This is Chris_p_walker's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following Chris_p_walker's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Recent Activity
Hi Claire I'd be happy to connect with your company's management in Orlando to discuss the PHIGs and how they fit into the bigger picture of managing information on an organization-wide scale. I'd also be happy to discuss coming over to Belgium or France and doing some PHIGs related sessions. It's been many years since I've had moules et frites in La Grande Place. Cheers! Chris
1 reply
Pretty good, overall. I still have issues with using "enterprise" if there's no integration with other enterprise business procs, apps, or content stores. What lifecycle is being managed? Is it the content? The business process?
1 reply
The biggest issue I have with this article is that if the design is horrible, it won't matter what device it gets delivered on. A "sexy" device does not automatically equate to good application design or user experience.
15 years ago I was revamping processes & implementing software for a cleaning & maintenance (i.e.: janitorial services) contractor. Automated-ish route planning, optimized supply drops, and semi-automated quality inspections. I didn't even know what ECM was. Luck me. :-)
1 reply
There are cases to be made for each approach. Certainly if the content is a white paper or case study written, paid for, and published by a vendor with the intent of generating leads, then I see the value of registration / identification. Of course, I have a couple of dummy email addresses I use just so I don't get bombarded. I suspect I am not alone. On the other hand, if the point of the content is educational or informational, I see the value in allowing free access to the content based on the premise that if the consumer likes your message, they will come back to you.
1 reply
If you're looking for people to get involved let me know. I wouldn't mind getting involved.
1 reply
You touch on what I believe to be one of the main reasons that social business has not yet been fully embraced by enterprises; no one really knows how to manage it from a risk / compliance / governance point of view. One of the other reasons, I think, is that aside from brand / marketing driven organizations no one really has a clear idea of what the end goal of a social business effort is or ought to be. If one accepts that E2.0 (or whatever the nom-du-jour is) is nothing more than a variety of communication channels with which to engage your stakehokders, then it stands to reason that governing E2.0 has to be done on a channel-by-channel basis; i.e.: it would be foolish to define a governance model that fits all aspects of E2.0 but doesn't allow for the differences between them. I'm referring to variations in the procedures, not necessarily the policies. We have to look at inbound vs outbound, static vs dynamic, and the actual business purpose driving the communication. E.g.: is it merely a company announcement or is it an exchange between a customer and a representative to solve some sort of issue or provide advice? If you can accept that E2.0 is about communication and engagement, then you ought to be able to identify the business processes that are being supported by the E2.0 efforts. If you can identify the business processes and are using a function based classification model then it ought to be simple enough to categorize your E2.0 facilitated communications. If you can categorize it you can govern it.
1 reply
Chris_p_walker is now following The Typepad Team
Jan 24, 2011