Updates from Mari Carmen Martin Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Mari Carmen Martin 9:00 am on January 30, 2013 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , ,   

    It’s time to speed up the implementation of social technology in organizations 

    Estimated reading time: 5 minutes

    I’m a follower and reader of research by the American consultancy company McKinsey, above all of its studies regarding social technology or social business. Social technology covers both the internal and external scope: internal tools are those that promote internal collaboration, such as Enterprise Social Networks; whilst external technology is what can be found outside the company in question, such as, social commerce, corporate blogs and general networks like Facebook and Twitter, among many others.

    The latest study published by McKinsey about social technology was in July last year. Later, in November, they published the article Capturing business value using social technology, which includes a very interesting summary revealing that the improvement in communication and the productivity of employees when social technology is used contributes to an increase in productivity of between 20 and 25%. The sectors where these types of services are most used, and therefore contribute more value to the business are the B2B sectors, such as advertising, auditing, engineering and consultancy services; for other sectors the percentage is also significant but with a lower level of influence.

    I really don’t understand why businesses and their managers don’t speed up the implementation of social technology in their companies.

    I’d like to believe it’s due partly to ignorance and the lack of development of their digital skills for accessing this information; and also that they don’t have the personnel with the skills to manage social technology. However, in fact it’s the managers of these companies who should be looking after innovation and be at the forefront of managing the team. From experience and after years spent in management positions, in general the short-term occupies an excessively large amount of managers’ time. This group, which should favor change and innovation, is in many cases the one that holds back these initiatives, due to ignorance, turning the organization into a slow institution that manages innovation badly.

    As this is my first post on the ZyncroBlog for 2013, here’s my personal list of trends 2.0 that I’d like to see implemented in many companies:

    1. Mass implementation and management of enterprise social networks created with the aim of being essential tools for managing innovation and practice communities that provide value to the business and generate more productivity among people, and streamline decisions.
    2. Development of digital skills at all levels in the organization, from management committees down, in a cascade process that will generate important strategic and operational changes in companies.
    3. Creation of digital skills maps necessary for leading the transformation process to enterprise 2.0 in the strictest sense of the word.
    4. Appointment in large companies of a social technology manager. This should be a multidiscipline and cross-company role that reaches all departments.
    5. Management of the personal brand of key managers and ambassadors to support and contribute to the positioning of the company brand in the internal and external social environment.
    6. Importance and management of the social influence on those brand ambassadors of the company, strategically located in different areas of the organization.
    Mari Carmen Martín (@maricarmenmar) is a trained Industrial Psychologist and an expert in HR. Currently she works for Cloudtalent, a company of the Humannova group, where she is responsible for creating personal branding programs for executives and professionals.

  • Mari Carmen Martin 9:00 am on December 3, 2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , ,   

    Communication 2.0 and organizations 2.0: designed to understand each other 

    Estimated reading time: 5 minutes

    A few weeks ago Alejandro Formanchuck was visiting Barcelona and he took the occasion to participate in an event organized by Zyncro: #Ysehizolaluz, which I was able to attend and during which he enthralled us with a conference about internal communication 2.0. Alejandro made us ponder a number of questions such as “Are 2.0 tools revolutionary?”, “Who uses these tools?”

    To be honest, after learning that even Queen Elizabeth II and the Vatican have been convinced, it should come as no surprise that many Spanish companies are currently deciding to join the 2.0 revolution.


    This table shows some of the differences in some areas between enterprises 1.0, those which have yet to adopt internal and external 2.0 tools, and the so-called enterprises 2.0. It is clear that the gap between 1.0 and 2.0 is not only semantic, but is also about a natural and sophisticated evolution in many areas and fields of the company, initially by adopting more universal and humanist values, and within a framework for collaboration.

