Found via Mario Vellandi, Erin Malone’s presentation (and affiliated blog post) on experience design, social design and service design:

And there’s a lot of connections indeed, just think about this line: “Create the space for people to make things happen.” Sharing knowledge in corporate creation spaces. Liberating office humans. Social business design.

… doesn’t work when dealing with creative, hard to pre-plan types of work. Knowledge work, yes. Much better to equip people with autonomy, mastery and a sense of purpose.

And that’s putting up some interesting questions with regard to leadership styles (command and control is doomed …), the organization and improving of collaborative work (facilitating connections and conversations through social software in the enterprise comes to mind … well, yes this needs some serious multi-pillar implementation efforts to succeed) and overall how a (shared) sense of purpose can be entertained be agreed upon be managed for? And is it a deformation professionelle that I am seeing an important place for social software and sustainable Enterprise 2.0 endeavours in this sense-making space too?

Gerade erst das Teaser-Bild zum Zeit-Blog Kulturkampf gesehen – das ist doch eine Anspielung die ich nicht verstehen kann und will:

kulturkampf-blog-368x110

Wer sagt denn dass man Kröten schlucken muss um ein Silver Surfer zu werden?

Thank you IBM – for the cute visual messaging of the links between here (BMID) and there (Enterprise Collaboration @ frogpond):

Yes, together, we work smarter. Smarter being all things agile, flexible, you know, see here and there …

via Stefan

Today I’m at the OSMB conference and posting and twittering notes, most of those notes will be posted over at my frogpond Enterprise Collaboration blog (see e.g. Open Source Meets Business (OSMB) – Tag 1 and Trendstudie Open Source im Unternehmen, german language alas). Something with a more BMID-twist is the session “Collaboration Contagion – How Collaboration is Changing the Economics of Software Development” by Stuart Cohen from the Collaborative Software Initiative on the changes collaboration brings to the economics of software.

Some of my notes:
- subject matter experts for business applications are not developers
- opportunities for collaboration: building communities (where none exist)
- the job of the Collaborative Software Initiative is to assess and build core teams, balancing requirements and benefits – i.e. they act as a network facilitator providing training and coaching
- main job is acting as central node and connector, i.e. supporting inter-company collaboration for open source (and soon commodity software)
- collaboration in this space makes a lot of sense from a strategy perspective, Stuart talked about reasons in three arenas – technology, social networking and “organizational dynamics”

There was a lot of content in Stuarts talk, and very dense charts, will link to them as soon as they get published.

Have another sunday treat? Try this one, video with Dr. David Vaine who in his video address to the actKM Conference adresses all participants and especially “my good friend Dennis (sic!) Snowden” (and David Greenteen too, sic!) – found via Mary Abraham and Green Chameleon:

[...] minimal impact KM touts the benefits of doing a great deal without in any way affecting the work lives of your colleagues or the results of your enterprise [...]

Dr. Vaine identifies several proven methods of achieving minimal impact KM:

- depreciative inquiry
- social network paralysis
- corporate flogging
- six stigma

Great stuff, but if you’re really interested in catching up on KM World 2008 better check out Michael Sampsons conference notes. Interesting in many regards, especially for an (enterprise) social software consultant who sees Knowledge Management as one of the most interesting usage arenas.

Via Paul Williams I learned that CNBC is doing another series on innovation, it’s aimed at C-level and I welcome this quite a lot as it stresses the importance (yet, Paul has some criticisms too). But these episodes are worthwhile anyway, and I appreciate the effort (btw, back then I wrote some posts about their initial series). Some interesting parts are:

The Human Element:

Innovation begins and ends with people, individuals who have the courage to push the boundaries. It also requires a corporate culture that nurtures and rewards creative thinking, where people feel comfortable enough to voice new ideas, no matter how small. That is where successful leadership comes in. A skilled and innovative leader must be a fearless visionary committed to backing bold ideas.

Innovate or Die:

Mel Kamarzin, CEO of Sirius Radio believes “there is no punishment that goes for taking a chance, making a decision”. Yet too often firms don’t take the steps really required to innovate because they want to protect their existing offerings. They seal their fate by doing just enough to get by. Fear of changing the status quo can be paralysing but if you are not moving forward and innovating in today’s challenging economic environment, it’s worse than standing still. You’re effectively moving backwards.

And the third installment – Redefining Innovation:

Innovation can be a hard concept to pin down. That’s why defining what it means to an organisation is the first step towards truly engaging customers. Radical thinking needs to be employed to come up with the blue-sky ideas. To turn those ideas into revenue generators means making a creative leap beyond the nuts and bolts of a product and really connecting with consumers. Ursula Burns, Chief Executive of Xerox says, “Customers can’t really articulate always what they want. They give you a rough outline”.

Yet indifference, hostility, and isolation are common obstacles in organizations that are inhibiting the growth in innovation (by Irving Wladawsky-Berger) – especially collaborative innovation. Yes, orchestrating groups of heterogenous knowledge workers is hard, that’s why there are Enterprise Collaboration Consultants with an innovation management background (hint …).