Researching Enterprise 2.0 consulting

Several things come up when one discusses 'Enterprise 2.0' consulting. While it seems to be the phrase of the day, any good management consultant will tell you that this is what we have been doing all along. Helping organizations to build internal / external communities of practice, driving at solutions, and of course empowering employees and customers to help move the organization forward is nothing new. However, with the preponderance of inexpensive and easily implemented collaborative and 'hive-think' Web 2.0 tools, there has been a shift in how this type of consulting can be delivered and a lower barrier to entry for many organizations who haven't been able to afford the luxury of out-side consultants / change-agents and the higher end tools that come with them. There is no shortage of creativity within organizations and the communities they interact with, and the ‘Enterprise 2.0’ tools will help to expose that, however, there is a shortage of people who can take those ideas and convert them into an operating reality. This is where the management consultants earn their fees – putting into place the structure to execute on the creative solutions, and then shepherding the process from conception to implementation to monetization to sustainability [rinse and repeat].

Any organization planning on undertaking any ‘Enterprise 2.0’ effort must be wary that they avoid many of the issues we saw in the mid-to-late 90's where companies thought that just by purchasing and implementing a particular software tool, it would solve whatever issue they were trying to overcome [e.g. CRM software on its own didn't increase customer satisfaction]. As the whole 'Enterprise 2.0' phase evolves in the next few years, it is my hope that we will see a shift -- from just hoping that a tool will create transparency, break down silos, cause conversations to spontaneously happen -- back to a more practical approach that leverages the new tools to implement solutions that are measurable and follow the best practices that have been around before there was such a thing as 'Enterprise 2.0'.

With that being said, we are seeing successful innovations around 'Enterprise 2.0' that borrow from AGILE / SCRUM software development practices. “The AGILE Enterprise” - It is not a software development approach, but it is the way organizations interact internally and externally, emphasizing the core tenets of AGILE Software Development:
- Individuals and interactions over processes and tools
- Working solutions over comprehensive documentations and processes
- Customer collaboration over contract negotiation
- Responding to change over following a plan

For a good case study to see the ‘Agile Enterprise’ in action, take a look at what we did with BusinessWeek’s very own BusinessExchange. We created an new delivery organization, utilizing ‘Enterprise 2.0’ tools to collaborate, employed Agile in software development practices, and extended Agile to the way all parts of the BX delivery and management organization operated. It created a noticeable shift in the way business as usual was practiced and was recognized as a model for successful projects within the larger organization going forward. And yes, complete with metrics and best practices.

By the practical use of ‘Enterprise 2.0’ tools, taking a more Agile approach within the organization [includes shifts in delivery of services / projects and corporate mentality], and sticking to the fundamentals of good management consulting, ‘Enterprise 2.0’ can avoid the “software is the solution”, and become a successful change agent for organizations willing to embrace a new, transformative, way of doing business.

-Rob Stoltz / www.twitter.com/robstoltz / www.linkedin.com/in/robstoltz

The Ad Contrarian has some nice views on social media gurus. You might get som good comments or point of views from him.

Here's hos blog: http://adcontrarian.blogspot.com/

- Rolf

This sounds like fantastic research about a very important area. I am one of those folks who now provide consulting to companies on Enterprise 2.0 and people ask me these very same questions that your research is raising. How do I add value? How do they know if I'm the right consultant for them? etc. So I suggest they use the following criteria. Four questions that help them determine: Presence, Contribution, Reputation, and Personality. As a result, they may or may not choose me -- but I think their decision will be informed by important factors:

1. Where are s/he found? Drop their name in a search engine and see where the consultant is located online. Do they have a blog? what do they say on it? Do they have slides on Slideshare? a LinkedIn profile? etc. Do they get invited to speak at conferences? Are they quoted in trade publications? Consultants that are easily found in the places that are relevant to their clients make it easier for clients to learn about them and determine if they are the right fit.

2. What have they shared? In the socially mediated world we are measured by what we give away for free. If the consultant gives freely, then the client can assess what is given -- before signing any contracts. Moreover, most good consultants give a lot for free, but also save the most valuable insights for their paying clients.

3. What do others say about them? Reputation is an excellent measure of a consultant. Does s/he have the respect of her/his peers? Do former clients share the praises? You can tell by looking at Twitter (see who asks, retweets, responds to her etc.), reading blog comments, seeing if other people talk about her/him, and checking out things like LinkedIn recommendations (note: read the text and see who wrote the comment, and when). There are some rating web sites out there, but I have not found one with enough info to be useful, yet. Perhaps soon we'll have a community-ranking system. You can always go old-school and call past clients on the phone and ask.

4. How does the consultant respond to what others say? If you find that people talk about your prospective consultant online, then you should pay attention to how the consultant reacts online. This is a measure of personality. Is she gracious when complemented? Does he get defensive if accused? Does she ignore comments on her blog? etc.

Of course, clients should avoid consultants that apply pressure, use fear, or arrogance in their pitch. Consulting relationships are founded on trust -- and those behaviors erode trust. The good news is that there are many excellent Enterprise 2.0 consultants who are truly valuable and legit. They are the ones who easily pass the tests above.

