Tagged: teamwork Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Chris Preston 9:00 am on April 15, 2013 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , , , teamwork   

    Losing Meaning Amongst Complexity 

    Estimated reading time: 8 minutes

    I’ve recently been reading Dan Ariely’s latest book – The Upside of Irrationality. For those of you who don’t know him, he’s a frequent writer and speaker on the subject of human behavior, with a particular emphasis on why we do things that make no practical sense. In this book, he shares research into how we find meaning in what we do, and the consequences of not having it in our working lives. It’s fascinating stuff, and I could read his work all day.

    He makes a key point about the need for us to see the outcomes of our work successfully launched into the world, and that it’s the role of leaders to make sure people can join the dots between what they are doing, with the ultimate outcome of the organisation. In the book, he uses SAP as an example of where complexity is clouding this process – I don’t believe he’s saying SAP is a bad system; it’s just one of many, many tools that we now use for our daily lives… probably one too many.

    How bad is the problem he’s describing? Well, for example, in 2008 I was working with a police force that had just audited its systems – they had upwards of 350 different ones. That was four years ago – I dread to think how many they have now. Officers at the time were frustrated and disheartened with the situation, feeling that it took them away from the core of the job: to police.

    This situation is echoed in the pharmaceutical industry, one of the most heavily regulated groups you will ever find. With multi-billion dollar fines levied for illegal activity, the companies involved have layer upon layer of systems to prevent any, tiny, slippage of the ‘code’. This compliance is aimed to benefit the patient, but it has the hugely negative effect of creating a group of dispirited people who genuinely want to make people’s lives better, but feel the myriad of steps in the process simply don’t allow it. I’ve been part of trying to make the many systems more understandable, which is a Sisyphean task I would not wish on anyone.

    Thinking this over, one phrase came to mind, written by the equally fascinating author John Maeda, who, when talking about simplicity, uses this powerful equation “How simple can you make it / How complex does it have to be?” I love this statement, and I turned to it recently when working on an online profiling tool, which I was happily heaping with features that I thought would be wonderful. The final product would have needed days of patient explanation before anyone understood it, and a manual the size of a phone book. Applying John’s rule, I chopped out most of the things I’d added, and it worked just fine.

    But with my system, I had total control. With the police and pharmaceutical industry control is far from perfect, and the ‘clear lake’ slowly silts up as many contributors independently bring in their own needs. Organizations over a certain size lose clarity around complexity – no one has the reach or remit to ask the question ‘are we too complex?’ when it comes to systems and process. Many companies simplify their products, operations and footprint, but few ever truly simplify how they do business. As one police officer put it to me, “we are good at adding, but not taking away process.” Systems seem to disappear only when technology takes a step forward.

    There’s no doubt that the proliferation of systems is damaging our ability to find meaning in what we do, research, common sense and performance figures all bear witness to this fact. I’m not suggesting that we stack them up and burn them – we’re past that point. What I do feel is needed is local ownership of this challenge. It’s the job of the manager to ensure that people working in complex environments can see how their contribution adds to the organization’s ability to deliver services, goods or outcomes. No one wants a meaningless task, but the danger today is that the processes we’ve built up around the daily job make it difficult to see past the task of administration.

    Leaders and managers need to become practiced at holding conversations about the organization’s aims, what’s coming off the assembly line, and who they are helping. They need to recognize that people are blinkered by the systems they have to use, and need encouragement, support and time to step out of this and look at the wider picture.

    None of this is difficult, it’s about time and effort on the part of the people that really need their teams to perform well.

    And, if you have the capability, maybe also extinguish the odd system here and there – start a quiet revolution around simplifying working life. One of John’s governing laws is “Simplicity is about subtracting the obvious, and adding the meaningful.” So, if it’s a law, you’ve got to do it.

    Chris Preston (@Trimprop) is a Psychology graduate and specializes in internal communication and team development. He currently is Director at The Culture Builders.

     

     
    • David Zinger 10:58 pm on April 15, 2013 Permalink | Reply

      Well said Chris. I like the way you put Johm Maeda and Dan Ariely together. I have been thinking about this a lot in relationship to employee engagement and this was a very nice personal booster.

    • Chris Preston 10:13 am on April 16, 2013 Permalink | Reply

      Thanks David – they are two lovely authors, and I really wish that business could do more with John Maeda’s work – I think the challenge is it’s not as easy to link his thinking with business process as it is with product design. Glad it helped boost you!

