Comments on: Where sharing makes sense and where it doesn’t http://corpblawg.ynada.com/2007/10/28/where-sharing-makes-sense-and-where-it-doesnt Cornelius Puschmann on computer-mediated discourse, linguistics, open access and other things that interest him. Now discontinued - see blog.ynada.com Sat, 01 Aug 2009 01:34:17 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Kim Feraday http://corpblawg.ynada.com/2007/10/28/where-sharing-makes-sense-and-where-it-doesnt/comment-page-1#comment-50282 Kim Feraday Wed, 31 Oct 2007 22:43:40 +0000 http://corpblawg.ynada.com/2007/10/28/where-sharing-makes-sense-and-where-it-doesnt#comment-50282 Sure but with clinical trials you would be recruited, either through your doctor or previous contact. Obviously, for this and PHR examples, you'd have to have pretty granular security on who gets access to what. Sure but with clinical trials you would be recruited, either through your doctor or previous contact. Obviously, for this and PHR examples, you’d have to have pretty granular security on who gets access to what.

]]> By: Cornelius http://corpblawg.ynada.com/2007/10/28/where-sharing-makes-sense-and-where-it-doesnt/comment-page-1#comment-50276 Cornelius Wed, 31 Oct 2007 22:25:15 +0000 http://corpblawg.ynada.com/2007/10/28/where-sharing-makes-sense-and-where-it-doesnt#comment-50276 Those are interesting examples, Kim. I think an important question is what avenues of communication with external stakeholders benefit the most from complete transparency. Medical information is certainly among them, though I think there are instances where pharma companies and patients would rather not have their information discussed out in the open. But generally there are more instances of insufficient communication (people "outside" are not involved where they could be) than vice versa and changing that would certainly have a lot of merit. Those are interesting examples, Kim. I think an important question is what avenues of communication with external stakeholders benefit the most from complete transparency. Medical information is certainly among them, though I think there are instances where pharma companies and patients would rather not have their information discussed out in the open. But generally there are more instances of insufficient communication (people “outside” are not involved where they could be) than vice versa and changing that would certainly have a lot of merit.

]]> By: Kim Feraday http://corpblawg.ynada.com/2007/10/28/where-sharing-makes-sense-and-where-it-doesnt/comment-page-1#comment-50244 Kim Feraday Wed, 31 Oct 2007 18:00:03 +0000 http://corpblawg.ynada.com/2007/10/28/where-sharing-makes-sense-and-where-it-doesnt#comment-50244 Sure. I was struggling to come up with some use cases but in thinking about it last night here's a coupld of potential ones in healthcare. 1. Patient diaries to support clinical trials (Pharmacuetical companies). 2. Disease managment programs. Again keeping patient diaries (possibly as part of an PHR). This might be accessible by Payor case managers/nurse practioners, the patients doctor, maybe the pharmacist and others. In addition each of those might blog to a limited audience to provide advice as required. 3. Payor product development -- particularly with newer products like HSAs a payor might white label financial products from banks, insurers, etc. This type of product devleopment would require collaboration across organizational boundaries etc. Sure. I was struggling to come up with some use cases but in thinking about it last night here’s a coupld of potential ones in healthcare.

1. Patient diaries to support clinical trials (Pharmacuetical companies).
2. Disease managment programs. Again keeping patient diaries (possibly as part of an PHR). This might be accessible by Payor case managers/nurse practioners, the patients doctor, maybe the pharmacist and others. In addition each of those might blog to a limited audience to provide advice as required.
3. Payor product development — particularly with newer products like HSAs a payor might white label financial products from banks, insurers, etc. This type of product devleopment would require collaboration across organizational boundaries etc.

]]> By: Cornelius http://corpblawg.ynada.com/2007/10/28/where-sharing-makes-sense-and-where-it-doesnt/comment-page-1#comment-50136 Cornelius Tue, 30 Oct 2007 21:44:32 +0000 http://corpblawg.ynada.com/2007/10/28/where-sharing-makes-sense-and-where-it-doesnt#comment-50136 Thanks Kim and Sam for the insightful comments - you make some very valid points. Thanks Kim and Sam for the insightful comments – you make some very valid points.

