PLM, Social Enterprise Failure and Future Steps

by Oleg on March 18, 2012 · 9 comments

Well… I hope got some attention with this provoking title :) . Social is trending topic these days. However, let me put a very bold statement – after few years of excitement, I haven’t seen any example of “social software” success in the enterprise manufacturing company. Now, “social software” in my view is not related to social media and obvious need to screen employees  Facebook and twitter accounts. There are all absolutely important actions. I’m taking about the fact “social software” or something that sometime called “Enterprise 2.0” software doesn’t make any significant change in the way enterprise software works in manufacturing companies. In other words, no signs of mainstream usage.

Enterprise 2.0 Failure?

Last year, I was reading Laurie Buczek’s article The Big Failure of Enterprise 2.0 Social Business. Take a look, in my view, there are some very rational points there. I found the following passage interesting:

The big failure of social business is a lack of integration of social tools into the collaborative workflow.  This is not a newly identified problem.  Those of us working on social collaboration efforts for a while recognized that integration is imperative from the beginning.  At the beginning, I clearly outlined integration as one of three foundational pillars for our strategy.  Unfortunately, various forces created challenges in this space. Social collaboration applications have been immature in this area for years (even after fierce calls for faster integration- i.e. CMS). Enterprises faced fork lift integration efforts to knit applications together.  Fork lift efforts get the budget axe when push comes to shove.  We managed to do the normal IT deployment model – the very model I fiercely advocated for us not to do.  We deployed just another tool amongst a minefield of other collaborative tools – without integration.   To make it even harder, we underinvested in transition change management.

The lack of integration is critical. Social software just created another silo in enterprise. This simple conclusion is important to understand, in my view.

Social is just another feature

It is interesting to see how PLM and other vendors threat social. If you are in the enterprise business, you are probably familiar with this strategy – “our software supports social features”. You can find evidence of such a strategy in many places. Maybe the best example of social integration is a feature can be found in AutoCAD – it is just a command. Navigate to WorldCAD Access blog to read the article – Social media becomes commands in AutoCAD 2013.

I recommend you to listen to Facebook Investor Roger McNamee Explains Why Social Is Over. Navigate to the following link to read the article and watch video. Here is an interesting quote from the summary:

Don’t try to be “social”: the big social platforms are created. You can’t create a social company, it’s just a checkbox. “The last 500 social companies funded by the VC community are all worthless. I’m serious.”

Integration and User Experience are the key

There are two important things that, in my view, can make a difference in the future of social software. Integration and user experience. Social web created a completely different level of expectation for software. It is a different user experience. To have it successfully replicated and integrated into mission critical business processes can make a difference. One of interesting examples I’ve seen recently is the announcement of Yammer integration into SAP Software.

Yammer, software for creating social networks inside businesses, just released a new feature that connects Yammer with the central component of SAP’s enterprise resource planning software. That means SAP customers can have on their computer screens a network ticker, like the updating sidebar on a Facebook page. Instead of the latest news about friends, this sidebar delivers updates whenever something relevant to people’s jobs happens inside their SAP systems.

Another interesting example came from Nuage -new company announced very recently on a horizon of PLM. It is still very little can be found on their website. One of the resources Nuage shared is a whitepaper by Jim Brown of Tech-Clarity. Read more about this on Jim’s blog – Social Business – What if Facebook Didn’t Fail for Product Development? The important quote from Jim’s whitepaper is the following one:

The greatest benefit will come from combining the collaborative power of social computing with the control provided by PLM. As Going Social with Product Development explains, “While social networking by itself can provide value, companies that develop a strategy to leverage the concepts behind social computing in a product development business context will likely gain greater advantages in product profitability than others.”

What is my conclusion? I think, companies made first initial baby-steps in social enterprise over the past few years. Few important lessons: 1/magic word “social” does solve the problem; 2/user experience is very important; 3/integrate into mainstream business flow and solve significant business pain is a key. I would like to quote one of my friends saying that this is what differentiate between “pain-killer” and “vitamin” software. Just my thoughts…

Best, Oleg

picture courtesy of w3c social web report.