    According to Alejandro, to create a culture 2.0 the following is necessary:
    • Access to and availability of information
    Minimizing the asymmetry between senders and recipients
    • Boosting the prosumer logic
    • Extending participation
    • A genuine interest in people generating the business and sharing contents
    • Interaction in decentralized network formats
    • Collective construction, collaboration and meritocracy
    • Willingness to listen and make use of this information
    Respect for people and giving up ego
    Minimizing control

    Every day more studies show that adopting and using 2.0 tools contributes positively to better company results. In this sense, in 2011 McKinsey statistically proved that businesses which internally and externally use technologies 2.0 to a larger extent, are more profitable. In the same study, 27% of companies declared to have better margins and market shares than their competitors. The conclusions state that “a connected company has 50% more of a chance of belonging to this group“. The latest study by McKinsey from November, about Strategy, shows how “social intelligence” guides decisions and how “internal and external social networks” are changing the classic decision-making process. The influence is clear, if from a common sense point of view we analyze the enormous amount of information that social networks provide, businesses need systems to be able to process the subject in an intelligent and suitable way. This leads to the conclusion that in the development of social CRMs there is a need to include all this “big data”, one of the greatest challenges facing companies over the next few years.

    In the most recent study by IBM on companies that have adopted a social business model, surprising data has been revealed such as:

    • 9 out of 10 businesses report benefits thanks to the adoption of a social business model
    • 57% of companies obtain better results than their competitors which do not have a social model
    Growth in expenditure on social software by companies is forecast at 61%, up to 2016, reaching a business figure of 6,400 million dollars.

    I would like to put a few questions to directors of Spanish companies with regard to this matter: Do you need more data? Do you need more time? What are you waiting for to get prepared? What are you waiting for to drive the strategic change and adopt your company’s social model? Do you want to start with a change in the company’s internal communication? Try out the Zyncro Enterprise Social Network.

    Mari Carmen Martín (@maricarmenmar) is a trained Industrial Psychologist and an expert in HR. Currently she works for Cloudtalent, a company of the Humannova group, where she is responsible for creating personal branding programs for executives and professionals.


  • Mari Carmen Martin 9:00 am on October 25, 2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , ,   

    Some confusion over the Enterprise 2.0 

    Estimated reading time: 4 minutes

    Many years and events have passed since Tim O’Reilly set the bases for the Web 2.0 at a conference in 2005, where he and other speakers outlined the key features of the Web 2.0.

    At that time, the Web 2.0 was defined as a series of Internet applications and pages that used collective intelligence to provide online interactive services.

    The Web 2.0, among many other features, continues to be characterized by:

    • It enables collective intelligence
    • The effects of the network are highly visible
    • Information is the next revolution
    • It marks the end of software obsolescence
    • Lightweight and easy programming and business models are key features
    • Software has gone to being a device
    • Users seek rich experiences
    • The whole is greater than the parts
    • The value of a group created on the networks increases exponentially, and therefore its implications are profound.

    When the Web 2.0 started to be considered a serious phenomenon, the US business schools came on the scene and started to perform some case studies, and in 2009 the term Enterprise 2.0 was coined with the publication of Andrew McAfee’s book. McAfee, Harvard University professor, defines the Enterprise 2.0 as the use of emergent software social platforms within companies, or between businesses and their partners, using social technologies (social software or social computing) in order to enhance collaboration and make business processes and flows more productive. These tools are part of a platform that can be understood by anyone in the company and last over time. They convert the task of knowledge into a wider, permanently visible experience.

    In some cases, it has been understood as a way of experimenting with new applications. The Enterprise 2.0 concept is much wider, as it deals with managing the company in collaboration, resolving business problems through collaboration, and achieving business results through collaboration. In his book Enterprise 2.0, McAfee makes it clear that new technologies are much more than a socializing part of the organization and that when they are applied intelligently to solve business problems, they help capture information that is scattered within the organization, converting it into knowledge that transforms quickly, generates and refines ideas, and finally brings the wisdom of the community.

    Many organizations confuse this term and often label themselves as Enterprises 2.0 when really they are experiencing evolutionary changes in their business models. For example, the sales of a company reached a higher call percentage via a call center. Due to the evolution of the markets, the changes in the customer behavior, and the implementation of a powerful online platform, the organization then started to change its business model towards online commerce. In this case, the evolution towards an e-commerce model can result in the implementation of collaborative technology and organization 2.0 models, but not the opposite.

    Mari Carmen Martín is a trained Industrial Psychologist and expert in HR. Currently she works for Cloudtalent, a company of the Humannova group, where she is responsible for creating personal branding programs for executives and professionals.


  • Mari Carmen Martin 9:00 am on September 20, 2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: ,   

    Don’t listen to the Social Media gurus 

    Estimated reading time: 5 minutes

    Editor’s note: Today, we’d like to welcome our latest addition as ZyncroBlogger. Mari Carmen Martín is a trained Industrial Psychologist and expert in HR. With a MBA and a PDE from ESADE Business School, she has worked in Change Management consultancy and HR management. Currently she works for Cloudtalent, a company of the Humannova group, where she is responsible for creating Personal Branding programs for executives and professionals.
    It is a pleasure to have you join our ZyncroBlog, Mari Carmen 😀

    The term guru comes from Sanskrit, meaning spiritual master, though the word guru is often used incorrectly to designate a mere professor or trainer in any area. In the case in point, in Social Media, this new use is also taking over. Following the original etymology, a true guru is a divinely enlightened master that has exceeded all limitations and created his/her identity with the Omnipresent Spirit. Such a master is singularly capable of guiding others on their inner journey towards the perception of God. Wow!! Basically that doesn’t apply to any management gurus we know, the ones that publish in the Harvard Business Review or teach classes in some prestigious universities or business schools in the US and old Europe. Of course, nor does it apply to Social Media or any other discipline, including experts in Quantum Physics and Astrophysics who amaze us every time they open their mouths.

    Well, if you are with me to this point, we already agree that a guru according to the etymological concept of the word is not the equivalent of a master. The paradox is the following: if a discipline as recent as Social Media where everything changes constantly, even the social networks themselves, the applications that monitor them, the concepts, the case studies, etc. how are we going to follow the advice of someone who is capable of guiding us? And where will they guide us to? Not long ago, the Holy Grail was Facebook. Today it’s Twitter, and tomorrow, what will it be? Yesterday, it was the number of followers, and now people, the conversations are the key. A few days ago, one of the main #TT conversations on Twitter was the applications that discover false followers, with the accounts with millions of followers like that of @Ladygaga or even the president of the United States, @BarackObama , estimated to having up to 20% of pretend followers.

    I’m sure you’ll agree that the most important thing in Social Media will always be and must always be the conversations and people, not numbers. If anyone tries to tell you otherwise, don’t trust them. We are humans interacting in a virtual world… never forget that. Naturalness, our own style, what we are in essence, and what we like to do and what we do professionally forms part of our personal brand. Without mentioning the social influence indicators @Klout, @Kred and the many others that will emerge.

    I’d like to finish off the way I started, by encouraging you to enjoy social media. Trial and error is the key: trial to try not to make a mistake, and if you do make one, don’t worry, I’m sure that you’ll learn a lot from it. Above all, use your discretion, deciding to do the right thing at each moment. Measure your results. Without analysis you can never know how you are doing, so have fun and measure. To finish, don’t believe everything I tell you either.

    • Nuno Bernardes 2:48 pm on September 20, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      I didn’t, I don’t and I won’t believe everything you say, but I couldn’t agree more on this article :) Like it! ( and believe me, I really did like it!)

    • Mari Carmen Martin 8:51 pm on September 25, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      Thank you, I also agree that’s why I got inspired and wrote!! You’re doing right!!

compose new post
next post/next comment
previous post/previous comment
show/hide comments
go to top
go to login
show/hide help
shift + esc