Pretzel Logic – Enterprise 2.0

A few days back, I had the pleasure of joining Bob Thompson, editor of CustomerThink on an interview as part of the Inside Scoop series.

CustomerThink is a online community of business leaders looking to create profitable customer-centric enterprises. In their own words, the community covers Customer Relationship Management, Customer Experience Management and Social Business.

Bob and I  had a good discussion on de-mystifying the value and promise of strategic collaboration, the changing customer, distribution and production dynamics that businesses face today and how to drive performance.

We talked about what’s missing in the enterprise business stack, innovation in collaborative and social technologies and what we are seeing in our work with some of the largest organizations in the world. And of course, the connection between Social CRM and the Collaborative Enterprise (often called Enterprise 2.0)

Pop on over to the CustomerThink website to listen in.

Thanks for having me, Bob.

p.s. I could have sworn I published this post but I just realized it was sitting in my drafts folder.

I’ve been buying computing hardware as a business customer from Dell for over 7 years now. All of our infrastructure technology as well as desktop equipment almost exclusively came from them. Servers, Printers, Laptops etc.

My experience, averaged out over this period with Dell has been a net positive. Their stuff works, the service and follow up has generally been good. A few issues such as a customer satisfaction calls at 6:30am (!?!), too many requests for equipment identification numbers after I’ve entered it into the touch tone system as I get volleyed from support rep to support rep. I can live with some of this as we don’t have reasons to call that often. And as a person, I’m generally not one to dwell unless you really get my goat.

Then a serious problem hit a few days ago where I really needed Dell to come through for me. My under-warranty hard drive was about to fail which would mean all my purchased software was about to be wiped out. So I asked Dell for replacement copies of software and the “its Microsoft’s problem” syndrome kicked in. So I went back and forth between these two ‘partners’ who’s reps had expert reasons for why the problem wasn’t theirs to solve.

During this, all I could think of is that the Dell has all the data concerning my purchase and loyalty history for seven straight years and yet, they wouldn’t budge to make this as simple as possible for me. When I mentioned to the these vendors that I have registered the software when I made the purchase (incase, the issue here was verification that I was the lawful owner), I was told, this information is captured only for future marketing purposes and that  customer support doesn’t get access to this data. Wait, my taking the time to register my software is to serve you and not me?

Please note my first comment: My experience with Dell is a net positive in spite of this. And as much as its unpopular in many circles to say you like Microsoft products, except for Vista, I really do like their stuff, personally. So this is not about these providers in particular.

The point is, CRM is a mess. Internal departments are not sharing my customer profile to appreciate my historical allegiance to the organization. OEM partners who had to collaborate to have the slightest chance at winning my business are not sharing data amongst themselves. Even when they know that keeping me as a long term customer is predicated on them both serving me equally well. As organizations, we just don’t have a handle on how to use what we already know about the customer.

As tempting it is to add to the chorus of many altruistic “CRM got it all wrong and Social CRM is here to reinvent customer interaction” or for that matter, “SCRM is strategy and not technology” (is it? or is it an execution path to established business strategy?) blog posts, Social CRM is going to accentuate the problems of CRM. The thing with SocialCRM is that it adds more customer data to CRM records when many organizations have not learnt how to act on existing data. Whist a quick look at my Twitter usage can give Dell an idea of my profile, what good will that do if organizations are not going to act on hard data they have today: How much I’ve spent with them over the years, my active registrations of software I’ve purchased, my loyalty based on the fact that I religiously buy new equipment from them every year.

So whilst we look at newly minted Gartner Magic Quadrants on Social CRM providers (Jive Software offers a copy here with registration), organizations need to understand how much house cleaning they need to do first. And unless that happens, SocialCRM only gives organizations a data migraine – more info that they don’t know what to do with.

Paul Greenberg, who sits at the pinnacle of the ‘whose who’ digerati when it comes to CRM and Social CRM has an excellent write up today about Gartner’s Magic Quadrant and the Gartner Event on Social CRM. A central point of this post is that whilst community and engagement are important and vendors to date have made solid progress, Social CRM integration with CRM to truly improve customer relationships is critical. And that nut has not been cracked yet. When the report was released a few days ago, I said to Mitch Lieberman, another SCRM thought leader on twitter:

“@mjayliebs those in the Gartner MQ #SCRM leader quadrant better have figured out lead gen in a meaningful, budget shifting way. think not”

My larger point (140 characters don’t often lend well to making larger points) was that this needs to move from community to supporting business tasks and an overall CRM initiative whether that is lead gen, or in my case, customer service and the like. In the case of my issue with Dell, everyone needed access to the same hard data (my company profile, purchase history), my probability of remaining a Dell/Microsoft customer based on my social graph , my in-warranty status on hardware and all OEM software (see that I was the legitimate owner of the software and simply wanted a replacement copy and only thanks to an in warranty failed hard drive).

We tend to think that using social media monitoring and listening systems reduces noise and lets us focus on things that matter in our customer relationships. I respectfully disagree. Until its surgically helping you execute business and process objectives more effectively, its still noise. Just squeaky clean. I asked Esteban Kolsky, a respected CRM analyst to chime in:

We have seen the positive effects that monitoring social media and acting on it in real time can have in an organization.  Even Dell, mentioned in this example, managed to earn some money in social media be leveraging real-time, social marketing.  However, that is not SCRM.  Social CRM is where the social data and the transactional data are analyzed together to create deeper insights that ever before.  Using Social data we can amplify what we know about customers by adding a sentimental, emotional layer to what we know — and that helps smart companies drive sales cycles and create better revenue models.  Are we there yet? not even close, we first need to figure out a way to integrate the socially-collected data with stored transactional data, then how to create better insights, and finally how to to act on them. Yes, it is a lot of work — but the rewards far surpass any amount of work you have to put into it.

Failing house cleaning on existing CRM design and decisive use of Social data as part of that revamp, we’ll just have glorified community forums that no doubt look far more sexier than forums of yore, but don’t mean much when it comes to tacking large scale operating and growth objectives of organizations.