  • Virginio Gallardo 9:00 am on April 10, 2013 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , teamwork, ,   

    The future of training will be social in communities 

    Estimated reading time: 8 minutes

    Editor’s note: Virginio Gallardo has let us post this article from his blog where he talks about what the new social learning environments in communities will be like. At Zyncro we are prepared for this revolution, what about you?

    We create much knowledge with a high expiration and this forces companies and professionals to reinvent knowledge management, training and business development processes.

    There are things from the past that we should bury in the past forever, because they block new ways of seeing the future. This is especially true in all things associated with what we know of education and training.

    We must learn to live with new concepts like personal learning environments, “gamification”, socialization of learning… although for many these terms are strange and unknown.

    However from all these new ways of learning, I suggest you reflect on the role of Communities, new organizational structures that are not mostly created with educational purposes, but that are the major source of learning in our professional future.

    Social learning, in communities

    In the company, learning in classrooms, memoristic, conceptual, separated from the reality, cognitive, disciplined learning… is disappearing. However, the classroom continues as the basis of business training. We must make the effort to forget this way of undersating education in companies, as the future has little to do with this reality.

    The new ways of learning will be often informal, outside the classroom, without programs, “serendipity”, ubiquitous (in any time and space), cooperative (social, in groups via conversations), participative or inclusive, where we are not just recipients, but also creators of content and ideas (prosumidors).

    Learning will be integrated in our company’s behavior and values as an on-going and collective phenomenon that will affect all us professionals constantly. For this reason, from the company we must ask and help our professionals to create their own personal social learning environments, which in some cases will be closely connected with the company, but on other occasions will be connected with external professionals or systems and educational institutions. The professionals that survive in the future will be socialnetworkers, experts in developing themselves in networks.

    Of all these new phenomena, the most revolutionary way of learning is that you learn with others in collaborative work environments: communities. Usually in technological environments where you connect, share, analyze, question, apply, share, analyze…

    The communities designed for learning are the so-called communities of practice. They are the most well-known: groups created with the purpose of developing a specialized knowledge, sharing learning based on the reflection on practical experiences. This type of community will be created in all companies and in all business environments (commercial, production, management, etc.)

    Many workers will be present in external communities of practice. Faced with the complexity and specificity of the knowledge of many of their workers, they will be trained with external resources, resulting in socially intelligent workers. And this will be done with external academic institutions and platforms, many on the Internet or in external informal groups. Many employees will create their own social learning space on which their professional success will depend.

    However, intelligent organizations will create, above all, another type of community. Communities that are not just used to share internal knowledge, but to resolve business problems, with the knowledge of employees being used to do this. Intelligent organizations will ensure their employees are connected in the network with other professionals, especially within the company.

    More efficient social environments for learning are not environments created to learn

    The most relevent learning theory for the digital era is connectivism, which according to George Siemens establishes that learning starts from the diversity that emerges from connecting people (nodes) and the quality of their connections, where decision-making is itself a learning process.

    The new ways of learning give increasing importance to action and real or simulated decision-making within the network learning process. The communities designed to improve processes, to reduce costs, to increase sales, to analyze new products, will be the communities where the professionals learn the most.

    The learning that will extend in the future will not separate learning and work, it will not separate theoretical learning and real decision-making, it will not separate between communities to learn and those used for decision-making. Communities where the most will be learned, those that will be most used in the future are the communities whose goals are associated with business: communities for improvement, innovation, creation, systemized…

    The goal of these communities is not to develop applied knowledge; the goal is change, the transformation or achievement of goals. They will be created to innovate, although they will be the greatest source of learning for new workers in the digital era.

    These communities will have many characteristics of the communities of practice, but proactivity and distributed leadership and the creation process of ideas to implementation (the so-called idea trip) will be the new bases of success. These communities will be the most mutable and flexible organizational structures, in which there will be roles and decision-making that require the management of complex knowledge thanks to the participation of diverse specialists.

    No, we won’t separate work from learning again. And this will make us think that perhaps there are memories from our childhood that we should not bury in the past forever and that we should remember school and how we learnt there… in the school yard. We will learn like we learnt when we were kids, experimenting, sharing and creating collaboratively, making mistakes and correcting ourselves, to achieve goals.

