Category: Leadership, Technology, and Social Media

Words matter: Customize to configure

Let’s look at some definitions when it comes to software development and the nuances each one plays:

Customize: to modify or supplement with code development internally to match end-user requests, it may not be preserved during an upgrade. This could be analogous to hacking into a game like Pokemon Go and enabling end-users the ability to spoof their locations, to obtain regional exclusive pocket monsters.

Tailoring: modifying or supplementing without code to enable a system into an environment.  Analogous to downloading Pokemon Go a Google play store or Apple app store, where the right version of the app is downloaded into the right environment.

Personalization: meeting the customers’ needs effectively and efficiently.  This is achieved by analyzing customer data and using predictive analytics.  A great way is using the Active Sync tool to encourage players of Pokemon Go to be more active, but realizing there are three tiers to active players and personalizing the rewards based on those levels that are achieved.  Personalization can also be seen with character customizations, clothing, poses, and buddy pokemon.

Configure: it is the process of setting up options and features tailored to meet implementation of business requirements.  In pokemon go, some people want to achieve a full pokedex, some like the gym system, some like the 1:1 battles, 1:1 trades, side quests, beating the villains, etc. You can configure your goals in the game by doing one or all, and you can do it to the amount that you want, meeting your requirements for satisfaction in playing the game.

Now if we want to think of these concepts on a continuum:

Customize <——- Tailoring ——- Personalization ——-> Configuring

where the cost of complexity decreases from right to left, constriction in growth decreases from right to left, and a decrease in profit margin occurs from right to left.

The question now becomes, its the additional complexity on this spectrum worth the extra cost incurred?

That is for you to decide.

 

 

Storytime:  The Hacker!

Systems and companies get hacked.  The biggest one in the tech sector is Yahoo back in August 2013 where 3 billion accounts were targeted. and again in 2014 where 500 million accounts were targeted unrelated (Larson, 2017). As reported vital information that was compromised from the yahoo hacks was the sign-in information, most importantly, passwords.

Now fast forward to December 2019, and I got an email saying that there was an attempt to get into my personal social media accounts.  Not saying that the Yahoo incident is at all related since it could have come from multiple other sites I use.  However, it illustrates a key aspect of living a digital life… Are we really safe from hackers?  Thankfully they didn’t succeed to access my account, but that won’t stop them in the future from trying my accounts again or yours.

Mark Goodman (n.d.a.), explains that there is an asymmetry in cyber threats, where the white hats (good guys) have to explore every possible corner to prevent a hack, whereas the hackers only have to find one weakness to hacking into a system.

Goodman (n.d.a., n.d.b.) in the Art of Charm podcast and Lewis Howes podcast proposed the following acronym: UPDATE, as one of many ways to protect yourself.

  • U – update frequently. (LastPass, 1Password)
  • P – passwords. Use a different password for every site and get a reliable password manager. Don’t use your Facebook account to login to other site.
  • D – downloads. Watch your downloads and be cautious about what you install. Download from authorized sources only.
  • A – administrator. Don’t run your computer using the administrator account (unless necessary).
  • T – turn off your computer. If it isn’t fully turned off it’s still accessible, especially when not in use, or at least the wifi.
  • E – encrypt. This scrambles your data unless you have the password and proper computational keys. There are 2 types: you can encrypt the data on your computer and encrypt the data as it is sent out using a VPN.

Resources:

How to do a podcast

In this post, you will get a behind the scenes look as you learn what it takes to produce your very own podcast. An opportunity to increase your presentation skill potential through this new landscape. This interactive session will teach attendees to learn how to plan, prepare and produce their very own podcast. You’ll get a bird’s eye view on the ins and outs of what it takes to become a successful podcaster. As an added bonus, the attendees of this seminar interacted and became a part of an official District 58 Podcast recording.

Below is the PowerPoint presentation I gave:

 

The raw audio file can be found below:

Whereas the production quality audio file can be found below:

Links to the products I used can be found:

Compelling topics in leadership, technology, and social media

  • A business strategy is “the direction, positioning, scope, objectives, and competitive differentiation” of the business (Wollan, Smith, & Zhou, 2010). It is important and enables a business to learn from the business’ employees, customers, and partners (Li, 2010).
  • Organizational alignment is when business strategy meets business culture, where visions are aligned, and business goals and objectives should be drafted towards this business strategy (Richards-Gustafson, n.d.). Organizational alignment and its governance should be part of the business and social media strategic planning from the beginning (Zhu, 2012). For social media strategy creation efforts, best practices dictate to borrow heavily from their current IT strategies and governance processes (Wollan et al., 2010).
  • The definition of social media would change with time because social media is dependent on the technology and platforms that enable and facilitates a social connection (Cohen, 2011; Solis, 2010). The social connection from social media shifts content creation and delivery from a “one-to-many” model to a “many-to-many” model (Solis, 2010; Wollan et al., 2010).
  • A social media platform is the technological infrastructure, platform, and software that allows a company or a person to produce and share content either internally to a selected group of people or externally to the entire world (Wollan et al., 2010).
  • The overall statement is true: “Emanating from the growing popularity of social media, consumers expect companies to be present on popular social media channels. As a consequence, companies can no longer maintain customer interactions solely by way of traditional channels.”
  • Social technologies can help drive tangible value for the company through: product development, knowledge sharing, increasing collaboration, operations and distribution, marketing and sales, customer service, business support, reduction in travel expenditures, reduction in costs, reduction in time it takes to complete a project, etc. (Li, 2010; Vellmure, n.d.; Wollan et al., 2010).
  • Social media helps shine a light exposing: hypocritical business policies, functions of a product/service, marketing, and sales; these issues must be solved relatively quickly, and that requires a social business strategy and resources (Wollan et al., 2010). Thus, there are a significant amount of resources that are needed to achieve any new social business strategies.  These resources should be accessible, such as training resources, best practice guidelines, in-house subject matter experts, and direct managers by all employees (Li, 2010).
  • Also, the power of a negative tweet (a social networking platform) can severely impact a company. This was the case when then President-elect Trump criticized both Boeing and Lockheed Martin, sending their stocks to plummet within minutes from that tweet (Kilgore, 2016; Lauby, 2010; Li, 2010).  Thus, mitigation of negative sentiment is becoming more prevalent for how a business that is operating in a world with social technology. Bughin et al. (2011), reported that social technology for customer purposes had increased effective marketing, customer satisfaction, and increased marketing cost savings.
  • Employee collaboration does not automatically increase within the organization when social technologies are set up because each employee has a different work style, ethic, values, and set of beliefs (Wollan et al., 2010). The organization must change the culture to embrace social technology, by having social technology champions to help bring the resisters into the fold (Li, 2010; Wollan et al., 2010).
  • According to Li (2010), the Open Leadership Style is the best style for implementing social media technologies.
  • Open Leadership Style: Has about five rules, which allow for respect and empowerment of the customers and employees, to consistently build trust, nurtures curiosity and humility, holding openness accountable, and allows for forgiving failures (Li, 2010).  It is not easy to “let it go,” but to grow into new opportunities, one must “let it go.”  This thought process is similar to knowledge sharing, if you share your knowledge, you will be able to “let it go” of your current tasks, such that you can focus on new and better opportunities. Open Leadership allows for one to build and nurture relationships with the customers and employees (Li, 2010).  It is customer and employee centered.
  • Situational Leadership Style: Is a style of leadership where the leader must continuously change their personal leadership style to meet the situation and needs of the employees/followers (Anthony, n.d.). The input of the employees/followers must come first regardless if the leader is a micro-manager, supervisor, coach, supportive, developer, or delegator. The leader would use: micro-manage if employees just need to do exactly what they are told; supervisor methods if employees are inexperienced; coaching if employees lack confidence/motivation; delegation if employees need little supervision; and developmental when the employees have high needs and little experience (Anthony, n.d.).
  • Autocratic Leadership Style: Is also known as authoritarian leadership, where the leader takes over everything and makes all decision with no input from the group (Cherry, 2016a). This is great for when quick decisions are needed, but it comes at a cost to the followers. That is because of Cherry (2016a), stated that decisions made in this style of leadership are absolute and the followers/employees are not trusted.  This feeling is felt and creates the illusion of the classic “control freak,” “bossy,” etc. trope on the leader.
  • Democratic Leadership Style: Is also known as participative leadership, where the employees/followers are a vital part of making the key decisions (Cherry, 2016b). This is the direct opposite of the Autocratic Leader.  Here ideas and opinions are championed, even if the leader remains the final arbitrator (Cherry, 2016b). Unfortunately, this style can be quite time intensive but could provide better results due to a diversity of thought.
  • Servant Leadership Style: The leader is considered a servant first to their employees/followers to allow them to grow, become healthier, wiser, freer, autonomous, and become servants themselves (Center for Servant Leadership, n.d.). The focus is on the growth of the employees/followers.  One way to accomplish growth is a leader sharing their power to help people develop, synonymous to caring for each other (Center for Servant Leadership, n.d.).
  • Laissez-faire Leadership Style: leaders allow employees/followers make their decisions, also known as delegation leaderships (Cherry, 2016c). Unfortunately, Cherry (2016c) points out that there is little guidance from leaders when it is most needed, or when there is a lack of knowledge. However, it does allow for the autonomy of the employees/followers and promotes problem-solving from them.

