Business process technology capabilities (BPM, BPA) are overwhelmingly weighted toward automating the processes that they've attempted to capture. There's nothing wrong with this, and in fact, the 'language' of process provides modelers with a common platform for defining process flow, impacts and related systems -- regardless of the proprietary technology in use. You get the value of streamlining the exchange and delivery of data, errors are reduced, quality improves and transactions are speeded along their way. However, automation is just the tip of the iceberg.
The overwhelming majority of business processes performed in the workplace cannot be automated. Most processes being performed are a series of human interactions, with a high degree of subjectivity, and with technology and systems used to assist in the completion of a granular task, but not to perform the process in its entirety. Yet, if these 'human-centric' processes as Forrester likes to refer to them could become more repeatable, predictable and defined, the business would benefit. This is where BPM and its cousins fall on their collective faces. These technologies are utterly incapable of communicating "how-to" perform any of the things that they were designed to capture. They were designed to automate, not to communicate, and therefore they have no ability to easily translate a process for consumption by a large audience.
Most human centric processes are communicated through training/learning, experience and word-of-mouth. Technologies helping along the way (to communicate) include learning management systems, collaboration tools, content management and search. The challenge with these technologies (in general) are their fundamental lack of structure e.g. a content management system can be organized in a variety of hierarchical structures but once created, they are quite brittle to change; a learning management system is simply a delivery mechanism only as good as the curriculum and classes that are developed for delivery; search brings back too many results.
Contextware set out early on to solve the problem of communicating processes more effectively. And core to our belief is using process as a means to capturing and then also organizing the information that needs to be communicated i.e. the business process IS the context. The next few blog posts will highlight some interesting examples of how our core belief can be applied.
Showing posts with label observations. Show all posts
Showing posts with label observations. Show all posts
Monday, February 8, 2010
Friday, December 4, 2009
Gilbane Boston 2009 Content Management Conference
Spent Wednesday afternoon at the East Coast iteration of the Gilbane content management conference. A lot of activity...a whole lot of vendors. Credit to the Gilbane folks for a crammed exhibit hall. But in talking to many of the technology companies in attendance, there were few potential clients walking the floor...and even fewer buyers. This isn't a surprise so close to the holidays as people are rightfully distracted, only compounded by the economic environment.
Picked up on a couple of major themes, at least as portrayed by the technology companies there.
1. 'Traditional' web-CMS companies are heavily focused on providing services that allow for site personalization...i.e. the ability to customize the site experience based on customer specific preferences. The problem with this...most websites can infer very little from an IP address (at least very little when it comes to customer segmentation). There is still a long way to go to match customer type (prospective customer) with site content but at least the technology is there.
2. The ubiquitous SharePoint. A major strength and problem is flexibility. This has led to legions of consulting firms dead set on implementing solutions. As with most markets that begin to mature, the newest craze is packaged SP solutions and an increasing number of add-on products. One of our issues continues to be the lack of attention to the way in which information is architected from the outset of any SP engagement. The most frequent response to my question: "how do you organize content" is "ahhh...hmm...we usually use the client org chart."
3. Control mechanisms for corporate social collaboration. Control social collaboration? Good luck with that.
Picked up on a couple of major themes, at least as portrayed by the technology companies there.
1. 'Traditional' web-CMS companies are heavily focused on providing services that allow for site personalization...i.e. the ability to customize the site experience based on customer specific preferences. The problem with this...most websites can infer very little from an IP address (at least very little when it comes to customer segmentation). There is still a long way to go to match customer type (prospective customer) with site content but at least the technology is there.
2. The ubiquitous SharePoint. A major strength and problem is flexibility. This has led to legions of consulting firms dead set on implementing solutions. As with most markets that begin to mature, the newest craze is packaged SP solutions and an increasing number of add-on products. One of our issues continues to be the lack of attention to the way in which information is architected from the outset of any SP engagement. The most frequent response to my question: "how do you organize content" is "ahhh...hmm...we usually use the client org chart."
