It's not just push, pull anymore. It's "I choose to subscribe."

Recently, a colleague asked me this question: do you need to collect and manage mobile numbers in order to tweet to your co-workers? Huh, I thought. Now, I've heard a lot of reasons why companies don't want to Tweet, but this was the first time I'd heard "user management" as a possible objection. Earlier this year, like millions of others, I started Tweeting. I simply find this mode of publishing fascinating. And as I talk to my peers, I think there is a lot of mis-understanding about Twitter, and how it works and its potential to revolutionize how we look at organizational communications. I told my colleague that we don't need to collect mobile numbers and we don't manage any user lists. Users decide if they want to follow or not. The meaning of this is significant. The old model of thinking of ourselves as senders who can control how users receive information is, well... outdated. With tools like Twitter, users are learning how to manage their own flow of information, choosing what to turn on and turn off. Recognizing this has caused a radical shift in my view of organizational communications. It's not just push, pull anymore. It's "I choose to subscribe." Is your leadership communications, HR info, or sales plan ready for that?

Company Culture Plays a Role in Internal Info

Writer Paul Chin has done some terrific writing on the more "human-side" of Intranet Management. I was honored when we connected on the Internet and he asked me to contribute to a story he was working on. Read his full story here http://bit.ly/yMJUK Working with Paul allowed me to reflect on my personal, very strong view about the role of culture within Corporate Information. This impacts many areas, but especially with the management of the Intranet. The cultural challenges that we faced as we evolved our Intranet were connected to the very things that make it a great company. Where we’ve had success in evolving is when we’ve leveraged our own organization’s strength and worked with the culture. What do you think? When have you acted within your company's culture? and when have you acted against it? What happened?

I’m not a Benefit Communicator... but there's too much opportunity for me to resist

Recently, Workforce Management online interviewed me & several other experts about using social media for benefit communications. Take a look at the article for yourself here at http://bit.ly/BRgOz Tweeting Health Benefits ... in 140 Characters or Fewer (Sorry that publisher requires a username to access.) Now, I’m not an HR Benefit Communicator. I know many other very talented people who this much better than I ever could (like Jen Benz who was mentioned in the article and Fran Melmed who wasn't mentioned helped me significantly).

HR Communications have a strange and strong alure for me. Why? Well... 1) There is SO MUCH OPPORTUNITY to apply more modern communication practices and make an impact. 2) PRACTICALLY EVERY EMPLOYEE is touched by benefit communications & so are their families 3) Businesses are DRIVEN BETTER when employees have their needs met 4) Benefits are often one of the TOP EXPENSES for a company These are good reasons for me to get myself involved.

Where a company is (and should be) on the centralized or decentralized spectrum

In my work, I am part of a decentralized organization. This is based in our culture which is driven by our business philosophy. Impacts can be felt every area of our business from leadership, to compensation, to sustainability, to communication to our customers-- and communication to our co-workers. Everything. I've done a lot of reflecting on how working in a decentralized organization like ours has impacted our choices for internal information. One of the most vibrant examples I can think of is how information gets reflected in an organization's Intranet, it's such a mirror. For example, is the organization's Intranet gatekeeped by a certain group and updates outsourced or it is facilitated by a group but updates happen within the organization through a content management tool? What do those processes look like? Of course the Intranet is just one channel. In retail (and in communications), we often say that our most important channel is face-to-face, so we have training for communication basics and also update sheets to let managers have the facts, so they feel confident about speaking on topics. We're also really big in getting co-workers to have "Self-Service access" to information. This means we work on having a work environment that sets up co-workers to have easy to access information themselves. For instance have a resource room in every store with computer kiosks. We print little booklets often that let people "grab and go". I think an organization's CULTURE AND COST-CONTROL NEEDS seem to be two of the keys in determining where a company is (and should be) on a "centralized - decentralized" spectrum. For IKEA, being decentralized is just who we are. After all, we are the company that asks customers to get involved by putting their furniture together so that, by working together, we save costs. One of our company mantras is: "I do a little, you do a little, together we can do a lot." But for a highly regulated organization, a pharma company for example, culture and business thinking are very different. I don't think it's about centralized or decentralized being better-- but instead recognizing what the right spot on the spectrum should be, and them building pliable processes and support structure to optimize this.

Do Intranets help to facilitate good communications practices, or frustrate them...?

It's true. I often refer to myself as a "passionate fanatic" when it comes to Intranet issues. It’s no secret that I have a personal philosophy that Intranets are inherently good. So when I was recently asked this question, before I allowed myself to yell out "Of course Intranets facilitate good communications!" I felt the need to step back and first recognize what I know to be true:Intranets DO aggravate an organization's frustration with its OWN information and relationship practices. But, I see this as good. As an opportunity. For me, this aggravation signals an opportunity for the Communication Pros to get in there and help an organization face some big "working together" issues. Such as:- Not enough interpreted meaning or clear direction coming with content- Bad/outdated work processes - Too much content being made up by too many people/(zapping productivity)- Silos and poor relationships across people/functions - Lack of simple coordination in communication within workflow of projects and everyday work (There is so much work to be done out there on this!) What do you think?