References

Additional research is needed for social media technologies

Additional research that is recommended for leaders implementing social media in their companies is an introspective research. To implement a corporate strategy for social media, it is advisable for leaders to be collaborative with other leaders (Zhu, 2013). Leaders should practice open leadership, which has about five rules, which allow for respect and empowerment of the customers and employees, to consistently build trust, nurtures curiosity and humility, holding openness accountable, and allows for forgiving failures (Li, 2010).

Leaders should work with others to understand how their business meets the needs and customer pain.  That is because, open leadership allows for one to build and nurture relationships with the customers and employees (Li, 2010).  Leaders should work with others to gain ideas on how they should implement social media technologies, either internally or externally that will support their current business strategy. If the social business strategy does not align with the business strategy then why is the company pursuing it?  It will be a waste of the company resources if there is a misalignment.  Once a company has a social business strategy, they should first experiment with different social media technologies and platforms that meet their goals and objectives.  Once the experimental process is completed, those technologies that had the most return on investment it should be pursued (Mathaisel, 2011; Wollan, Smith, & Zhou, 2010).  These should be data-driven decisions based on metrics and key performance indicators.

Shortly, there doesn’t seem to be any major impacts to current business processes that are stemming from the continued proliferation of social media, like rumors of e-mail disappearing. Each social media platform has its customer base, customer segment, different purposes, and different uses. E-mail is safe from extinction as long as another social media platform or technology cannot fill the needs and purposes that e-mail fulfills.  Even if a social media platform or technology can fulfill the needs and purposes of e-mail, it has to become prolific enough to replace e-mail altogether, i.e. meeting a critical mass of users.

References

CIOs and CxOs roles in implementing social media technologies

Chief Information Officers (CIOs) and Chief x Officers (CxOs) must take into account that implementation of social media technologies are not going to have high adoption rates initially and should then adjust their expectations accordingly (Mathaisel, 2011). CIOs are now in the position to help their companies adopt social media. According to Mathaisel (2011), CIOs should be in the middle ground when it comes to their willingness to experiment, use of social science, and personal risk tolerance. CIOs should take advantage to practice open leadership given the nature of social media technology projects (Li, 2010; Zhu, 2013).  Additionally, the concept of experimentation is key. CIOs should be willing to conduct deep analysis on parts of the social media experiments that succeeded and letting go of others that don’t succeed (Mathaisel, 2011).  CIOs must finally take into account that the nature of the social media technology project should depend on the goals and objectives of business (Zhu, 2013).

These business goals and objectives should be aligned with the business strategy (Wollan, Smith, & Zhou, 2010). Even though social media technology tools are the same, their focused use on the company whether internally and externally should change how leadership style practices are used (Zhu, 2013).  Internal adoption of social media technologies could involve retaining talent and knowledge, content, and data management tasks (Li, 2010; Mathaisel, 2011; Wollan et al., 2010; Zhu, 2013). This type of adoption requires enhancing corporate culture to become more collaborative, and the CIO should be the active user not necessarily a power user (Zhu, 2013). External adoption of social media technology could involve recruiting talent, recruiting more customers, developing a relationship with customers, and creating a corporate social brand (Berkman, 2013; Li, 2010; Mathaisel, 2011; Wollan et al., 2010; Zhu, 2013). This could involve collaborative efforts with other CxOs and other departments other than just IT. Thus the CIO does not need to be an active user nor a power user (Berkman, 2013; Zhu, 2013).  Thus, the CIO should not have to become a social media power user to influence either internal and external change but should be leveraging other power user’s strengths to connect ideas together and move the company forward with social media (Zhu, 2013).

According to Berkman (2013), the role of the CIO is starting to blur in the past few decades with other CxOs. This means that Information Technology (IT) departments are no longer a silo as they were in the past. Other CxOs and departments are starting to have their IT specialist outside of the IT department (Berkman, 2013). Therefore, for a successful implementation of social media technologies in business should involve the CIO and other CxOs to find collaborative wins, not just IT but for other departments in the company. Though the question lies on should the CIO and Chief Marketing Officer (CMO), or any other CxO, be equal partners in these types of projects? The answer to that is, it depends on.  It depends on who has more of the budget and human capital resources to dedicate to these projects (Berkman, 2013; Zhu, 2013). Although the ideation of the project’s goals and objectives, should be equal across the CxOs, not all CxOs should have equal influence in the implementation due to their resource allocation.  If the CMO has all the funding and human capital, it should be their initiatives that are given higher priority, whereas the CIO and the IT department are there to help and vice versa.

