There’s been some useful and interesting discussion in the blogosphere recently about collaborative social tools and their potential to improve business performance. Especially good takes have come from Hutch Carpenter, Sameer Patel, Ross Dawson, and ZDNet’s own Dennis Howlett.
At the core of this discussion is this essential question: Can social tools reach the “hard numbers” part of a business enough to make a real difference?
This is a key point: Despite growing evidence, which I’ve presented here and elsewhere, there still remains for many people a real question about the overall ability of social software to improve how organizations get things done. It doesn’t help that ‘performance‘ itself is a loaded word that is shorthand for a wide variety of measures including improved efficiency, innovation, financial results, customer satisfaction, and many other metrics. Thus, even when good data is available, one person’s vital performance measure is often another person’s irrelevant statistic.
The art and science of performance measurement forms the underpinning of critical business questions about technology deployment in terms of how they ultimately affect the operation of a business. Countless IT projects over the decades have had to prepare the proverbial business case with ROI estimates to obtain funding. All too often these are optimistic estimates designed to support a decision that has already been made — often due to local biases and parochial inclinations — instead of dispassionately examining all reasonable approaches and supporting the one that actually makes the most sense with hard analysis.
In other words, calculating the ROI of technology in a vacuum or with a focus on it in isolation or because of novelty is a poor approach, yet this is done with Enterprise 2.0 just as much as any other type of IT solution.
Largely due to increased application, Enterprise 2.0 has increasingly been the subject of scrutiny about its effectiveness, particularly around value and performance. Even though many good case studies now exist (see Jakob Nielsen’s terrific meta-study of some of the larger efforts), there’s still not enough hard data in enough industries about whether social tools generally provide real, bottom-line value to businesses. Despite this, social tools have now become the standard — even preferred — way to interact in personal life and increasingly in professional life.
Related: Fixing IT in the cloud computing era
Given this focus on performance and productivity, will organizations eliminate one of the more popular ways of communicating unless they see regular ROI reports that confirm value? Perhaps, given that most organizations still block Facebook and Twitter, though that doesn’t stop over 70% of employees from using them at work anyway. However, in my experience, most organizations don’t calculate ROI regularly after a project has been funded, but that may change with Enterprise 2.0 given that CIOs are actually continuing to tighten their reign on social networks.
And the debates won’t go away any time soon: As I’ve discussed in Enterprise 2.0 ROI discussions last year and with the rise of a more emergent approach to IT, there is a confluence of factors that are continuing to push enterprise social software debates to the fore:
- Better IT solutions are often and easily accessible in the cloud and are available for low or no cost.
- Workers can (and will) “vote with the feet” to use the tools that they find are the most useful to get their jobs done (shadow IT and related grassroots IT trends)
- Calculating actual ROI in Enterprise 2.0 and more broadly of IT in general is notoriously difficult.
- There is still not enough objective evidence that key business performance metrics are directly improved by social software deployments.
Focusing on what matters to the business
(Cross-posted @ Enterprise Web 2.0)