What will Social Computing Reveal About Your Company's Culture

Just about every industry blog (including this one), magazine article and random discussion on the topic of social computing in the enterprise mentions that the success of such initiatives  is highly dependent on culture.    You’ll get no argument from me -  we address this topic forthrightly when consulting with our customers.  But I have observing during consulting gigs and during my own experiences using the technology in the workplace that social computing will often shine a bright light on existing corporate culture.    Some of the cultural issues may already be well known, if not openly admitted or discussed.  Others may be subtle and can become more obvious as people interact in a more social and transparent manner.  Here are a few we have witnessed.

• Using status updates to implicitly send a message or set an example –  Technologies that provide a mechanism for regular updates such as micro-blogging, status updates and activity streams can be very useful in a corporate setting.    Likewise, Twitter has become de rigueur as a component of corporate social media.   However, there can be some interesting reactions to the timing of those updates.  If a manager regularly updates at all hours of the day and night (and all weekend), is there a message being sent – even, if unintended?      I’m not referring to personal micro-blogging, but rather updates very specific to work.   This culture of “always working and always on” may be a perfectly normal and expected part of the culture, especially in smaller, agile companies.    In more traditional settings, however, observing this type of activity can be daunting and even threatening to certain groups of workers.    Remember that status updates are much more visible that the occasional email sent at 6:00 am or 11:00 pm.
• Knowledge hoarding – Perhaps a more politically correct term for this behavior is personal intellectual property protection.  Successful groups or communities are dependent on active and enthusiastic participation by a significant portion of the members.  Are some of your communities thriving and a repository of rich  contributions while others are stagnant?    A culture of unhealthy competition can stifle the desire to share ideas and content.  If an employee believes that “knowledge is power” and sharing what she knows will cut into her competitive advantage, then she isn’t about to share.  Another cultural dysfunction that can manifest in knowledge hoarding is fear of retribution.   A manager or senior member of staff who is “thin-skinned” and is unable to take constructive feedback is likely to exhibit that same behavior when users rate or comment on his contributions. 
• Excessive sniping or “snarkiness” -  if you have spent any time participating in consumer social computing sites and communities, you’ve witnessed firsthand how mean-spirited exchanges can become.  Corporations typically have governance rules that will cover appropriate behavior and those rules should apply to social computing efforts.  But, there may be more subtle tones of discord that could suggest a cultural dysfunction.    Debate and constructive feedback are good and to be encouraged.  Excessive negativity, whether towards a topic, an individual or the company at large are cause for concern.  The line between the last two points may be subtle or glaring. 

If any of the aforementioned trends are happening, it is worthwhile to dig a little deeper and determine if there is a prevalence of occurrence within certain groups, certain job functions or even with certain individuals.  For instance, observing a trend within one department and not in another when those departments are performing very similar functions and have similar goals could be suggestive of personnel issues (management or individuals).  Of course, cultural issues are always complex and seldom related to one tangible cause, so there is no “one size fits all” set of guidelines to address any of the issues listed above.