New deck chairs on the Titanic.
Matthew - There is so much to comment on here in the positive sense. In short, thank you for saying what may, to some, seem/be obvious. There are (sadly) some companies and individuals who just "don't get it" and refuse to accept the reality that is present.
Seeing only the negative of it, they fail to optimize the resource and reserve insisting to move at the pace the previously set for themselves. Others of us - - well, quite frankly cruising through this space with the beeze through our hair, sometimes breaking the speedlimit, but generally mindful of the newness of the pavement beneath us.
Thanks again Matthew - I will be directing others to this post!
The ThinkerNet does not reflect the views of TechWeb. The ThinkerNet is an informal means of communication to members and visitors of the Internet Evolution site. Individual authors are chosen by Internet Evolution to blog. Neither Internet Evolution nor TechWeb assume responsibility for comments, claims, or opinions made by authors and ThinkerNet bloggers. They are no substitute for your own research and should not be relied upon for trading or any other purpose.
One of the most persistent criticisms of Enterprise 2.0 is that collaborative tools like wikis and social networks are needless distractions that undermine productivity. Or put simply, they're a time sink.
Call it MySpace versus the WorkPlace: Complain about your boss on MySpace -- you’re fired. Post a questionable photo of yourself on Facebook -- you don’t get hired.
As social media tools are increasingly embraced inside corporations, the vaunted Enterprise 2.0 model is gaining momentum. Yet, if senior executives remain nervous about the downside risk of Web 2.0, their fears are frequently stoked by valid arguments: security breaches, confidentiality issues, legal liabilities, even simple “time wasting” on social networks like Facebook. These concerns, even if alarmist (and sometimes motivated by the prospect of security software sales), cannot be casually dismissed.
The US boasts a commitment to "Internet freedom," but in practice that commitment falls short. What Internet freedom really means is freedom of the mind.
Does your organization use cloud computing? Even if you aren’t aware of it your employees might be... right behind your back. But don't fret. Use this as a learning opportunity.
Cincinnati Children's Hospital CIO Marianne James explains some of her organization's innovations, including its fetal care portal, its expansion beyond just being a community hospital, and its collaborative efforts among all of its constituents.
Facebook's Graph Search may face some profound challenges and risks, first, because Facebook users haven't been thinking of their posts as product reviews; and second, because Facebook will now have to contend with the social-network equivalent of SEO "gaming" of results.
A recent release of the popular TweetDeck app for Twitter power-users gives new life to software that had previously taken a wrong turn. Here's a quick walk-through of the new TweetDeck, to show you why it should be at the top of your Twitter toolkit.
A growing number of HR managers are suspicious of individuals who do not take part in social media and view them as anti-social in real life as well as online.
New York's Metropolitan Transit Authority is conducting a pilot test of digital kiosks to guide subway users to where they want to go more efficiently and at lower cost.
The whole Amazon.reader debate is a double-stupid. It's stupid to think that there's any e-book buyer who doesn't know Amazon's URL, and it was stupider to let ICANN launch the whole free-form TLD initiative to start with.
While NFC's original goal was to enhance mobile commerce applications, it is finding its way into a number of other uses, which is creating both opportunity as well as challenges for IT departments.
Enterprises would like to move to cloud computing but are hesitant because they are concerned about providers’ ability to secure company data. Here are some tips that help to ensure that if breaches occur, the business is not left holding the bag.
Edmunds separates customers into segments based on the info it collects on its site and from partners, and uses that to push out custom content, said Brian Baron, director of business analytics for Edmunds.com, at Predictive Analytics Innovation Summit.
The automotive website uses propensity modeling to target ads and customer registration forms, said Brian Baron, director of business analytics for Edmunds.com, at Predictive Analytics Innovation Summit.
Expert Integrated Systems: Changing the Experience & Economics of IT In this e-book, we take an in-depth look at these expert integrated systems -- what they are, how they work, and how they have the potential to help CIOs achieve dramatic savings while restoring IT's role as business innovator. READ THIS eBOOK
your weekly update of news, analysis, and
opinion from Internet Evolution - FREE! REGISTER HERE
Wanted! Site Moderators Internet Evolution is looking for a handful of readers to help moderate the message boards on our site – as well as engaging in high-IQ conversation with the industry mavens on our thinkerNet blogosphere. The job comes with various perks, bags of kudos, and GIANT bragging rights. Interested?
To save this item to your list of favorite Internet Evolution content so you can find it later in your Profile page, click the "Save It" button next to the item.
M2M: Rise of the Machines? Not Yet David Weldon In the 1970 science fiction thriller Colossus: The Forbin Project, two giant supercomputers from the United States and Soviet Union secretly join forces to take control of the collective nuclear might of the two countries. In the film, the two machines discover each other's existence, communicate back-and-forth, share their collective data, and cut their human creators out of the process. It is the ultimate example of machine-to-machine communications, or M2M. CLICK FOR MORE
M2M: Rise of the Machines? Not Yet David Weldon In the 1970 science fiction thriller Colossus: The Forbin Project, two giant supercomputers from the United States and Soviet Union secretly join forces to take control of the collective nuclear might of the two countries. In the film, the two machines discover each other's existence, communicate back-and-forth, share their collective data, and cut their human creators out of the process. It is the ultimate example of machine-to-machine communications, or M2M. CLICK FOR MORE
Email This