Share
  • http://twitter.com/PLMJim Jim McKinney

    Oleg,

    Very nice comments on an important topic. I think that one of the biggest challenges to the spread of social technologies in PLM is the willingness of most people in engineering organizations to use any social solution. The main tool for most people in their daily job is still email. As younger employees, those who have grown up with social media, begin to take charge, I think you will see more use of social media in standard product development activities.

    I am old enough to remember when only younger employees used email, and most executive still had their secretary print it all out for them; the change will take some time, but it is coming!

  • beyondplm

    Jim, excellent example about email usage. I remember these stories as well. Conservative people and absence of social tool integration into the mainstream application are two fundamental reasons of social enterprise failure. Best, Oleg

  • Erik Jansen

    Companies tend to cling to their patents and intellectual property. Going “social” or adopting beneficial features into company workflows depends on an open mind(set). Collaboration, open mindset (/source, /api, etc) will improve businesses everywhere once that barrier has been broken. I agree fully with the statement that complete integration of social tools into BI/PLM tools is a requirement for larger scale adoption.

  • beyondplm

    Eric, thanks for your comment! You've made an important point about company IP and the mindset. In the public web is called “new openness”. What was absolutely unaccepted 10 years ago, today is okay. So, I can see a similar process is going on a corp. level these days. It takes time. Best, Oleg 

  • beyondplm

    Eric, thanks for your comment! You've made an important point about company IP and the mindset. In the public web is called “new openness”. What was absolutely unaccepted 10 years ago, today is okay. So, I can see a similar process is going on a corp. level these days. It takes time. Best, Oleg 

  • http://twitter.com/vuuch Vuuch

    One reason to use social over email is IP.  Today IP is spread who knows where using the least secure solution possible, email.  True enterprise grade enterprise social software protects IP well beyond how people are working today.

    When you say “social” you need to separate consumer social, social @ works for internal usage and social for marketing and customer support.  Each of these are very different and have very different solutions.  You are never going to use Facebook for working out design issues but you can be assured marketing is using to to gather prospects and reduce cost of customer support.

  • http://twitter.com/vuuch Vuuch

    Email helped people communicate, get things done and distribute information and Jim as you said you are old enough to remember the initial reaction – email is bad, we don't need it…  Hey what can you say humans hate change and humans at work hate change even more. 

    Now email is evil because we are all buried in it, even our mothers are using it and in some cases grandmothers.  Email has become so pervasive it is now a problem.  Social has an opportunity to fix this.  But simply applying a Facebook like connection model of friending or twitter like following approach to connection at work is simply stupid.  At work people connect due to being focused on a common deliverable.  At work there is a center to the discussion.  Therefore it should be simple to see social work needs a different connection model.

    http://www.vuuch.com/enterpris
    http://www.vuuch.com/enterpris

  • beyondplm

    Chris, I'm sorry for a “blond” question. However, what means “to use social over email”? In my view, it sounds like “collaborative software” we are all trying to adopt for the last 10-15 years. Data is located in databases and system with UI provides an access. The last “round of adoption” is to adopt UI experience developed during wide adoption of FB and other social tools. Is it compliant to your definition of “social”? If the answer yes, I'd be testing every 'social' system from the standpoint of user experience first. Thanks for your comment! Best, Oleg

  • beyondplm

    Chris, Thanks for your comment! I think, there are two aspects in “following FB” pattern. One is about “friending”. Yes, this is probably something that doesn't make sense in enterprise – you don't want to be a friend with 1000s of your colleagues. However, FB user experience is something that makes sense to people – it is “easy share” experience and just UI practice. So, maybe the big deal for social is just about how to apply coolness and usefulness of UI practices? It will abandon old Windows-Office-like user experience. Does it make sense?  Best, oleg

Previous post:

Next post: