Tag: Bruce Galinsky

Enterprise 2.0, Policies and Compliance

Mike Gotta asked me to join him on a panel about the policy and compliance issues at the Enterprise 2.0 Conference in Boston. This was my fifth Enterprise 2.0 conference: 2007, 2008, 2009, 2009 San Francisco.

That the audience was interested in compliance and regulatory issues is an indication of the industry maturing.

“Policy formation, governance and risk management programs are a critical requirement as organizations assess implications to the enterprise (e.g., identity assurance, data loss, compliance, e-Discovery, security), arising from internal and external use of social networking and social media. This panel of social media and Enterprise 2.0 practitioners will discuss real-life approaches that address management concerns.”

The panel consisted of:

  • Mike Gotta, Principal Analyst, Gartner
  • Bruce Galinsky, IT Director, Global Insurance Company
  • Abha Kumar, Principal, Information Technology, Vanguard
  • Doug Cornelius, Chief Compliance Officer, Beacon Capital Partners LLC
  • Alice Wang, Director, Gartner Inc.

I took the opportunity in my introduction to set the stage for the view of most compliance and in house lawyers:

“I’m the “NO” guy in your organization and most likely the person to bring your enterprise 2.0 or web 2.0 project to a grinding halt. People in my position do not want to hear about being social. I don’t care what you had for lunch or what your kids did last night. I don’t want to endanger the multi-million dollar value of this company so that you can play with Facebook inside the office. “Now get out of my office before I sic my flying monkeys on you.”

We were unsure when planning the session whether the audience would be interested in issues related to external or internal policies. Overwhelmingly, the audience voted for a focus on internal.

One of the initial questions was whether you even need a policy. We were largely in agreement that you may not need a new separate policy. However, I pointed out, your compliance/legal department is going to want one.

Largely, the risks with enterprise 2.0 are not new risks. The big difference is that the bad stuff is now findable. Most of evangelists proclaim the benefit of finding the good stuff you need to do your job better and to encourage innovation. The downside is exposing the bad stuff and opening the enterprise up to liability.

We eventually got to the point in the discussion about if you let personal issue community to form internally. Should you allow an employee to set up a wiki or discussion forum on religious, race or political issues?  Generally it will take some action to create a new community on the enterprise 2.0 platform. Undoubtedly, there will be some need to control the creation of communities and therefore a need for a policy.

There was some discussion about content, control of the content and fixing mistakes. Personally, I have less concern about that. You need to encourage the team to keep the information current and correct. If someone is operating with the wrong information it is better you know about it and can fix the problem. The alternative is not knowing about the problem because it lives in an email silo, allowing the bad information to continue uncorrected.

When trying to draft a policy it is very useful to look to external policies for ideas and approaches. My social media policies database is a good place to start looking for precedents.  The public web 2.0 industry is well ahead of the slower enterprise 2.0 industry.

Some other issues:

  • FTC and the disclosure of “Material Connection”  (see FTC and Bloggers.)
  • EU Data Privacy
  • Records Management
  • Discovery and Law suits
  • First Amendment
  • Human Resources Issues
    • Labor relations
    • Recommendations
    • Overtime
    • Retiree and alumni involvement
  • Hiring Discrimination
  • Off-Duty activities
  • Company IP, logos and trademarks
  • Monitoring – if you have a policy you need to enforce it.

Each company has a different set of issues they are worried about. Each company also has a unique corporate culture. So there is no right way to drafting a policy. You really need to pick and chose finding the different elements that will work in your enterprise.

Is Enterprise 2.0 a Crock?

enterpise 2.0

I’m attending the Enterprise 2.0 Conference in San Francisco. I’m sharing my notes from this session.

  • e2 Moderator – David Berlind, Chief Content Officer, TechWeb
  • Jamie Pappas, Manager, Social Media Strategy, EMC
  • Bryce Williams, Social Media Consultant, Eli Lilly
  • Megan Murray, Community Manager/Project Coordinator, Booz Allen Hamilton
  • Claire Flanagan, Senior Manager, KM and Enterprise Social Collaboration, CSC
  • Bruce Galinsky, Director IT, Metlife
  • Greg Lowe, Social Media Architect/Program Manager, Alcatel-Lucent

David started off by point out that this session was set up as a response to Dennis Howlett’s Enterprise 2.0 What a Crock. (Although he didn’t mention Dennis by name, merely saying a ZDnet blogger.) The panelists are part of the Enterprise 2.0 Adoption Council.

Workplace Transformation.

The first topic the panel addressed was workplace transformation. Greg pointed out that Alcatel wants to break down organizational silos so that people doing similar things can find each other. He points out that in big organizations have a hard time finding internal expertise.

Claire pointed out that the tools are enabling devices.She points out that the tools are not an incremental change, but a quantum leap. She comes from knowledge management where the concept was to push information into a new silo. These new tools allow knowledge capture as part of the workflow.

Bruce agreed. The tools make sharing easier.  Bruce emphasized the need for speed and innovation in the marketplace. Enterprise 2.0 tools help.

Business Process

Claire points out that the 9-to-5 office has been eroding. People are collaborating around the world, so face to face collaboration is not feasible.

Intellectual Property/Privacy/Governance

You need to focus on the governance and compliance issues. There was some discussion of the benefit of open governance, allowing organization groups to get input from other groups in creating policies.

Companies need to start stop not trusting their employees. The biggest threat is from within. But you need to educate employees. Malicious people will find ways around the lock-down. Email is no more secure than Enterprise 2.0 tools.

Religious Wars (Technology and Generational Bias)

The importance is tools that are easy and intuitive to use. Some companies prefer open source, some prefer Microsoft and others IBM. People want the tools to communicate better to remove information silos.

Bottom-Line Business Benefits

The elusive quest for ROI on technology tools. The panelists agree that this is the biggest challenge. It is hard to show the direct benefits of collaboration. One panelists took the time saved approach to measurement. The tools allowed a project to be done faster. Another did a comparison of the time and money comparison between reply-all emails and a wiki. (Of course, this is soft dollars.)

Then the audience joined in.

One question was how you value the better decision-making that can come from use of Enterprise 2.0 tools. A panelist gave the example of how the company sent an open question on how to save money. They got lots of good feedback and money-saving ideas. The tools allow management to get better feedback and an ability to tap into the conversations happening in the organization.

Claire pointed out the need to find a tool that is “addictive.” Employees will vote with their feet and use what works best for them. Tools need to be easy to use and intuitive. And of course, useful.

My Take

Enterprise 2.0 is still looking for pays to justify itself. People that have used the tools (at least the good tools) do find them addictive. The problem is comparing the tools to email when it comes to ROI. The ROI for email was easy. Email was obviously cheaper and faster than mail or overnight delivery of documents. It was also cheaper than a phone call. The ROI for Enterprise 2.0 tools is much more elusive.

I think Enterprise 2.0 should look to some of the arguments for knowledge management. Sure, knowledge management largely died because the tools and approach were flawed. I find the Enterprise 2.0 approach to be the better approach to knowledge management. You are capturing the intellectual capital of your enterprise as part of their workflow.