    Virginio Gallardo is Director of Humannova, a HR consultancy specialized in helping lead innovation in companies and manage the organizational transformation. He is author of the book “Liderazgo transformacional” and coordinator of “Liderazgo e Innovación 2.0”. This post was originally published on “Supervivencia Directiva“, where you can follow his thoughts.

     
  • Rafael Garcia-Parrado 9:00 am on September 3, 2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , teamwork   

    The importance of the right environment 

    Estimated reading time: 4 minutes

    Currently we are witnessing a series of structural changes that have a strategic consequence for organizations. While competitive advantages were traditionally yielded from assets owned by the company, nowadays it is knowledge that helps improve results.

    These days companies are organized in such a way to encourage business practices that generate and protect the company’s knowledge. For this reason, self-managed teams use collective intelligence as their modus operandi with the goal of the group’s ideas and conversations having an impact on the business results. Working together as a team is more productive than working as individuals.

    There are many advantages to working as a team: greater productivity, better quality, customer satisfaction, job satisfaction, and even greater organizational commitment.

    Knowledge generated in groups comes from the individual contributions of each member, meaning this knowledge is aveguarded from imitation by the competition. By creating numerous variables, competitor companies are unable to identify the source generating the competitive advantage, destabilizing this system of surveillance.

    In any case, although it may seem the miracle cure for improving productivity, collaboration does not always positively affect performance, as some individuals may present resistance to sharing their knowledge, something which essentially ends up deteriorating the group’s performance overall.

    It is at this point that the working environment comes into play. One of the greatest premises of economics is to achieve a goal beyond mere individual achievements, where work spaces are shared by people with different, complementary experiences, providing a multi-disciplinary training that covers multiple new areas from non-expert perspectives in order to obtain innovative solutions.

    To reiterate, no one individual can perform all these activities alone and generate improvements or innovations.

    Among the negative aspects of collaboration, there is opportunism, the so-called “stowaway” effect. An individual can corrupt other members into thinking that it is more profitable to reduce their performance, as they can still benefit from the system whether they have contributed or not, which would, without a doubt, destabilize the group’s entire operation.

    To conclude, we need to highlight the importance of the working environment as a key aspect within the group in order to encourage the sharing of knowledge and to work towards a common project, as it is a determining factor in internal collaboration among group members. Nor can we forget that ICTs cannot achieve the desired collaboration alone, but must act as a additional resource, since although they may be a necessary condition in some cases, they are not sufficient in themselves.

    Rafael García works as a consultant at Índize and has his own blog in Spanish,
    which at Zyncro we highly recommend: La Factoría Humana.

     

     
  • Pablo Fuentes 9:00 am on July 17, 2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , teamwork   

    The Foosball theory: Three key points to internal communication and teamwork 

    Estimated reading time: 4 minutes

    Introduction: Through a communication colleague, I heard about this article by Pachi Lanzas, expert in internal communication with extensive experience in charge of this function in companies such as Banco Santander Central Hispano, Acciona or Vodafone Spain, among others. Pachi wrote this post thinking about Relatos Corporativos, which fills me with pride.

    Teamwork. A cinch, right? We all work in teams. We have all received hundreds of courses, we all put it down as one of our skills in our resumes… No one would dare to say that they don’t teamwork Could you imagine the look on the recruiter’s face if you told him in the interview that you don’t know how to work in a team?

    Yes, we do it. We all share the same objectives, the same strategies, the same values. The guys at Internal Communication have done their jobs and we’ve learnt it all by heart. But what exactly does us working in teams mean? I think—which may be wrong, of course—in most cases it meets the foosball theory.

    I’m sure you’ve played foosball once or twice, right? Or at least, you’ve seen it played. In foosball, each row has its own zone. When the ball arrives, you spin that row. They all have the same goal: win the game. All “collaborate”: they pass the ball, defend, etc. But do they work as a team? No.

    To work in a team, you need to walk “in the shoes” of the other members of the organization. You need to “leave your comfort zone” and mix. Discover what they do and how you can collaborate better and create what we call “synergies”.

    And what does Internal Communication have to do with all that? How can it support the game “between the rows”? I propose three key ideas:

    1. Social networks. There are a great many experiences that have worked. Nowadays, the most obvious thing to do is to use social networks (See Five keys for approaching an internal communication 2.0 model) to improve internal communication flow.
    2. Design inter-area interaction plans. But is that it? Not even close. Knowing how to pass the ball between rows doesn’t mean that they know each other or “mix”. For that reason, you need to design interaction plans between different areas of the organization.
    3. Analysis and action plan. That’s what we consultants are for. I’m not going to explain what I would do in each organization, basically because I don’t believe there are any magic formulas valid for all. In each case, you need to make a careful, serious analysis of the situation and take your action plan from there.

    Foosball is a fun game. If you give a group of kids a Playstation or a foosball, 85% will choose foosball (I’ve tested that theory out). But in an organization, it’s not a game and it’s not as fun.

    Pablo Fuentes is internal communication manager at Telefónica Latin America. On his blog relatoscorporativos.com, you’ll find the best strategies and ideas for implementing communication 2.0 systems, as well as the latest trends in corporate communication.

     

     
  • Mireia Ranera 10:02 am on February 28, 2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , , , , , middle management, , , teamwork,   

    20 tips for a successful Social Network for Employees 

    Estimated reading time: 5 minutes

    Editor’s note: We would like to thank Mireia Ranera (Director of HR 2.0 at Íncipy, Digital Strategy and Innovation) who has shared with Zyncro her article, given below.

    Mireia gives her clear tips on how we should make the change needed to get the most out of an Enterprise Social Network.

    20 tips for a successful Social Network for Employees

    We had got used to the idea that all technological innovation (the first computers, cells, Internet, email…) started off initially in companies and slowly was transferred to the private sphere.

    Now the exact opposite is happening. Our employees have smartphones, tablets, computers… that are much more modern and innovative than the ones our companies give them.

    But leaving the devices themselves aside, new communication channels and ways of communicating associated with professional topics are appearing first outside the organization’s walls, such is the case with Professional Social Networks, enabling employees, collaborators… to communicate, relate, exchange experiences, ideas and opinions.

    Now we want to take advantage of what is happening naturally and spontaneously outside the company’s walls and transfer the potential of social networks to inside our companies with internal tools.

    There is no shortage of media, as a multitude of social platforms and software have appeared on the market to be implemented in enterprises, and cloud computing has made things much easier.

    All offer powerful functions like in the open networks: profiles, groups, directories, internal blogs, share spreadsheets, wikis, collaboration tools and communication in real time…

    Really excellent features for promoting interaction among members of a company, helping to strengthen relationships and collaboration, encourage the flow of knowledge and to leverage collective intelligence.

    What’s more, documented studies show that there are important benefits to be obtained from an Enterprise Social Network (McKinsey: “The rise of networked Enterprise: web 2.0 finds its payday”)

    So, it’s hardly surprising that, given this potential, more and more companies are seriously considering implementing social network for exclusive, private use for all its employees.

    But we must not fall into the trap of thinking that if our employees use the social networks outside the company’s, that they will also do so inside. Nor is it a case of simply integrating a powerful internal social software and waiting for our people to start to use it. It is an organizational change, a new internal way of working, communicating and relating to one another that must be guided and stimulated.

    When is an Enterprise Social Network for employees really successful?

    1. When the vision of its benefits starts from General Management.

    2. When this vision is shared without fear and with courage by the other Directors.

    3. When the Directors know how to transfer their support and priority to Middle Management.

    4. When it is communicated and users are involved in the objectives of the initiative and in the real advantages that the new platform will mean for them in their work.

    5. When IT becomes involved, supports it, provides their know-how instead of seeing it as a loss of power.

    6. When a platform that is suitable for the specific objectives and needs of the company is chosen. You need to choose the best tool and don’t see the project as just a matter of buying licenses.

    7. When the platform is so easy to use that it is intuitive and it generates a pleasant, simple and extremely visual user experience.

    8. When the implementation is planned and stimulated, and users’ participation is made dynamic.

    9. When it is implemented without imposition, and users are supported with patience so that they lose their fear, become familiar with it, and learn without pressure.

    10. When you don’t fall in the trap of thinking that users will start to use the tool spontaneously, automatically sharing information and working collaboratively.

    11. When actions are carried out and stimulated to encourage participation, collaboration and help break those initial barriers.

    12. When the results of implementation are measured (level of participation, reading, contributions, comments, interaction, etc.) and you act and reactivate participation based on those results.

    13. When the project is planned and started with pilot groups to learn, experiment and detect possible obstacles and opportunities.

    14. When the know-how learnt is applied and implementation is gradually extended to the rest of the organization.

    15. When users manage to improve aspects of their work with the new platform and achieve things that mail or traditional media couldn’t do.
    16. When specific, top priority and valuable projects for day-to-day operations for employees, teams and the company are transferred to the platform.

