Social media or web 2.0 is often regarded as a powerful tool to communicate to customers (existing and future), stakeholders and pretty much anyone else outside the organization. But that ignores a critical group and your most important asset.
New workplace dynamic
The workplace environment is shifting to forgo the traditional hierarchical structure of old in place of a flatter and freer environment. In this structure, it is the contribution that really matters, less so the title. All voices are heard and everyone has an opportunity to influence the outcome. This is the sort of environment that huge corporations such as Facebook and Virgin are adopting with impressive results.
Web 2.0 is the perfect tool to support and encourage that notion. Employees are no longer content to work endless hours and see the bottom line increase. They need to know that their individual contributions matter and that they have a voice. They need to feel valuable. Web 2.0 is so conducive to that end. Successful adoption of these tools means that the information is not just flowing down to employees, supporting and constructive ideas are moving back up. That, my friend, is how you evolve.
How better to understand the impact of plans and ideas before they hit the market or the industry than from the people who are regularly selling the product or delivering the program on the ground. You have just saved valuable time and resources by not having to tweak the product and respond to complaints down the road. It’s not foolproof, but it is definitely strategic. And the best part: most of the tools are relatively inexpensive. Internal wikis, blog posts and open comment options are great examples of effective tools that speak to this new dynamic.
Unfounded concerns
And yet, so many companies are not making full use of them. The usual concern is actually feedback, or negative feedback. In my experience, it’s usually unfounded. Employee names typically accompany the comment. Just as someone wouldn’t yell out absurdities or profanities in a crowded room, they are not prone to do so on these vehicles either. Companies should also provide rules of engagement as well. They should respect fellow employees, use appropriate language and be in the interest of the common good. And, in the end, so what if someone says something bad. They are saying it anyway. You just have a chance to address it and maybe even become better for it.
Just knowing that employees’ ideas are being considered is huge. And you very likely end up with a far more considered and strategic approach. Isn’t that worth the risk? Yes, it implies a certain culture shift. It’s called adapting. As Darwin put it: “It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent that survives. It is the one that is the most adaptable to change.” That time has come.
Helpful links:
Employee Engagement:
After I posted this, someone asked me: “Why not just use email? Why would you need those devices?” Because, I answered, you are limiting your great idea to just one person. Perhaps that person doesn’t even have time to read it, fails to consider it or just dismisses it. He or she is denying someone else who might be able to make great use of it. Maybe a key component gets lost in translation as it makes its way up. Look at the great question that prompted this reply, for example. I could have just kept it to myself, or, I could have others consider it. I’m not that selfish:-)