3. Control mechanisms for corporate social collaboration. Control social collaboration? Good luck with that.
Friday, September 18, 2009
Contextware: In the Basex Briefing Room
As often happens, third parties looking from the outside-in find new ways to explain and articulate issues that Contextware addresses, and the article below from Basex, Inc., the world's foremost knowledge economy research and advisory firm is no exception. We think you'll find their review of Contextware interesting.
The article begins:
One of the missing pieces of a puzzle the knowledge worker faces in the course of performing knowledge work is context. Without context, the knowledge worker is looking at isolated bits of information that are, more often than not, of limited value. Most content doesn’t stand on its own; there is always important related and supporting information that completes the picture. Beyond a single document, what else should one read and whom else should one query? Knowing what to read next or which experts to contact completes the puzzle and increases the value of the content exponentially. Click to read the entire piece...
The article begins:
One of the missing pieces of a puzzle the knowledge worker faces in the course of performing knowledge work is context. Without context, the knowledge worker is looking at isolated bits of information that are, more often than not, of limited value. Most content doesn’t stand on its own; there is always important related and supporting information that completes the picture. Beyond a single document, what else should one read and whom else should one query? Knowing what to read next or which experts to contact completes the puzzle and increases the value of the content exponentially. Click to read the entire piece...
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Tweeting for Business
Having created my own Twitter account a couple of months ago, I still struggle with trying to determine the business value of tweeting. Although there are plenty of anecdotal examples of how Twitter can benefit a business those examples are the exception and not the norm. And as a result it seems difficult to envision a systematic adoption of tweeting in a business environment. That said, here is an interest blog page from blogger Chris Brogan titled 50 Ideas on Using Twitter for Business. They aren't use cases as much as they are things to consider. Check it out if your looking for an excuse to dive in.
http://www.chrisbrogan.com/50-ideas-on-using-twitter-for-business/
http://www.chrisbrogan.com/50-ideas-on-using-twitter-for-business/
Friday, April 17, 2009
Soccer, Business and Making Decisions
Read no further if you don't like sports and soccer metaphors in particular.
Mike Prokopeak, the editorial director for Chief Learning Officer magazine wrote an April 2009 executive briefing piece titled, "Goooaaal! Decision-Making Lessons from Soccer." The article features 2005 research on the effectiveness of soccer goal keepers blocking penalty kicks by diving left or right vs. remaining in the center of the goal -- akin to doing nothing. The report shows statistical evidence that by doing nothing, goal keepers in fact increase their chance of stopping the penalty kick.
Here's a link to the 27 page research.
Furthermore the conclusion of the report and of Graham Jones, a sports psychologist from the consulting company called Lane4 (interviewed for the article) is that just like goal keepers, today's executives may be doing things just for the sake of doing things.
Well as a career soccer player, I couldn't resist digging into the research further, because from my perspective, there are too many elements to consider in the fierce competition of a soccer match that a bunch of scientists could reduce it to an algorithm. I also couldn't accept that a subject matter expert such as a goal keeper couldn't be right in trying to anticipate the direction of a penalty kick when trying to stop a it. The kicker has to choose a side, why not the keeper?
Turns out I was sort of right. In more recent research scientists showed that goal keepers typically stand just off center of the goal...by just a few centimeters...thereby trying to influence the side to which the penalty kick taker will shoot the ball...and apparently in the majority of cases, the penalty kick taker does in fact shoot to the side of the goal with more space. By taking action the keeper does influence the outcome.
You see, just as in stopping penalty kicks, in business, sometimes making a move, even a subtle one (such as standing a little left or right of center) can increase your chances of success in the long run. Accepting the status quo without trying something just doesn't make sense.
Mike Prokopeak, the editorial director for Chief Learning Officer magazine wrote an April 2009 executive briefing piece titled, "Goooaaal! Decision-Making Lessons from Soccer." The article features 2005 research on the effectiveness of soccer goal keepers blocking penalty kicks by diving left or right vs. remaining in the center of the goal -- akin to doing nothing. The report shows statistical evidence that by doing nothing, goal keepers in fact increase their chance of stopping the penalty kick.
Here's a link to the 27 page research.
Furthermore the conclusion of the report and of Graham Jones, a sports psychologist from the consulting company called Lane4 (interviewed for the article) is that just like goal keepers, today's executives may be doing things just for the sake of doing things.
Well as a career soccer player, I couldn't resist digging into the research further, because from my perspective, there are too many elements to consider in the fierce competition of a soccer match that a bunch of scientists could reduce it to an algorithm. I also couldn't accept that a subject matter expert such as a goal keeper couldn't be right in trying to anticipate the direction of a penalty kick when trying to stop a it. The kicker has to choose a side, why not the keeper?
Turns out I was sort of right. In more recent research scientists showed that goal keepers typically stand just off center of the goal...by just a few centimeters...thereby trying to influence the side to which the penalty kick taker will shoot the ball...and apparently in the majority of cases, the penalty kick taker does in fact shoot to the side of the goal with more space. By taking action the keeper does influence the outcome.
You see, just as in stopping penalty kicks, in business, sometimes making a move, even a subtle one (such as standing a little left or right of center) can increase your chances of success in the long run. Accepting the status quo without trying something just doesn't make sense.
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Finding and Using the Right Content - IDC Directions Follow-up
Clare Gillan is Senior Vice President of Executive and Go-to-Market Programs at IDC. Her general session presentation was titled "The Year of the Sales Rep." Among many of the juicy tidbits in the presentation, she cited a 2009 analysis from the Savo Group that indicated only 20% of the content created by the marketing organization for sales, was actually used by sales. Think of the massive waste in terms of time spent, actual cost and opportunity cost. Although this example is specific to sales and marketing content, it could easily apply to content anywhere within the organization. In fact when you think about your own enterprise we bet you'd be surprised that even 20% is used.
Part of the reason for this lack of usage Clare hypothesized is the classic disconnect between sales and marketing. Marketing produces stuff assuming sales needs it, sales doesn't communicate customer pre-sale requirements to marketing and the ships pass in the night. This is certainly a reason. Here are some others that we would add to the list.
1. Inability to locate information. Even if you have an enterprise search technology in place, it's still often difficult to a) search across all content repositories in the business and b) receive search results that reflect the precise intent of the query. Nucleus Research finds that 34% of employees spend 2-5 hours per week searching for content they can use, and 28% spend 5 hours of more. Not how most sales managers want their sales people spending their time.
2. Content without context. Even if you locate content that you think you want, it is up to you, the end user to determine the context of when/how/what/where to use the content. While determining context may seem easy, it places a huge burden on the end user, and also a huge expectation that they'll get it right. Outdated content and poorly written content proliferates most organizations. If you could, wouldn't you want your employees to always have access to the more relevant, best examples of content.
3. Information overload. Sticking with more statistics from Nucleus Research, 67% of employees are overwhelmed by the volume of information they have to access despite (or maybe as a result of) enterprise search technologies such as Google or Autonomy. Who isn't overwhelmed?
So if 80% of marketing content created for sales is going unused, what's to blame?
Part of the reason for this lack of usage Clare hypothesized is the classic disconnect between sales and marketing. Marketing produces stuff assuming sales needs it, sales doesn't communicate customer pre-sale requirements to marketing and the ships pass in the night. This is certainly a reason. Here are some others that we would add to the list.
1. Inability to locate information. Even if you have an enterprise search technology in place, it's still often difficult to a) search across all content repositories in the business and b) receive search results that reflect the precise intent of the query. Nucleus Research finds that 34% of employees spend 2-5 hours per week searching for content they can use, and 28% spend 5 hours of more. Not how most sales managers want their sales people spending their time.
2. Content without context. Even if you locate content that you think you want, it is up to you, the end user to determine the context of when/how/what/where to use the content. While determining context may seem easy, it places a huge burden on the end user, and also a huge expectation that they'll get it right. Outdated content and poorly written content proliferates most organizations. If you could, wouldn't you want your employees to always have access to the more relevant, best examples of content.
3. Information overload. Sticking with more statistics from Nucleus Research, 67% of employees are overwhelmed by the volume of information they have to access despite (or maybe as a result of) enterprise search technologies such as Google or Autonomy. Who isn't overwhelmed?
So if 80% of marketing content created for sales is going unused, what's to blame?
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Why Enterprise 2.0 Won't Succeed - IDC Directions Follow-up
There was a great breakfast presentation on Tuesday the 17th by Michael Fauscette, Group Vice President, Software Business Solutions at IDC. The presentation was really about leveraging 2.0 technologies and approaches in the partner channel. But the broader Enterprise 2.0 piece was of course a part of the discussion.
The problem we (Contextware) have with 2.0 technologies and initiatives (ironic I'm blogging about this), is that regardless of the problem they are trying to solve they inherently lack structure in how information is captured and organized. The ability of the mob to contribute content and information via a wiki, blog, community of practice, twitter, yammer or blather is very democratic...but also chaotic by their nature, whereas businesses are highly structured entities and require organization of chaos to be effective. While this is a self-serving viewpoint for Contextware, since we argue that information should be structured around the processes people are tasked with performing, the viewpoint isn't without merit.
Enterprise 2.0 will experience the same problems that content management systems (one of its technological predecessors has):
-massive amounts of information produced stored in loose structures
-challenges navigating that content...with search often exacerbating the problem based on the number of results it returns
-determining stale vs. fresh content, and the battle to keep information relevant
-authoritative commentary vs. blather
-finding a way to capture information from the best performers in the business who often have the least amount of time to contribute.
The problem we (Contextware) have with 2.0 technologies and initiatives (ironic I'm blogging about this), is that regardless of the problem they are trying to solve they inherently lack structure in how information is captured and organized. The ability of the mob to contribute content and information via a wiki, blog, community of practice, twitter, yammer or blather is very democratic...but also chaotic by their nature, whereas businesses are highly structured entities and require organization of chaos to be effective. While this is a self-serving viewpoint for Contextware, since we argue that information should be structured around the processes people are tasked with performing, the viewpoint isn't without merit.
Enterprise 2.0 will experience the same problems that content management systems (one of its technological predecessors has):
-massive amounts of information produced stored in loose structures
-challenges navigating that content...with search often exacerbating the problem based on the number of results it returns
-determining stale vs. fresh content, and the battle to keep information relevant
-authoritative commentary vs. blather
-finding a way to capture information from the best performers in the business who often have the least amount of time to contribute.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
IDC Directions 2009 - Content Rich, IT Poor
I attended IDC's Directions conference in Boston earlier this week. This was the East Coast version of its West Coast twin held earlier in the month. According to one of the hosts, John Gantz, Chief Research Officer and SVP there were over 800 people in attendance. The rumors of the demise of the technology industry in this economy must be greatly exaggerated.
Credit to IDC for herding dozens of their analysts and hundreds of senior technology industry people into the Hynes conference center. It must have been the content. This is the first conference I've attended in a long time where there was more information of value than I could consume.
Networking opportunities were plentiful despite the openness of the space, and IDC analysts were readily available and approachable.
Not surprisingly, many of the attendees from software and technology companies that I spoke with are seeing their sales pipelines slashed and even existing contracts renegotiated. You see declines in tech spending mimic pretty closely declines in GDP, again no surprise.
The good news - at least from my perspective - is that good products, people and companies always seem to flourish in adverse environments and those that aren't...don't. Gantz was very optimistic about the future and I hope other attendees took that to heart.
We'll post more on some of the specific presentations over the next couple of days.
Credit to IDC for herding dozens of their analysts and hundreds of senior technology industry people into the Hynes conference center. It must have been the content. This is the first conference I've attended in a long time where there was more information of value than I could consume.
Networking opportunities were plentiful despite the openness of the space, and IDC analysts were readily available and approachable.
Not surprisingly, many of the attendees from software and technology companies that I spoke with are seeing their sales pipelines slashed and even existing contracts renegotiated. You see declines in tech spending mimic pretty closely declines in GDP, again no surprise.
The good news - at least from my perspective - is that good products, people and companies always seem to flourish in adverse environments and those that aren't...don't. Gantz was very optimistic about the future and I hope other attendees took that to heart.
We'll post more on some of the specific presentations over the next couple of days.
Monday, February 23, 2009
Society for Applied Learning Conference: New Learning Technologies Part II
Well...results are in from the SALT conference and I must say anecdotal evidence suggests Doug Harward from TrainingIndustry.com is correct in his assertion that the training and learning profession will experience a 10% downturn in 2009. A lower attendance rate, lower energy and reports from the people attending all but confirmed his hypothesis. But really this is no surprise is it?
During our very well attended talk at the SALT conference in Orlando, I emphasized to learning professionals that they will increasingly be asked to connect their projects directly to ROI and key performance indicators KPIs of the business. At risk of alienating potential clients...there were a lot of blank stares. That's pretty hard to believe but it's true.
Our recommendation (albeit self-serving) to them is that learning professionals increase their focus on efforts that impact day-to-day performance of employees. In essence they need to focus on performance support initiatives. Beyond just job preservation, there are a fair number of business reasons that support this change of mindset.
One of the statistics we presented related to the number of applications and systems that knowledge workers are expected to interact with as part of their jobs. Shockingly, on average a knowledge worker may have to work with upwards of 20 applications and systems as part of their job. This is true even for smaller companies.
During our very well attended talk at the SALT conference in Orlando, I emphasized to learning professionals that they will increasingly be asked to connect their projects directly to ROI and key performance indicators KPIs of the business. At risk of alienating potential clients...there were a lot of blank stares. That's pretty hard to believe but it's true.
Our recommendation (albeit self-serving) to them is that learning professionals increase their focus on efforts that impact day-to-day performance of employees. In essence they need to focus on performance support initiatives. Beyond just job preservation, there are a fair number of business reasons that support this change of mindset.
One of the statistics we presented related to the number of applications and systems that knowledge workers are expected to interact with as part of their jobs. Shockingly, on average a knowledge worker may have to work with upwards of 20 applications and systems as part of their job. This is true even for smaller companies.
Knowing when to access and what to do with them is a huge part of employees jobs. Making this easier, in the context of learning and performing one's job has potential.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Society for Applied Learning Conference: New Learning Technologies Part I
Greetings from Orlando. Here at the SALT New Technologies Conference. Delivering a presentation on Performance Support and the role learning professionals should play in these initiatives. The presentation takes place early afternoon. I'm very curious about the response.
Learning and training have always been areas of return on investment for Contextware, but not necessarily our primary focus. However, as learning grasps for new ways to capture and deliver content, make an impact on the business and cast itself as strategic to the organization...we figured we would try to help. Help from the perspective that learning as a profession needs a wake up call to move out of the classroom and move closer to impacting day to day performance of the people they support. If you in the middle of trying to do your job, you're not going to pause to take a 1 hour class online to figure out how to do what you're doing. But what if learning content were delivered in more digestible chunks and if you were able to access those chunks in the context of the task that was being performed. Well...that's Contextware in a nutshell.