I’ve been a buying computing hardware as a business customer from Dell for over 7 years now. All of our infrastructure technology as well as desktop equipment almost exclusively came from them. Servers, Printers, Laptops etc.

My experience, averaged out over this period with Dell has been a net positive. Their stuff works, the service and follow up has generally been good. A few issues such as a customer satisfaction calls at 6:30am (!?!), too many requests for equipment identification numbers after I’ve entered it into the touch tone system as I get volleyed from support rep to support rep. I can live with some of this as we don’t have reasons to call that often. And as a person, I’m generally not one to dwell unless you really get my goat.

Then a serious problem hit a few days ago where I really needed Dell to come through for me. My under-warranty hard drive was about to fail which would mean all my purchased software was about to be wiped out. So I asked Dell for replacement copies of software and the “its Microsoft’s problem” syndrome kicked in. So I went back and forth between these two ‘partners’ who’s reps had expert reasons for why the problem wasn’t theirs to solve.

During this, all I could think of is that the Dell has all the data concerning my purchase and loyalty history for seven straight years and yet, they wouldn’t budge to make this as simple as possible for me. When I mentioned to the these vendors that I have registered the software when I made the purchase (incase, the issue here was verification that I was the lawful owner), I was told, this information is captured only for future marketing purposes and that  customer support doesn’t get access to this data. Wait, my taking the time to register my software is to serve you and not me?

Please note my first comment: My experience with Dell is a net positive in spite of this. And as much as its unpopular in many circles to say you like Microsoft products, except for Vista, I really do like their stuff, personally. So this is not about these providers in particular.

The point is, CRM is a mess. Internal departments are not sharing my customer profile to appreciate my historical allegiance to the organization. OEM partners who had to collaborate to have the slightest chance at winning my business are not sharing data amongst themselves. Even when they know that keeping me as a long term customer is predicated on them both serving me equally well. As organizations, we just don’t have a handle on how to use what we already know about the customer.

As tempting it is to add to the chorus of many altruistic “CRM got it all wrong and Social CRM is here to reinvent customer interaction” or for that matter, “SCRM is strategy and not technology” (is it? or is it an execution path to established business strategy?) blog posts, Social CRM is going to accentuate the problems of CRM. The thing with SocialCRM is that it adds more customer data to CRM records when many organizations have not learnt how to act on existing data. Whist a quick look at my Twitter usage can give Dell an idea of my profile, what good will that do if organizations are not going to act on hard data they have today: How much I’ve spent with them over the years, my active registrations of software I’ve purchased, my loyalty based on the fact that I religiously buy new equipment from them every year. 

So whilst we look at newly minted Gartner Magic Quadrants on Social CRM providers (Jive Software offers a copy here with registration), organizations need to understand how much house cleaning they need to do first. And unless that happens, SocialCRM only gives organizations a data migraine – more info that they don’t know what to do with.

Paul Greenberg, who sits at the pinnacle of the ‘whose who’ digerati when it comes to CRM and Social CRM has an excellent write up today about Gartner’s Magic Quadrant and the Gartner Event on Social CRM. A central point of this post is that whilst community and engagement are important and vendors to date have made solid progress, Social CRM integration with CRM to truly improve customer relationships is critical. And that nut has not been cracked yet. When the report was released a few days ago, I said to Mitch Lieberman, another SCRM thought leader on twitter:

“@mjayliebs those in the Gartner MQ #SCRM leader quadrant better have figured out lead gen in a meaningful, budget shifting way. think not”

My larger point (140 characters don’t often lend well to making larger points) was that this needs to move from community to supporting business tasks and an overall CRM initiative whether that is lead gen, or in my case, customer service and the like. In the case of my issue with Dell, everyone needed access to the same hard data (my company profile, purchase history), my probability of remaining a Dell/Microsoft customer based on my social graph , my in-warranty status on hardware and all OEM software (see that I was the legitimate owner of the software and simply wanted a replacement copy and only thanks to an in warranty failed hard drive).

We tend to think that using media monitoring and listening systems reduces noise and let is focus on things that matter in our customer relationships. I respectfully disagree. Until its surgically helping you execute business and process objectives more effectively, its still noise. I asked Esteban Kolsky, a respected CRM analyst to chime in:

We have seen the positive effects that monitoring social media and acting on it in real time can have in an organization.  Even Dell, mentioned in this example, managed to earn some money in social media be leveraging real-time, social marketing.  However, that is not SCRM.  Social CRM is where the social data and the transactional data are analyzed together to create deeper insights that ever before.  Using Social data we can amplify what we know about customers by adding a sentimental, emotional layer to what we know — and that helps smart companies drive sales cycles and create better revenue models.  Are we there yet? not even close, we first need to figure out a way to integrate the socially-collected data with stored transactional data, then how to create better insights, and finally how to to act on them. Yes, it is a lot of work — but the rewards far surpass any amount of work you have to put into it.

Failing house cleaning on existing CRM design and decisive use of Social data as part of that revamp, we’ll just have glorified community forums that no doubt look far more sexier than forums of yore, but don’t mean much when it comes to tacking large scale operating and growth objectives of organizations.

The flagship Enterprise 2.0 Conference in Boston, Massachusetts ended last week. I’m going to pen two posts to cover my thoughts on the achievements and challenges in the Enterprise 2.0 sector based on observations at the conference. This post covers the big (positive) shifts and the conference itself.

A quick disclaimer first: I’m on the advisory board of the Enterprise 2.0 conference.

The conference attracted a gaggle of practitioners, leading enterprise analysts and bloggers, and vendors who opined about latest techniques in collaborative approaches and technologies to improve engagement and relationships between employees, partners and customers.

(Image: JP Rangaswami / Credit: Alex Dunne)

For my part, along with colleague Oliver Marks, I co-chair the strategy and execution planning track which , like our work, is focused on identifying where collaborative approaches can accelerate workplace and process performance and on how to plan, sell, design and execute programs.

Every year the conference pushes management and engagement boundaries by introducing newer concepts, often in the face of lava-like progress on the ground. In its 4th year, my sense is that we can definitively see a tiny white light at the end of the tunnel with respect to the ultimate stamp of legitimacy – the eventual emergence of a capital and operational budget line item to build and support 21st century collaborative enterprises.

Thanks to the work of some very dedicated practitioners (there’s scores more), there’s no  doubt that the Enterprise 2.0 case studies of tomorrow are now being written. It’s a long road but these will eventually showcase more agile and fluid collaborative approaches that leverage existing process and collaborative systems and initiatives which will surface the best minds across the enterprise ecosystem to solve tough business challenges and enable effective competition.

A few large themes, and in particular order……

The Tide’s About to Rise

Tools won’t drive but they will enable. The entry of established vendors and a maturation of pure play positioning signals a decisive shift from feel-good to problem solving and growth focus.

• First, the traditional pillars of the Enterprise Software business attended and showed off their Enterprise 2.0 wares, en masse. We had platform offerings and extensions from the likes of SAP (Streamwork and Elements), Cisco (Quad), Microsoft (SharePoint 2010) and Novell (Pulse) and IBM (Lotus Connections).
• Second, proven vertical specialists such as Saba Software (Saba Live) and Success Factors (Cubetree) talked about collaborative offerings weaved into traditional talent management and workplace performance constructs.
• Third, the case for connected threads between employees, partners and customers gets stronger. Vendors such as Jive Software, Telligent and BlueKiwi offer strong platforms for customers ready to tackle multi-pronged solutions, whole hog.
• Fourth, a few horizontal platform providers woke up to the fact that they need to shove a foot into the door that leads to the process side of the house if they want to be taken seriously. Beyond experimental or tactical applications of collaborative constructs that are often void of purpose, they are moving from carpet bombing Enterprise 2.0 to launching surgical strikes. PBworks for instance announced strong collaborative wrappers to traditional CRM processes. CrowdCast latched on its predictive smarts to a known problem at every enterprise – how to turn today’s often dormant, “for the executive-brass-only” business intelligence capabilities into for-the-masses decision facilitation that helps any employee estimate the consequences of their decisions before they take action. And Socialtext introduced a beta release of what looked to be a social middleware layer that adds engagement to process.
• Fifth, those that are unapologetic about their approach to doing one thing and one thing only – simpler and better than anyone else, stuck to their story. Providers such as Socialcast and ThougtFarmer. The former continues to proudly call itself a light weight activity stream that adds much needed engagement to large, complex environments. The latter continues to innovate to gives you a far better intranet that replaces your asynchronous portal design, circa 1991.

Content, engagement and process – all in context. From a vendor offering perspective, that’s a first and must be celebrated.

Closely tied to this is another trend. Seasoned enterprise sales and marketing executives are being successfully lured to Enterprise 2.0 vendors. I spent a lot of time with them and one thing is clear: They are not adopting the party line. Rather they are channeling the passion and energy of cause driven entrepreneurs towards practical value propositions that customers will possibly care about. 

The reason I’ve led with vendor innovation here is that historically speaking, there’s a significant, practical take away from the entry of established players. The ramifications of platform and vertical process specialists betting on collaborative enterprises, means this: We’re about to see hundreds of millions of marketing dollars put to work to drive awareness and education around Enterprise 2.0, Social, Collaborative (or your jargon of fancy) forms of engagement in the workplace. Add to that, the network effect about to ensue when new and existing ecosystems around these vendors (Strategy Consultants, SI’s, ISVs, Resellers) start to articulate solutions to business problems for their customers based on these innovations.

This rising tide will lift all boats and likely cement a stable foothold for Enterprise 2.0 in the application stack (a big caveat to this that I will cover in a subsequent post). The technology may come from your process vendor, or from a pure play. Regardless the programmatic spend to realize business value will need its own budget.

None of this means that customers will be guaranteed performance acceleration or that smaller vendors will achieve instant stardom. This level of exposure may well highlight some of the rudderless propositions afforded around the altruistic value of E 2.0 that seasoned customer executives will instantly balk at. Dennis Howlett covers this with great insight on his ZDNet blog. And I’ve written before about the risk of the E2.0 marketplace facing the same fate as portal vendors. That continues to be a genuine possibility.

But one thing is certain: the Enterprise 2.0 message will now have far, far deeper tentacles into mahogany row. That’s good for big platform players as well as their pure play counterparts that don’t have the budgets to educate as many buyers as they would like to, on the value and promise of Enterprise 2.0. Many large buyers don’t allow single source deals and so, RFPs will often have to cast a wider net and as a consequence, expose pure play innovation in the marketplace

Distributed Customer Stories Beyond the Obvious

Most of the case studies to date have been skewed towards either Hi-Tech or Professional Services (consultants, agencies, etc) organizations. What’s unsettling about this to me is that neither are strong sample sets to extrapolate a credible assessment of wide scale acceptance across other industry sectors. I’m not in any way suggesting that it’s been easy going for orgs in hi-tech or services, but relatively speaking, hi-tech is traditionally an early adopter of technology enabled innovation and so its natural that a lot of Silicon Valley-esque organizations have jumped in first. In the case of Professional Services, knowledge and expertise is itself the end product. And so making the case that finding better ways to surface and reuse knowledge can more directly improve margins, if done correctly. Two very strong drivers to give E2.0 a shot. Again, some of these are my customers, and at others, I personally know internal champions who are banging their heads against the wall with adoption and cultural issues.

All that said, relatively speaking, what we’ve been missing all along are strong, tangible case studies from other sectors that are not early adopters or don’t naturally see a direct link to the bottom line. Many of these are extremely successful organizations in their markets but from a collaboration standpoint, some are still evaluating SharePoint 2007.  But that’s begun to change. We see it in our work and we finally saw a respectable number of case studies and customer stories from companies in other sections. Examples are YUM! Brands (restaurants), Harvard Business Review (publishing), NASA (government), Thomson Reuters (financial media), Vanguard (financial services) and Abbot Labs (life sciences) that made great presentations on their strategic uptake on open, collaborative constructs to drive performance.

Articulating the Business Case

A seemingly less critical point but one that I think is extremely important. This time around, customers were far more articulate when describing the inefficiency or limitations of existing processes and transactive designs before jumping into the promise of collaborative constructs. Enterprise 2.0 is often labeled as a solution looking for a problem and for good reason. In two customer panels that I moderated on Customer Networks and HR and Workplace performance, practitioners stated succinct, large scale business inefficiencies and competitive and market economics factors that have compelled their organizations to consider new ways of conducting business. These practitioners have been rooted in a structured process laden world over the last decade or two and spoke with authority when it comes to articulating what’s wrong first before gushing at what can be so right with Enterprise 2.0.

Where some organizations/departments have the luxury of being led by the likes of John Chambers (Cisco), Lem Lasher (CSC) and Brad Smith (Intuit) who naturally consider collaborative enterprises to be a necessarily utility to compete effectively and often without ROI prerequisites, most look for far stronger, tangible business case justifications from the get go. I’ve seen my customers in both camps, but there’s more customers who look for a strong articulation of what’s wrong with how things are done today and a seasoned justification to try a new approach. And we saw this maturity of critical business justification at least to the extent that an executive can’t afford to not listen to cause and effect arguments. That’s a huge step forward. 

The Definitive Watering Hole for the 21st Century Enterprise

The point that often gets lost in the midst of constructive criticism is that we have a strong physical platform with the Enterprise 2.0 conference to compliment digital and often disconnected conversations on Twitter and the blogs to help each other. As important, the conference offers a vehicle for attendees to share suggestions and for organizers to respond with solutions the next time around. There’s always a yearning from attendees to see more case studies, to see less vendors and consultants on stage and I think that’s legitimate.

Honestly, I don’t personally have a categorical objection to vendors presenting on the keynote stage. The reality is that vendors are no different from the rest of us in one particular aspect: They also share a passion and vision for a better way to conduct business and are putting their money where their mouth is, every day. Unfortunately one too many vendor keynote speakers launched demos where they should have taken the allocated 20 minutes to share industry vision and big market and customer problems that need tackling. It’s implied that their offerings address these challenges. What we largely got was 1.0 marketing to a 2.0 crowd. A big opportunity was lost to level with the rest of the community by offering new pathways to value and by inspiring the collective. These were in sharp contrast to keynotes from the likes of JP Rangaswami, Professor Andrew McAfee, Vinnie Mirchandani and others.

But we also saw more senior executives and mangers from the buy side present or join panels, this time around. I evaluated last year’s event by looking at the degree of practitioner focus and gave it a thumbs up. This year, the conference offered an all day Adoption track chaired by the able Susan Scrupski that gave practitioners significant leeway to design their own day long workshop, panels and sessions. So the conference built on last years practitioner centric efforts.

The conference is now in the early stages of catering to the entire Enterprise 2.0 life cycle: Credibly articulating the business case for layering in a collaborative backbone to enrichen process, understanding the tools, applications and platforms, getting adoption and tactical planning right, and holistically looking at interaction between customers and employees. With the help of a strong cadre of instructors and track chairs including Mike Gotta, Irwin Lazar, Tony Byrne, Oliver Marks, Susan Scrupski, Rachel Happe , Dion Hinchcliffe, Alistair Croll and Larry Cannell.

Whilst still consultant/analyst heavy, the conference is also become a clearing house for not only customer success stories but about the journey, as was made evident by over 30 customer stories presented on the keynote stage, in panels as well as in session talks.  Kudos to TechWeb and in particular the management, sales, marketing and operational teams for their flawless organization of the event itself.

Some Must Read Posts on the Event

There’s a lot of blog posts and media coverage offering up excellent opinion on the conference and state of Enterprise 2.0 from the likes of Oliver Marks, Thomas Vander Wal, Bertrand Duperrin and Nigel Fenwick.  I’m still digesting and will expand on these in my next post. But if your looking for the best blow by blow coverage, that comes from V Mary Abraham, Bill Ives and Patti Anklam. (please comment if I missed anyone and I’ll update)

What Comes Next:

It wasn’t all peachy. In a subsequent post, I’ll try and cover some of the following items that I suggest we deal with, pronto.

• We’re still lacking adequate operational metrics alignment to be taken more seriously.
• Addressing cultural nuances is certainly an important success factor. But we’re hiding behind cultural arguments as the universal culprit, far more than we rightfully should.
• The millennial discussion is mostly without substantial evidence and downright asinine.
• There’s a giant disconnect between today’s customer expectations and the ability of employees to fulfill these expectations. I covered this in my keynote at the International Forum in Milan week before last, and Ill try to add insights from others, based on my discussions.
• Unnecessary complexity added to design frameworks and to toolsets which, will only overwhelm potential customers.

On a personal note, this is the one event in the year that I look forward to most. And it did not disappoint. I chatted with lots of old pals into the wee hours of the morning, and had the good fortune to meet people who visit this blog and to thank them for taking the time to read and engage. Some in the community use this platform to genuinely bond once a year and to graciously share experiences, lessons learned and to celebrate the work of everyone involved. And you can’t put a price on that.

Next month I travel to Milan to speak at the 3rd International Forum on Enterprise 2.0.  A premier event on next generation enterprises and the processes and technologies that will power them, this event attracts business and technology executives across Europe and respected thinkers, advisors and practitioners that play a role driving business performance at leading organizations.

There’s some excellent content on tap at this event. The agenda is packed with purpose driven sessions around Marketing, HR and Innovation showcasing real world, practical experiences on applying new, more current techniques to performance.

Keynote

The conference has a great line up of keynotes and speakers including Andrew Gilboy – Oracle and Emanuele Scotti – Open Knowledge, Hutch Carpenter – Spigit and Verna Allee of Value Networks.

I will be keynoting the conference on the implications of the social customer on today’s organizational design and infrastructure. As important, the need for collaborative enterprise design to engage customers, partners and employees, to cater to this new customer dynamic.  I hope to help frame the discussion for executives as they prepare to respond to these changes in customer dynamics.

Workshop

In addition, I’ll do a workshop on the first day that provides a primer on the process from Idea to Launch. This 4 hour workshop will include instructional content, do’s and don’ts, pitfalls to avoid, and how to align the promise of open, collaborative constructs with discrete performance goals. One particular area where we will go deep is the pitch – in addition to instructional content, we’ll moderate a panel of vendor CEOs that pitch the most skeptical customers on a daily basis on how newer collaborative approaches can move the needle. We’re thrilled to have leaders at Telligent, Broadvision and Blue Kiwi join the panel. A special thank you to them for giving back to the larger Enterprise 2.0 community by sharing insights and practical knowledge. Finally, we will also involve practitioners that will tell their story on how they launched Enterprise 2.0 initiatives at their organizations.

More about the conference

The conference has three primary themes as stated on the website:

• Inside the organization: Intranet 2.0, Community Management, Human Resources 2.0, Social Learning, Organizational Network Analysis, IT Governance

• Outside the organizations: Social CRM, Sales Communities, Social Media Marketing, Social Media Monitoring

• Innovation: Idea and Innovation Management, Crowdsourcing and Idea generation, Prediction markets

An excerpt from an interview conducted by ComputerWorld (translated from Italian) with Emanuele Quintarelli, one of the organizers of the event:

Among the more than 40 actions to point out the contribution of Hutch Carpenter on 3C innovation to Sameer Patel on the use of collaborative approaches to improve business performance and ultimately the joint submission by Mark Tamis and Esteban Kolsky on how to compete by building a business client-centered. In addition to experts and also indicate that twelve managers of major Italian companies will go up on stage to confront so candid and transparent about the real risks and opportunities of the introduction of similar approaches in business.

More on the conference, the esteemed list of speakers, and agenda here. 

Hope to see you there!

I read, with great interest, an interview with Jeff Clavier of SoftTechVC in Network World. Jeff’s had notable successes in the consumer world (Mint, MyBlogLog, and Userplane). I’ve never interacted with Jeff (other than recommending a Dim Sum Restaurant on Twitter) but I’ve always had respect for him – unlike many others, he’s adequately self deprecating when it comes to his passing on an opportunity to invest in LinkedIn. : -)

On the topic of Enterprise Software, Jeff says:

Most of SoftTech’s investments have so far been in the consumer space. “Innovation is slower on the enterprise side,” Clavier claims, and “beset by security issues.” “It’s a mature market with only a few acquirers; sales are more difficult and investors have little leverage when there are so few buyers. Low cost, consumer applications that leverage the Web offer capital efficiencies not matched on the enterprise side – and they are fun to work with.”

I’ve had conversations with scores of CEOs of traditional and Enterprise 2.0 companies on this topic. I’m still sticking with my analysis of over a year ago about Commoditization that’s partly due to a lack of focus on process and context, too much reliance on nebulous measures such as productivity and little alignment with tasks at hand. That’s played out with CubeTree’s purchase for $20 million. Anemic by Enterprise standards.

But leverage is coming. I’ve been reading a galley copy of The New Polymath by Vinnie Mirchandani, due out later this summer, and its clear how enterprise application infrastructure, based on customer expectations is ripe for a re-haul. It’s not just about the cloud and its also not just about SaaS vs On Premise business apps. Simpler, better, faster-to-update ways of GTD in context, and in a way that connects people, are about to hit. And that opens up organic as well as M&A opportunities on the technology supply side.

There’s quite a few opportunities’ that are large enough to have significant impact, but I’m going to touch on a few areas I see when talking to end customers, discounted by the pace of innovation, to date.

• Decision Facilitation: Yes, in-person meetings and email are time consuming, expensive and often un productive. The answer is not to simply move those to digital interactions powered by Enterprise 2.0. That’s a first step. But that can also mean moving the same unproductive discussions to a digital platform and arguably more of them since its less time consuming. We still need to wrap a decision facilitation layer around it to drive better results. OpenAPIs, activity streams, data and document access all in context is where its at.
• Exception Handling: Somewhere between your Enterprise 2.0 platform and your structured employee, partner and supplier processes, lies a wide open gap. It’s a myth that we can get by with process laden technology since it solves 70%, 80& 90% of repeatable process tasks. The other 10%, 20%, 30% is where things can go horribly wrong and cost millions. Weaving in a social fabric to deal with those exceptions to standard process outcomes is barely tapped today.
• CRM 2.0 (or socialCRM) is DOA with Enterprise 1.0. You can have the most sophisticated customer community but remember, prospects and customers are looking to bypass marketing and talk to experts deep inside your org and partner ecosystem. You cant have a vibrant and successful community if you’re rely on a 1990s style latency riddled, portal/intranet/extranet inside the firm. Even a “facebook for the enterprise” that cant methodically wrap around real time customer interaction demands is but a first step.
• Performance: I joined a panel on SugarCRM’s SugarCon event last month with Esteban Kolsky, Jeremiah Owyang and Diogo Rebelo where we discussed who owns Social  Data in the enterprise. Traditional BI tools extract results from structured data systems. New performance applications will blend social and analytical data to improve discrete business performance outcomes  – HR and Talent, Spend Management, Communication Performance. Etc. Ultimately moving from “here’s the report” to “here’s what to do about the data”.

Each of these can spawn vastly different value propositions for end customers.

Jeff’s spot on when he talks about simple consumer constructs starting to influence how Enterprise users interact with people and data. And all of the opportunities, above, will expect this as a price of entry. The big consideration though for large mature enterprises will be to avoid siloed efforts and the need to form a central collaborative back bone that’s still flexible enough to show concrete improvement around specific business tasks (sales, marketing, innovation, etc). Last month, Oliver Marks and I  presented at Interop on Performance Acceleration via Enterprise 2.0 and this was further validated by a very mature audience of technology managers and executives.

I’m expecting to have a lot of interesting conversations on this topic over the next few weeks. Tomorrow I head to SAP SAPPHIRE, then to the International Forum on Enterprise 2.0 in Milan where I’ll be talking about 21st Century Enterprises and the Role of Social, and finally at the Enterprise 2.0 conference in Boston where were going to be focusing on business value of E2.0.

I’ll update this post after I’ve processed what I learn.

It’s fascinating how we consider New Product Development /Research to be investments (by implication, a return can be had on these) on one hand, but we allocate marketing and customer acquisition as an expense. In plain English that translates to: We’re ok with considering what we design, build and sell, an asset that will yield returns. But not the effort it takes to serve prospects and customers that may be interested in what we purvey. Baffling, no?

Marketing has this almost comical, inverted model of inputs and outputs that defies Economics 101. A business typically buys inputs at wholesale and sells products at higher margin retail thereby seeking to make a profit. In contrast, marketing uses big picture estimates such as ‘customer lifetime value’ to estimate how much you can make from the average customer (output). But excluding branding, cost inputs to acquire prospects and sell more to customers are at hefty, mind boggling, retail costs – point advertising spots to sell a product, product launch emails, webinars, promotions, and recently, SEO/SEM campaigns. Hell, we financed Google’s insane success thanks to this model, if you think about it! 

Moving from Transactive vs Relationship Elasticity

I see customer acquisition model as a mindset of ‘transactive’ elasticity. In other words your spend goes only as far as supporting each transaction. So, your spending over and over again to sell new products to the same target customer. And that tactical design can’t be treated as anything but an expense. Conversely, investments are nurtured over time, are less susceptible to cuts in a down market, and yield results at intervals or in perpetuity. 

Contrast this with a model where you invest in relationships with your customers by engaging authentically with them in communities. These communities give the money you allocate to customer acquisition far more elasticity by spreading the wealth across the life of the relationship with relatively smaller spikes in expense that correlate with new product awareness. They center on investing in fostering and facilitating a dialogue with your customers, your partners and your prospects. Dialogues that far outlast single transactions. And via a platform to engage with them between transactions. Sounds like an investment and not an expense to me now.

This is articulated really well in, “CRM at the Speed of Light”, a must read by the terrific Paul Greenberg:

“Transaction is not the paramount artifact of the interaction. Instead a transaction becomes the side effect of rich relationships that are built on conversation. This notion is fundamental, and is a radical switch in priorities for the interaction between customer and vendor”

Edge Relationships Don’t Scale

Creating true relationship networks, whether on third party participatory networks (such as Facebook or Twitter) or on your own branded communities require a clearly defined approach, mindset and interaction design.

Umair Haque, Director of Havas Media Labs and blogger at Harvard Business Review wrote a superb post “The Efficient Community Hypothesis”  (that I recommend you read in full):

“People, truth, identity, reputation, values are the five elements of an efficient community”

I agree with that and they apply to communities that foster these relationships.

That said, community building often gets limited to efforts managed by the “social media expert” or the community manager. Its no doubt a first, extremely important step and herculean at that, (just ask Rachel Happe) but edge efforts don’t scale easily. And if the effort is superficial, they quickly start reeking of old school spam marketing (just see many of the groups on LinkedIn, for example, that sport the same old marketing pitches).

To be truly valuable, customers want to bypass marketers and get to those that have the highest quality information. The best information, void of spin or marketing speak, are in the minds of your other customers, your channel partners who may interact with customers more than you do, and your suppliers who know more about individual components that make up your product.

To enable such a design you need a collaborative design and enabling technology infrastructure that allows for the right minds to wrap around the customers needs. Marketing needs to broker and facilitate that, and then get out of the way. That’s the new customer acquisition design for the 21st century enterprise.

For a more in-depth overview of how to respond to this new customer dynamic and to move from a transactive model to a relationship model, take a look at a recent piece I published with Oliver Marks and TechWeb (email required).

Getting There

I’m not suggesting we stop advertising products when they launch. But do we have to buy marketing, over and over again at retail prices to sell that same customer time and again? Instead, why not invest (not expense) in more elastic relationships that defrays a good chunk of that retail cost?

Customer Acquisition seriously needs a new name to affect any institutional change in how organizations consider the actions and investment behind customer engagement. Customers never gave us permission to acquire them and it’s a bloody expensive to acquire them at retail, anyway. Tomorrows winning CMOs and Marketing leaders will be making a case for this to their CFOs and CEOs, today. I’ve been fortunate to work with some of these forward thinking folks. It’s not about big bang, it’s about etching away at it piece by piece and having it emerge, organically.

On the heels of SalesForce.com’s announcement of ChatterExchange this morning, FinancialForce releases Chatterbox – a rules based overlay on Chatter that allows businesses to associate the use of collaborative constructs with discrete business activity. For those of you not familiar with Salesforce.com’s Chatter, I covered the initial release, here.

For all the benefits of Enterprise 2.0 software, the biggest stumbling block has been this lingering feeling that its a solution looking for a problem to solve. And so even if you got past the skeptic managers and secured the green light to give it a shot, come adoption time, the use case for collaborating and socializing business conversations in the open via a microblogging application in favor of email just never came naturally. And at that point starts the real scramble: backfill use cases that might appeal to certain users, conduct training programs, institute herculean behavioral change management processes and devise incentive plans to get active usage up to a respectable level.

Welcome to the Enterprise Context Web.

FinancialForce, traditionally in the business of bringing Finance and Sales together on the force.com platform has built a rules and workflow facility to incorporate those very important social and collaborative elements and data triggers that make a given business activity whole. All on top of Chatter. Here’s how the finance and accounting community can collaborate over bean counting topics, using micriblogging constructs:

• When an outstanding credit on a customer account goes over 90 days – finance and sales professionals linked to that account can be immediately alerted, then they can quickly identify the reasons for non-payment and act to try and solve the problem to help cash flow and prevent further sales to that client being held up.
• When a specific supplier has been paid or a new supplier engaged – to help procurement and marketing departments better manage their suppliers and improve relationships.
• Customer accounts that show no activity for a specified length of time – may indicate service deficiencies and help ensure customers are contacted regularly.
• New sales over a specific size or won against a key competitor – to keep management and marketing abreast of sales trends.

Where unstructured and, really, knowledge access and sharing was conducted directly in email, via Chatterbox,  now accountants and finance professionals can now tap into the larger community for expertise and critical customer knowledge to understand exceptions in a process (say, an overdue invoice from an otherwise timely customer). If Chatter is adopted as the central collaborative backbone at the organization, it can now becomes the common watercooler to show up at with specific business data and context and where collaboration happens. Far beyond the out of the box process integration with Salesforces’ CRM application.

I still don’t believe that this eradicates adoption planning and more importantly incentive structures that encourage wide scale usage, out of the box. As I discussed with the FinancialForce folks, with respect to finance and accounting professionals, making it second nature to use a microblogging format to notify people over email needs to be preceded by showing the value of ambient outcomes. Accountants by the nature of their job do in fact need to conduct a lot of business in private and so subconsciously knowing when to going private vs. open might be a bit of a struggle. Add to that, most finance and accounting folks especially at smaller companies already know the 5 people at the company that might have the best answer for what generally are very specific questions. And on the topic of receiving data alerts in the microblogging stream, well, native enterprise apps have had email alerts per se for decades. Where process knowhow and training comes is to show communities wrap around critical alerts to respond to an event, thereby enrichening the outcome. Data events bring context out of the gate and that makes adoption and showing business benefit far more straight forward.

One smart thing that FinancialForce has done is to not limit the use of Chatterbox to its core financial product. By offering Chatterbox as the rules engine for any application on the Force.com platform, it limits its reliance on the financial and accounting user and that’s a really smart move.

Microblogging and data access is not new to the Enterprise Social Web. Pure play Enterprise 2.0 providers such as Socialcast and Socialtext both offer similar features and the upcoming release of Tibbr from TIBCO boasts this as a central theme to its own microblogging offering. But it’s all about distribution. And force.com brings awareness and distribution. And the rules engine offered by Chatterbox brings needed context to enterprise 2.0 constructs that’s been missing for far too long. As my friend Megan Murray commented to me, that’s Peanut Butter and Jelly or Carrots and Peas. Finally.

Dennis Howlett, an accountant by trade originally is optimistic, saying:

One off surgical help is useful, but the larger opportunity comes in activity pattern discovery where what� Sigurd Rinde might call Barely Repeatable Processes are captured and become actionable in the context of business processes that matter. Does this excite you or is it a huge yawn? I know where I am placing my bets

Some links on Chatter Exchange here as well and Paul Greenberg puts it all in context on his Social CRM ZDNet blog

Will it make it? I think so. Is there still a need for proper strategic planning and follow through for large scale uptake? No question about it. But that’s no different from any other enterprise software category. One things for sure – having the software make it simpler to illustrate business cases out of the box makes it a hell of a lot easier to pass the initial litmus test.

Finally, social starts to embrace process.

My good friend (and fellow competitive swimmer, back in the day), Dina Mehta, wrote an insightful post based on her research work around the topic of product durability. Though she refers to her findings based on the Indian market and the changing nature of durability, locally, there’s no question that this is a global phenomena.

The central theme of the research is that consumers value product durability less and less as time goes on. It used to be that when we bought products and services, life of the product was an important consideration and products were advertised as such. In Dina’s post, Stuart Henshall provides the most well known example:

When I think durability I think of Maytag – the washing machines that go forever here. Yet today that “durable” isn’t expected to last 20 years and new features, energy efficiency etc are changing the definition

Dina provides some great local examples of how consumers look at durability today. Based on her research, she concludes:

Thinking thru current Ads on tv – only the infrastructure and paints guys seem to talk about Durability in their communication today.

As Dina points out, its obviously not the case that customers don’t want products that last; it’s just that the markets in India finally afford choice. When I grew up there, you could only by one of 2 types of cars, a handful of electronic or appliance brands or for that matter, chocolate (yes, a travesty). All that’s changed now. And with choice comes the desire and willingness to swap for newer, shiny models at a more frequent pace.

There’s plenty of parallels to be drawn in the rest of the world where choice has been standard for decades. However, the marketing approach to this was to turn up the volume when it comes to badgering the customer with more marketing emails. Or to throw in the towel and compete on price with promotions that were often loss leaders or just a way to empty out the warehouse.

Durable Relationships

The truth is that in this age of transparent and open marketing which is moving to influencer and peer to peer modes, one sustainable approach to respond to this consumer trend is to focus on building durable relationships with customers. Existing customer relationship programs and enabling technologies (CRM) often enforce a fenced-in transactive model where its about that individual sale. That needs to move to a relationship model that can outlast that single transaction. And with the proper strategic planning, create an interaction environment that results in durability. Choice is here to stay. All you can do it make the customer comfortable with the notion that your first in line when they are looking to exercise choice. And one way to do that is to preemptively help them understand exactly why and when you should be in consideration. Thats done through effective customer Networks.

From a programmatic stand point, the answer is not jut Social Media or some other over intellectual way of looking at public or consumer relationships. Social Media is part of the larger tapestry. The answer lies in reworking the process of building and sustaining relationships with customers via social and collaborative forms of engagement. That comes from revisiting the mode of engagement that extends far beyond the nominated “social media leads” but permeates the walls that today, omit interaction with traditional sales, marketing, internal and partner experts who truly have the most substantive knowledge. Anything less will come of as plastic.

In turn, from an enabling technology standpoint, that means rethinking how your Social Media, CRM and so called ‘SocialCRM" and ‘Enterprise 2.0‘ efforts come together to build and foster genuine, durable relationships.

I highly recommend you read Dina’s original and follow up post on the implications of durability taking a back seat in the context of purchasing behavior. She’s got a very passionate community of intelligent folks that have provided comment.

Marc Benioff unveiled what he described as Salesforces’ “biggest breakthrough” – an enterprise social networking platform dubbed Chatter.

Here’s a video interview, courtesy of Dennis Howlett, that provides insight into the drivers, challenges and opportunities for moving to more open constructs in the workplace, as Salesforce sees it:

VentureBeat has a straightforward run down of the proposed feature list. Some other good commentary as well:

Jeremiah Owyang chimes in with what, I sense, is on the minds of many right now:

Trying to grapple with understanding Salesforce’s Chatter, is it something *new* or just a *me too*? #DF09

I’ve seen all of these Chatter features (at least in parts) from Jive, Telligent, Lithium(client), Socialtext(client), Yammer, #DF09

Dennis Howlett’s skeptical:

Salesforce.com may well be the poster child for hip and cool apps that bring the consumer experience to the enterprise but it will likely find CXO’s baulk at the idea of Chatter as a useful addition to their Salesforce.com environment. Only time will tell whether Salesforce.com marketers have judged this correctly.

And Michael Krigsman concludes:

Regardless of where Salesforce decides to take Chatter, the announcement demonstrates that social computing space is reaching a tipping point, which I think is great.

I’m baffled by the name of this service but on the whole, my sense is that this is a huge development for the enterprise software business, as well as a definitive stamp of validation for Enterprise 2.0 constructs and technologies. Assuming of course that Salesforce.com gets this to market as promised.

Context Built In

Chatter is different. Its got the one thing baked in that other applications don’t – context. Built in from the ground up.

Back in February of this year, I wrote about how social computing constructs can make a difference to enterprise sales organizations. Based on our work with sales and marketing organizations at leading enterprise and voice of customer (sales reps) interviews with over 900 sales reps, I laid out a simplistic illustration of what makes a sales rep tick:

• Media watching is not a sport for sales reps. Feed them the good stuff and they’ll consume it.
• Data/Intelligence extraction over collaboration. “Give to Get” doesn’t fly with most sales reps.
• Good reps know exactly which 8.75 data types help them bust quotas. No more, no less.
• In spite of the above, don’t expect them to dig for it. They’d rather use the time to cold call a lead.
• Sales reps often ignore a lot of what marketing might offer or recommend.
• They don’t personalize portals & intranets.
• They rather search than browse; they want answers, not search results. (ok, who doesn’t!)
• CRM apps often morph into reporting mechanisms that sales reps are mandated to use.
• Pre-sales engineers (in the case of High Tech) often do most of labor intensive tasks in the sales cycle (assembling proposal components, finding SMEs and references, etc).

Super impose these characteristics on the features presented in the Chatter demo and I say we have a solid start. Chatter’s got context and intent built in for the sales organization given its close out of the box linkages to Salesforce.com’s flagship CRM application. Next, the activity stream/ feed metaphor was made for the sales rep: Why? Given how they prefer to work, it 1) enables them to pluck important nuggets out of the stream that support the sales process and 2) lets the best minds wrap around a task at hand (RFP, prospect inquiry, customer support issue and the like). It won’t all just happen out of the box but the application has the potential to make it a hell of a lot easier.

Process + Social

Last week I wrote a post called “Why Process Barfs on Social”. My central point was that unless we see a social + process in context, Enterprise 2.0 won’t realize its full potential. Whilst tools certainly won’t provide the solution alone, Chatter has the capability of being the first integrated showcase where social concepts are unleashed to enrichen discrete processes (in this case, closing and keeping customers) towards established performance goals.

There’s no question that some of the most important data that sales reps need reside outside of the confines of traditional CEM and sales applications. They sit in home grown contract registries, support agreement databases, 3rd part news and social media platforms, ERP systems and very important – the minds of known and unknown colleagues. Chatters’ platform capabilities enable access to these data sources and people. This, along with the ability to collaborate around an object ( a lead, a competitor, a customer, a topic) brings process + social closer than ever before.

One Part Offence, Two Parts Defense

Despite the very convincing assault on Microsoft SharePoint by Marc, my sense is that this is more defense than offence on Salesforces.com’s part. Taking on the installed base of SharePoint may be a longer term goal but for now SalesForce needs to make its existing applications useful to sales reps and move away from being a glorified reporting application for operational bean counters or (as Scott Schnaars suggests), a contact management system. Not to mention the rising interest in so-called “social CRM” services. Chatter gives reps a reason to stay within Salesforce.com a little while longer and amps up the sustained utility of the service.

Distribution

Whilst this is validation around the concept of social computing in the enterprise and pureplay vendors will see a rising tide effect, there’s a downside as well. Its tempting to say that pureplay vendors had these capabilities for a while and can hold their own. The reality is that feature shoot outs play but one role in enterprise purchase decision making. Salesforce brings its powerful distribution channel, out of the box process integration, and a now social marketplace in AppExchange – together providing a very compelling reason for enterprises to consider this as a company-wide social networking platform.

Customer Centricity

This, in my opinion, was the biggest lost opportunity in the launch of this service.

One of the reasons for Bloomberg LPs ungodly success is that every single employee’s bonus is tied to new sales and renewals. IT, Product, Marketing, Support, everyone. That means everyone prioritizes their work around revenue. That’s extremely difficult to do especially since only a chosen few at most companies have any control or even insight into the sales process. Now, with Chatter being seeded in the nucleus of managing customer relationships in the enterprise (i.e. CRM), there’s the opportunity, for the first time, to provide a universal lens into the process of courting, converting and servicing a customer. Everyone can see the sales and support process live and chime in with expertise, helping cradle the process to revenue and customer satisfaction. The big value proposition of the enterprise social web is improved customer centricity and there’s a unique opportunity for Chatter to make this a reality. I wish Salesforce had seized this opportunity to present a model that can transform how organizations and their partner ecosystems can be structured around the customer.

$50 bucks a user per month? Ouch!

Yes it’s a lot. But what strikes me as odd was that Salesforce did not offer some sort of basic/read-only access to Chatter for non Salesforce users at a given customer. What better way for others to see where their input is crucial to an ongoing project, RFP, discussion etc and make the case for purchasing that additional seat? That’s free marketing and a straight forward conversion strategy for Salesforce to move laterally, out side of sales and marketing. It’s still early so I won’t be surprised to see something similar to this.

Closing Thoughts

All up, this is excellent news for the Enterprise 2.0 space and I’m thrilled that a process facilitator such as Salesforce has dipped its toes in the social computing arena. Its about time Enterprise 2.0 grew up and started talking business. And Salesforce is one of the few companies that can lead that charge. It’s a separate post but pure plays will gain more than they will loose with increased awareness of the business association of social computing concepts. Good for the entire ecosystem.

For a detailed look at Chatter, see Marc Benioffs (very long) interview at TechCrunch’s Realtime Crunch Up Event.

I’m bullish.

Update: Great analysis on the infrastructure view point by Esteban Kolsky.