References

2 phases for implementing social media in a corporate environment

There are usually two phases in which social media technology are implemented in a company: experimental and business transformation phase (Wollan, Smith, & Zhou, 2010).

Primarily in the experimental phase, the focus is on the social media technology tools, like blogs, forums, micro-blogs, vlogs, etc. (Mathaisel, 2011; Wollan et al., 2010). It is in this first phase, where the company has only implemented parts of the social media technology, and it may not be consistent across the company or the social media platforms (Wollan et al., 2010). This could have happened because a social business strategy was not drafted or implemented.  Another possibility could arise from the creation of a social business strategy where it outlines a specific experimental phase (Mathaisel, 2011).  Mathaisel (2011), stated that this possibility allows leaders like the CIO to be liberal on the technology, but still be fiscally conservative.  The inconsistencies between each technology in the second scenario could result from experimenting which techniques works best in creating relationships. However, companies should be wary that not all social media platforms will have the same type of customer base or customer segment.  Therefore, messaging can be consistent across social media platforms, but at the same time, the messaging must be tailored to the social media platform and their respective customer segment (eMedical Media, n.d.).  When this inconsistency is discovered, the silo and out-of-sync efforts will be reconciled to help move the company towards the second phase (Wollan et al., 2010).

In the second phase, the business transformation phase is where the real business value can be realized because in the first phase the derived value could be small as they are usually connected to a project or simple purpose (Wollan et al., 2010). In this business transformation phase, social media technology is seen as a strategic tool to engage and build relationships with their employees, future talent, and customers (Mathaisel, 2011; Wollan et al., 2010).  In this phase, the social media technology is integrated into the company and in particular in integrated part of Information Technology (IT) department (Wollan et al. 2010).  The integration depth into the IT department depends if the social media technology is used internally or externally.  Depending if the social media technology is used internally IT must integrate it with Active directory, data warehouses, content management, etc.; whereas if the social media technology is used externally, IT must integrate it with web analytics, logistics management, customer relationship management software, etc. (Wollan et al. 2010).

Compared to the first phase, the second phase has a more considerable amount of planning, resources, and experience (Wollan et al., 2010).  Finally, Wollan et al. (2010), stated that the key focus of the second phase was to focus on a thorough and thoughtful approach to picking the right social media technology and platform that is sustainable and scalable for interacting and building relationships with the customers.

References

Achieving full benefit of social technologies through a culture of trust

“To achieve the full benefit of social technologies, organizations must transform their structures, processes, and cultures: they will need to become more open and non-hierarchical and to create a culture of trust. Creating a culture of trust is even difficult for organizations that have not implemented social technologies as well. Ultimately, the efficacy of social technologies hinges on the full participation of employees who are openly willing to share their thoughts and trust that their contributions will be respected. Creating these conditions will be far more challenging than implementing the social media technologies themselves.”

The most important element from the above premise statement is that creating a culture of trust is difficult and that social technology will fail or succeed based on trust of their contributions.  If there is no culture of trust, there will be no contributions to a social technology. Even if the tool is perfect, if no one uses the tool, it was just either a waste of money, waste of time, waste of messaging, or all of the above.

It is true that a culture of trust is more important in a highly collaborative environment powered by social technologies (Burg, 2013).  It is needed because this could be an avenue where ideas can be fully expressed to improve certain parts of the company, product, or service in a constructive and respectful discussed (Burg, 2013; Li, 2010; Vellmure, n.d.; Wollan, Smith, &Zhou, 2010).

However, establishing a culture is much hard than introducing a new piece of technology. There will always be naysayers and resistors to a new piece of social technology (Li, 2010; Wollan et al., 2010).  Even though people who are willing to share their thoughts and ideas are hoping that they can do so in a trusted environment, that their shared ideas are respected, and still have a job the next day.

The leadership style that is more conducive to creating an open culture based on mutually shared respect and trust would be either an open or democratic leadership style. Both the open and democratic leadership are heavy on team participation and are customer and employee centered (Cherry, 2016; Li, 2010).  Cherry (2016), describes that in democratic leadership styles the final decision comes down to the leader, whereas Li (2010) describes that the open leadership styles give more autonomy to the team.  Thus, both are more conducive to creating an open culture, but it depends on the current company culture and the willingness of leadership to give their employees full autonomy over social technology that defines which of these two cultures will prevail in the end.

References