Learning and training have always been areas of return on investment for Contextware, but not necessarily our primary focus. However, as learning grasps for new ways to capture and deliver content, make an impact on the business and cast itself as strategic to the organization...we figured we would try to help. Help from the perspective that learning as a profession needs a wake up call to move out of the classroom and move closer to impacting day to day performance of the people they support. If you in the middle of trying to do your job, you're not going to pause to take a 1 hour class online to figure out how to do what you're doing. But what if learning content were delivered in more digestible chunks and if you were able to access those chunks in the context of the task that was being performed. Well...that's Contextware in a nutshell.
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
2009 Forecasts and Predictions
We shy away from making our own predictions other than where we think our business is headed...but some of the following from third parties that relate to areas our technology addresses are interesting.
Top 10 Market Predictions for 2009: Are YOU ready for the New Training Industry?
by: Doug Harward
TrainingIndustry.com
Among his other predictions, Doug sees a decline of 10% budget and 11% workforce in 2009...that's 65,000 people.
http://www.trainingindustry.com/articles/2009-predictions.aspx
Our take: Better figure out a way to better connect learning and training initiatives to KPIs and ROI or Doug is way conservative with his numbers.
Nucleus Research Announces Annual Technology Predictions for 2009
by: Nucleus Research
Nucleus offers 10 predictions via the link below. One that stands out: "No Shiny Objects. No one is investing in the cutting edge this year, unless there is a clear and compelling business benefit. Vendors still pitching their bright and shiny technology took a hit in late 2008 and will continue to suffer in 2009."
Our take: We agree completely. Nifty technology without an obvious ROI is done.
http://nucleusresearch.com/news/press-releases/nucleus-research-announces-annual-technology-predictions-for-2009/
12 Technology Predictions for 2009
Analysts weigh in on content management trends for the New Year.
by Tony Byrne and CMS Watch
http://www.destinationcrm.com/Articles/CRM-News/Daily-News/12-Technology-Predictions-for-2009-52162.aspx
DestinationCRM.com quotes 12 predictions from content management guy Tony Byrne, the founder of CMS Watch http://www.cmswatch.com/. Here's number 12..."Buyers will not accept vendors' first offers," the CMS Watch report states. "Rather they will demand better pricing, more licenses, and better support levels."
Our take: No kidding? When has a good buyer not thought this way. We would have stopped at the 11th prediction.
Top 10 Market Predictions for 2009: Are YOU ready for the New Training Industry?
by: Doug Harward
TrainingIndustry.com
Among his other predictions, Doug sees a decline of 10% budget and 11% workforce in 2009...that's 65,000 people.
http://www.trainingindustry.com/articles/2009-predictions.aspx
Our take: Better figure out a way to better connect learning and training initiatives to KPIs and ROI or Doug is way conservative with his numbers.
Nucleus Research Announces Annual Technology Predictions for 2009
by: Nucleus Research
Nucleus offers 10 predictions via the link below. One that stands out: "No Shiny Objects. No one is investing in the cutting edge this year, unless there is a clear and compelling business benefit. Vendors still pitching their bright and shiny technology took a hit in late 2008 and will continue to suffer in 2009."
Our take: We agree completely. Nifty technology without an obvious ROI is done.
http://nucleusresearch.com/news/press-releases/nucleus-research-announces-annual-technology-predictions-for-2009/
12 Technology Predictions for 2009
Analysts weigh in on content management trends for the New Year.
by Tony Byrne and CMS Watch
http://www.destinationcrm.com/Articles/CRM-News/Daily-News/12-Technology-Predictions-for-2009-52162.aspx
DestinationCRM.com quotes 12 predictions from content management guy Tony Byrne, the founder of CMS Watch http://www.cmswatch.com/. Here's number 12..."Buyers will not accept vendors' first offers," the CMS Watch report states. "Rather they will demand better pricing, more licenses, and better support levels."
Our take: No kidding? When has a good buyer not thought this way. We would have stopped at the 11th prediction.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