These, along with the more standard measures (e.g. qualifications, cost, your gut feeling about the person, etc.) should help clients filter out the really valuable and reputable consultants from those who are just hopping on the latest bandwagon.

I hope this tip helps your readers and you as you put together this series of articles.

Gil Yehuda (GilYehuda.com, @gyehuda, www.linkedin.com/in/GilYehuda)

We define collaboration as "both a process and an outcome about people, for people, and by people who work together to achieve solutions they cannot achieve individually." Notice the three types of stakeholders and the element of the inability to achieve a goal individually. They are needed and needed to be understood in any execution of collaboration in enterprises before technology is even considered.

A successful collaboration that is “imposed” versus one that is organically grown is one of the tricky aspects of E 2.0. Trying to put business structure, which demands financial outcome, to technologies that have proven great value for grass-roots and unstructured collaboration (Here Comes Everybody continues being my favorite book on this subject) hasn’t yet been completely flushed-out. In organically grown collaborations, people are usually left alone to play with the technology and overtime they chose/identify the ones that solve their problems. The hierarchical nature of businesses presents challenges to adopt 2.0 the way it has been successfully organically. Not that it cannot be achieved. There are many examples of success already, based on what success is defined.

Only a handful of books (i.e. The Maverick by Ricardo Semler) give samples of enterprises where the top executives truly allowed their employees to choose how to build the company and experiment all across the board. In fact, in Semler’s companies they simply got rid of the structure all together. Since those scenarios are very rare, 2.0 providers have to figure out how deliver value under structured environment. And for what I am seeing, many will.

Your point on best practices and metrics are the same issues with any new technology. HOWEVER, collaboration itself, as part of human life, isn't new, nor quick, easy, or cheap. And it seems that we are deemphasizing that reality by insinuating that technology can be the solution to it all, at times quickly, easily and cheaply.

And then, there is email…There is a reason why we are still relying so heavily on email (have yet to find a 2.0 provider that doesn't rely on it for its notifications. Twitter, of course, providing alternatives). It seems that for 2.0 to move into the business world (in addition to the people issues) it must deal with email’s pervasiveness as the business communication tool.

But 2.0 technology is here to stay and soon we will no longer be given it a label that separates it from the web. Those activities will become part of the way the web works and the ways we use the Internet. In the IT world we have been here. As with all other technologies we have adopted, the great value and benefits 2.0 technologies do offer and deliver will survive and be enhanced as we master them.

And all these consultants? They are part of the “by the people” section of our collaboration definition. They are part of the contributors who in one way or another will help us all identify the real values.

Every consultant on the planet is claiming Enterprise 2.0 expertise. It is and will continue to be a highly lucrative field and because of this, shingles are being virtually posted everyday. Gil Yehuda's advice is spot on.

But as with any other type of consulting, I would ask for demonstrable results. Where has the consultant implemented a social media strategy for the enterprise and to what result?
And the key here is a total strategy, not a cherry picked set of solutions. If the consultant cannot create a strategy that is interwoven throughout the enterprise, walk away.
Loraine Antrim www. coreideas.com

An interesting set of questions and very relevant.

I am an IT director tasked with deploying social computing solutions across our group, so interpret my responses in that light.

You're right that the role of expensive consultants is questionable in the rollout of Web 2.0 in the enterprise.

On the technology side, I am still looking for consultants who can help me quickly get to the right technology solution (which wiki is right for us) and then design the supporting tecnical architecture (one global site, multi geographically dispersed sites). But these are short projects requiring real expertise. I won't pay to teach someone else.

But after the technology stuff is done, the REAL challenge is change management : getting people and businesses to adopt it and really complete the transition to the new tools. Here there is a role for change management consultants, but in the current economic crisis, companies are resistant to these costs. They think they can do it themselves. And as you say, how to you tell a legit one from a bogus one?

The experts keep saying to start with the business first, experiment etc. before you chose a technology. At my 200 000 person company that is not possible. Our goal with social computing is to breakp-down the barriers not use new technology to reinforce existing barriers. that means that I have to pick a technology platform upfront that will hopefully meet a majority of our needs (I think this is doable, but hard) before our besinesses start their experiments. When I ask the quesiton of experts they generally agree with me, but all of the advice you see on the web says the contrary. Interesting dichotomy.

One solution to the dilemma is simply to hire Gil Yehuda, who really knows his stuff.

But let's say Gil isn't available...what then?

The bottom line is that Enterprise 2.0, like everything else in this world, is not exempt from common sense.

Whenever someone says, "The rules have changed," my advice is to reach for your wallet...to keep it out of reach.

(Aside: How much money would you have saved back in 1999-2000 if you heeded this advice?)

Demand concrete deliverables that tie to measurable business results. Solve real business problems, rather than just feeding senior management's love of buzzwords.

One thing about our approach at PBworks is that most of our big customers start off with small pilot projects. And with a hosted solution, this is very easy to do.