    17. When Management also participates actively and shares, exchanges ideas, makes suggestions… with the same transparency as the rest of users.

    18. When employees see their contributions recognized by their superiors (with mentions, thanks, recognition of talent…)

    19. When content of interest is shared and good repository of knowledge is generated that will be useful for everyone.

    20. When, as well as work issues, more personal issues are shared, as they help to humanize relationships and consolidate teams.

     

    My thanks to all my colleagues at Íncipy for helping me select these 20 tips, found from our day-to-day operations in supporting and stimulating Enterprise Social Networks.

    The list is open to all your contributions and suggestions. Will you help us extend it?

     

     
  • Ignasi Alcalde 9:30 am on February 13, 2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , conspiracy, , freeriding, , , , teamwork   

    Workneting and collaboration networks 

    Estimated reading time: 6 minutes

    Collaborative workMuch has been said, written and speculated about collaboration and co-creation on collaboration networks and about collaborative work. Networking and relations are important for getting work, but when commencing projects through collective, joint work, what is really important is workneting, in other words, starting lasting professional relationships.

    Workneting means a true collaboration that cannot be forced, which is more than just coordinating efforts, as individuals decide whether to collaborate or not, and their decision is both emotional and rational. It is people, the project and ultimately the tool and/or software that gives value and meaning to the collaboration.

    How do I start and maintain a collaboration network?

    Essentially, in line with what I mentioned in my post Why do people share knowledge?, among the many other factors, there are two basic conditions: matched expectations and unmatched knowledge.

    Regardless of the collaboration network type, there are 3 types of problems that we come across in collaboration networks and collaborative work that need to be taken into account:

    • Freeriding: In a collaboration network, relations are sustained by fairness in contributions. When someone gives back little or nothing at all at an insufficient rate and takes advantage of other’s contributions, the “freeriding” phenomenon occurs, which takes its name from those that use the subway without paying: the group has contributed to create an infrastructure/service and there are those that don’t collaborate in maintaining it.
    • Crowdsourcing: Another problem that wears with this is that at times, “crowdsourcing” occurs where a privileged agent takes credit for all the creativity of the group (e.g. a company). If the rules are clear and indicate who will use the result of the group’s creativity, then there is no basis for complaint if the person who called the “crowdsourcing” uses the results.
    • Conspiracy: Networks are established on trust. Trust is expectations on the capacity for commitment and response, on the other person’s competence, on the people we collaborate with. Complete sustained trust generates and stabilizes a reputation. But the reputation can be easily broken if the group decides to reduce the positive evaluation and reputation of an element on the network after each interaction or collaboration. The mechanism can be extremely quick and difficult to detect in systems that base their evaluation on people’s votes.

    As we can see, in an ideal team-collaboration experience we must be able to detect who’s committed as opposed to who is frustrated, as this can determine the team’s performance.

     

    Ignasi Alcalde is a multimedia consultant at Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (UOC). Once again, he has wanted to share his thoughts on collaborative work, which he usually publishes on his blog and on his Twitter timeline.

    We fully recommend all his previous articles!

     

     
  • Virginio Gallardo 12:11 pm on February 9, 2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , , teamwork   

    We are all transforming leaders in social networks 

    Estimated reading time: 6 minutes

    Liderazgo e innovación 2.0

    Editor’s note: Today on ZyncroBlog we want to share with you a book Liderazgo e Innovación 2.0” (Leadership and Innovation 2.0) (recently published by Netbiblo) from the team of Humannova, made up of Alicia Pomares, Sergio Gil, Eduard Legazpi, Juan Francisco Arza and Virginio Gallardo (coordinator).

    In this book, members of the consulting firm Humannova examine the change in paradigm in people management and organization, and the role that social networks have to play in integrating innovation in the day-to-day running of teams.

    The key theory of the book is that the future is for those who are capable of making their organizations change at the pace of its surroundings. There are many ways of describing this concept, but they have called it Innovation. For them, they propose establishing a new agenda in our companies that takes into account this new reality.

    This new agenda aims to assume the challenge of innovation and to continuously ensure the essential process of converting ideas into results.

    We’d like to thank all the co-authors of the book for letting us share the ideas and conclusions that their book makes, and we hope that, with our work in Zyncro, we are contributing by providing tools for fulfilling that transformation they propose.

    We’ve included a fragment from the introduction of the book. We hope you find it interesting!