After the pilot is successful, expansion usually follows.

Each company's needs are different enough that general-purpose expert advice is of limited value. Your consultant shouldn't be giving you the answers, he/she should be helping you ask the right questions and conduct the right experiments.

Indeed, Chris Yeh's advice is the best of the bunch. His first sentence and his last especially (thanks, man.) :-)

The issue is real. Many companies need help understanding what to do, when, and how. There is a lot of confusion in the whole E2.0 marketplace, and they need to sort it through. They need help asking the right questions, and applying what they hear to their existing situations. A good consultant can help. A bad one just ruins the marketplace for everyone else.

Bravo to Steve for shining a light on this issue.

[Steve, forgive this ad, I mean to address Bart's question above] Bart - I'm publishing a report in a week or two that should help your question. It's the result of my interview with practitioners such as yourself. They shared with me what they did in their companies (large ones, like yours) that worked. In addition, I may be able to help you with some of your other challenges. First check out where I'm found, what I share, what other people say about me, and how I respond. If you like what you see, then contact me at gil-[at]-gilyehuda.com and we'll talk.

How to separate the wheat from the chaff in Enterprise 2.0 consulting? Easy-peasy, IMHO (In My Humble Opinion):

1. Who is practicing what they preach? Any new media consultant worth her salt should be active and should be able to be found in the core social platforms applicable to her business and/or the businesses of her client base. You have to use it to understand it. There are no shortcuts. Everyone wants a piece of the Web 2.0 emerging economy, yet so many don't understand how and why it is different from advertising or Web design or PR or journalism. It's a new media that requires new communication skills, especially the ability to listen and respond in real time and in the language of the community.

2. What results have they achieved and for whom? Case studies are a dime a dozen, but their work and their successes should be readily accessible in the public domain of social platforms. The successful brands and companies in social media are not overnight successes; they have built their communities through value and loyalty over time and are consistent in their efforts over the long haul. Remember that the timeline of existence and popularity for many of the available platforms is measured in weeks and months, not years.

3. Does your consultant claim to be and expert? Often it is those who claim to be experts who are precisely not. Those of us who are true students/business users of the social Web acknowledge that it is changing too quickly for anyone to know everything there is to know. It is, however, our job to stay on top of things as they emerge and to anticipate what is coming next. That's what consultants should be bringing to the table. Playing catch up only goes so far. Your consultant should be able to help you get ahead of the curve, before your competition.

4. If the responses to your inquiries are focused on offering tactics- rather than seeking further strategic reasoning for your inquiry- run in the other direction. Do not pass go. Do not collect $200. A monkey can set up a Twitter account for you. And you can set up a YouTube Channel for yourself. Your consultant should be asking you why you want a Twitter account and identifying how your business goals can be achieved and supported through strategic use of the right social platforms. Managing an integrated social media strategy well takes a lot more time than most people imagine. Even free platforms require many hours of listening, responding, engagement initiatives and content creation for any of it to add value to your business or your community.
5. The true value in social media consulting is not in the set-up and administration of accounts (while sometimes it can be a time-saver for a client in the short-term). It is in the ability to work with you to build a community that is seeking what you have to offer, whether it is related to your product/service or not. Add value to the community and the community will pay it forward. Just like your real life friends do.

If you keep these five things in mind when choosing a consultant, you should be LOL in no time.

Enterprise 2.0 really became relevant to businesses after Don Tapscott released his Wikinomics book. This gave a vision to business leaders to think outside the box of hierarchical organizations and think about the potential of the collaborative enterprise. An enterprise where rank in the organization didn't prevent good ideas and passion to rise to the surface. Enterprise 2.0 isn't just about the Social Network Tools out there. These are just enablers. It's about flattening the enterprise and making information and ideas available at all levels of the organization.

Just my two cents....I'm going to miss meeting up with you in the elevator Stephen...

I too work in Social Media and Enterprise 2.0. BRANDfog is a Social Media Branding Practice for CEOs. Most CEO customers experience analysis paralysis, afraid to engage with social media and afraid not to. Once we establish the strategy and discuss the benefits, enthusiastic adoption ensues.

A fringe benefit is that we focus on CEOs giving back via social philanthropy. What we teach these accomplished executives is this “It's good for the brand, and good for the soul.”

Hi Steve,

Our announcement this morning should be of interest. http://www.socialtext.com/blog/2009/11/socialtext-announces-partner-p.html

Ross

you should talk to tony byrne from cmswatch...

Think of Enterprise 2.0 as a Wikipedia for business. The information is out there, but only those who are knowledgeable care to communicate it, and only those who do so effectively will succeed.

You pose an interesting question when speaking about the price of consulting for this new era of business. The effective communication is more valuable than the information itself. If a consultant can teach a professional how to apply today's resources to his or her business in order to make the business more successful, that consultant should profit as well.

The latest blog post on www.stay-comm.com presents a high-level overview of some "Enterprise 2.0" tools.

http://www.stay-comm.com/blog/2009/11/9/cost-effective-technologies-for-the-new-entrepreneur.html