     

    “We are all transforming leaders in social networks”

    A transforming leader is one who drives new innovative organizations where communities take a greater role, which are not based on the myth of the heroic CEO or Managing Director as the champion of change. Not even on a Managing Committee with “exceptional” characteristics.

    For an Organization 2.0 to possess an innovative capacity, the characteristics associated with leadership must be distributed throughout the organization and form part of hundreds of leaders and key professionals in an organization.

    The ideas need to emerge and be converted into daily behavior, which is unspectacular by itself but together is what creates this organizational capacity that we call innovation.

    The main mission of the new director is to create other leaders, to ensure that leadership conditions exist across the board.

    In other words, transforming their organization into a place where there is the highest number of people with top decision-making capacity, where anyone in their community is capable of implementing their ideas or those from others. The main mission of the director is to transform their organization into an Organization 2.0.

    We will analyze why leadership must be distributed in order for there to be innovation and why the people must have more freedom. Or if we translate this concept in business terms: greater independence, greater empowerment, greater capacity to assume risks.

    This will not be done for humanist beliefs about people; it is done out of need, because it is the most efficient way of innovating.

    For this reason, new tools are emerging that allow this new type of innovation: technologies 2.0.

    These are the new tools of innovation and their complexity is not technological; their complexity lies with how to manage communities with distributed leadership and how to create emotional links so that there is collaboration.

     

     
  • Sílvia Majó 10:21 am on February 3, 2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , teamwork   

    Internal branding, an intelligent plot 

    Estimated reading time: 4 minutes

    Today we’ve a great opportunity to talk about the book by Alejandro Formanchuk, one of the most important organizational communication experts in Argentina. On his blog Todo Significa (Spanish)  he shares his extensive experience in internal communication and has compiled a summary of it under the title Branding Interno, Una Trama Inteligente (Internal Branding: An Intelligent Plot only in Spanish right now).

    We would like to thank Alejandro for letting us dedicate a post to the main lessons we’ve taken from his new book which can be applied in our organizations.

    To start, when we want to place the value of internal communication or internal branding in companies, we need to ask ourselves, like the author did, what possesses value in the corporate world?

    The answer lies in Branding Interno, Una Trama Inteligente with authors such as Jonas Ridderstrale and Kkell Nordstrom, who declare that the classic balance sheet captures less than a quarter of the real value of a modern company.

     

    75% of that value can’t be seen, accounted, measured and recorded by those old balance sheets

     

    That’s what Formanchuk maintains. For him, this figure has a clear translation:

    • A machine, a building, a product: 15%.
    • The loyalty and the positive image in the eyes of your customers, partners, employees and others: 75%.

    Departing from this or from a similar qualitative calculation made by other authors, which places human capital at the center of any successful corporate operation, Formanchuk’s reading is a must that you should flick through at the very least.

    In it, you’ll discover important maxims for designing valuable internal communication:

    • Many of the most important resources in a company are not tangible.
    • Employees are not an internal audience. They’re an outside actor.
    • The barriers are gone between external and internal communication.
    • People themselves are a branding channel.
    • Internal branding is simply just branding.

    Having made these reflections, Formanchuk puts forwards some guidelines for determining the actions that can be taken from them. For the author of Todo Significa,  brand value is built from within the organization. For that reason, we talk about strategic decisions that necessarily involve integrating disciplines. In this sense, remember that organizations mustn’t forget that they need to:

    • Manage the brand from within the company.
    • Execute branding actions designed for and aimed at employees.
    • Carry out internal communication done with branding techniques.
    • Organize ERM programs (Employee Relationship Management).
    • Employ B2E strategies (Business-to-Employees) driven by “EVP” (Employer Value Proposition).

    To all this, from Zyncro we could add the best practices proposed by the manual for Enterprise Social Networking.

    And a final quote from the author in his book:

    The people making up a company are its best ambassadors.

     
  • Marta Zaragoza 9:30 am on January 30, 2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , teamwork   

    The golden rules for entrepreneurship 

    Estimated reading time: 5 minutes

    I started out on ZyncroBlog by commenting my ideas on what enterprising initiative means in a wider sense of the word. I encouraged you all to be enterprising and carry out all initiatives possible through a journey of constant learning that enables you to develop new and better skills and competences.

    Retaking the comparison we made of the entrepreneur’s journey with Snakes and Ladders, today I’ve got some golden rules to remember when traveling around the board to achieve your mission and vision.

    Golden rules that are essentially factors that affect any enterprising initiative:

    Firstly, our competences that represent our integrated set of knowledge, skills, aptitudes and attitudes that we put into play in any situation or activity.

     

    We need to identify our competence resources!!

     

    Both resources acquired in informal and formal contexts. The goal is to be able to design an improvement plan that will help us to achieve our objectives, while being sufficiently inspiring and motivating to encourage us to continue to develop our professional and enterprising competences.

    Secondly, values or beliefs that limit us or build barriers against our enterprising initiatives; some our own, others imposed by our surroundings.

    For greater comfort and quality of life, understood as the level of goods and services we’re capable of acquiring and consuming, we have adopted behavior and attitudes characterized by:

    • Wanting a stereotyped success, which brings us far from any initiative that involves going out and finding our own concept of success;
    • Seeing a job “for life” as the best option for us;
    • Believing that as employees we’re not paid to think, and less still to propose and even carry out our own initiatives, and:

    Being true inter-entrepreneurs!

     

    • Or simply, running from any situation that involves risk or failure, giving up on the only factor in life that involves true learning.

    All these beliefs have been fed, among others, by an authoritarian, hierarchical business culture and a “human resources” management model that doesn’t take into account that those resources are “people”.

     

    People with extraordinary competences waiting to be discovered…


    And willing to be promoted in order to contribute to the good progress of those companies, with initiative, independence and creativity.

    Thirdly, we should mention alignment with the environment. This involves being able to identify and analyze all information emerging from the surroundings, be they economic, socio-cultural, political, technological, environmental, etc. in order to prevent threats and design measures and leverage opportunities.

     

    Any successful initiative with vision for the future will have to watch for the wellbeing of its people and care for the environment.


    Last but not least, cooperation and online work. Working as a team with all the people involved and being able to commence shared projects in all areas. Undoubtedly here the role of Enterprise Social Networks for Enterprises, like Zyncro, is key, as they enable an optimum management of knowledge in the company, which in turn aids cooperation among and between teams.

    To conclude, I sincerely believe that the most interesting and exciting part of the journey is not reaching the end, but being able to develop our competences and share success and being in harmony with our own values and our surroundings.

     
  • Carlos del Pozo 10:45 am on January 19, 2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , departments, , , teamwork,   

    Zyncro Features: Departments section 

    Estimated reading time: 4 minutes

    What is a Zyncro department?

    It’s one of the organizational blocks making up the structure of each organization in Zyncro that can be defined in the Organization Configuration section of the Control Panel.

    Users with department creation permissions can create departments (this permission is given to them by the administrator in the Control Panel, in the User Management section) and only the person that created the department (main owner) or the owners appointed by the main owner can add users to that department.

    Only corporate users from the same organization can become part of those departments or companies.

    Other users of the organization can follow a department or company to stay up to date with the latest news in that department or company.

    What appears in the “Departments” section?

    The departments created in a company are always shown in the Departments section (tab between Files and Groups and Tasks, if there is one).

    Each department has a name and is accompanied by an image associated with the activity that department carries out, a description and button to follow it.

    Existing departments can be sorted or organized according to:

    • Only departments whose name starts with a specific letter
    • All departments in ascending (A-Z) or descending (Z-A) order

    Members of a department

    The sections (tabs) shown in each department are:

    Messages: This section appears by default when accessing a department. It shows you all communication happening within the department: messages written by the main owner (they appear by department), uploaded files or notifications of new members that have joined.

    Files: It shows you all files that have been uploaded to the department. This action can only be done by members of that department.

    Members: These are the people with their photos, statuses and email addresses that make up the department. This page enables you to follow these users or stop following them if you are already following them.

    Under the Permissions column, you’ll see who is the main owner within the department. The main owner can add or remove people from the group, change the information shown for the department they “belong to”.

    Followers: These are the people that see the department’s actions (messages, actions on files, people added or removed) on their Home section.

    Their department is shown in brackets in a blue color (link).

    More about us: This section is designed for adding information, links of interest, references to the department. This information can be entered in HTML format.

    Zyncro lets you group users by groups and by departments.

    Create your own customized structure within your company!

     

     
c
compose new post
j
next post/next comment
k
previous post/previous comment
r
reply
e
edit
o
show/hide comments
t
go to top
l
go to login
h
show/hide help
shift + esc
cancel