]]> By: Kim Feraday http://corpblawg.ynada.com/2007/10/28/where-sharing-makes-sense-and-where-it-doesnt/comment-page-1#comment-50113 Kim Feraday Tue, 30 Oct 2007 17:26:26 +0000 http://corpblawg.ynada.com/2007/10/28/where-sharing-makes-sense-and-where-it-doesnt#comment-50113 Cornelius, There are cases where you would want to collaborate with people outside your own company. For example, my company might have a product that is complementary to mine and we want to bring a solution to market. From my own experience, I can tell you that would help us to identify how we package the joint offering, what markets we want to target, and even potentially to target specific customers. These types of efforts typically require collaboration across geographies and time zones and it can be very difficult to get peoples time given that they have alot of competing interests (closing current pipeline opportunities, new product introductions, etc.). Having a set of tools to support these efforts would be invaluable. There are also use cases inside a company as well. In a large company for example, you might want to launch an existing product in new vertical or geography. This would require resources that you don't normally interact with and might not even know. In mature markets you might want to evaluate the opportunity to bundle existing products into a new offering -- again this would require participation across groups that don't normally collaborate and probably have alot of competing interests. In all of these cases the underlying motivations are the typical ones -- driving top line revenue, customer retention, increasing wallet share. But there is also a reputational aspect to this as well for employees. Being a contributor to a successful project that moves the company forward can increase personal prestige. I think the real challenge this disucssion is on focussing on some key use cases and finding customers to partner with where these use cases resonate. ROI will fall out of this. Cornelius,

There are cases where you would want to collaborate with people outside your own company. For example, my company might have a product that is complementary to mine and we want to bring a solution to market. From my own experience, I can tell you that would help us to identify how we package the joint offering, what markets we want to target, and even potentially to target specific customers.

These types of efforts typically require collaboration across geographies and time zones and it can be very difficult to get peoples time given that they have alot of competing interests (closing current pipeline opportunities, new product introductions, etc.). Having a set of tools to support these efforts would be invaluable.

There are also use cases inside a company as well. In a large company for example, you might want to launch an existing product in new vertical or geography. This would require resources that you don’t normally interact with and might not even know. In mature markets you might want to evaluate the opportunity to bundle existing products into a new offering — again this would require participation across groups that don’t normally collaborate and probably have alot of competing interests.

In all of these cases the underlying motivations are the typical ones — driving top line revenue, customer retention, increasing wallet share. But there is also a reputational aspect to this as well for employees. Being a contributor to a successful project that moves the company forward can increase personal prestige.

I think the real challenge this disucssion is on focussing on some key use cases and finding customers to partner with where these use cases resonate. ROI will fall out of this.

]]> By: Sam Lawrence http://corpblawg.ynada.com/2007/10/28/where-sharing-makes-sense-and-where-it-doesnt/comment-page-1#comment-49863 Sam Lawrence Mon, 29 Oct 2007 05:25:48 +0000 http://corpblawg.ynada.com/2007/10/28/where-sharing-makes-sense-and-where-it-doesnt#comment-49863 Hi Cornelius, Great blog post. Wanted to offer a few follow up comments. Wikipedia is a good, iconic example of different people working collaboratively to create something faster and better than the way traditional dictionaries were created. It's merely an example that everyone can relate to that can serve as a proxy for social productivity within an enterprise. Inside the enterprise, it could be the product development process, for example. Or training. Or an RFP. As well, when we talk about involving potential stakeholders outside the company we mean vendors, consultants, or highly engaged customers. While it's true these folks are not employees, they are stakeholders and each has incentive to add value to the process. So, I'd argue, they're not helping "for free" as you mentioned, rather they are chiming in to help add value because of their stake and relevancy. For example, last week I worked on a marketing strategy with folks in marketing, sales, professional services, our PR contractors, a consultant and an analyst. I plan to involve key customers for feedback, too. With social productivity, I can do this quickly, effectively and the outcome will be a much higher value then if done in a vacuum. Not to mention, ever individual who contributes will be associated with this project, so their value and reputation as individuals is recorded as well. Next time we are looking for expertise in this area, we'll be able to quickly find those associated with this project. Ultimately, social productivity will help capture the unstructured, collaborative content not currently captured within companies and their constituencies and aim those efforts at high-impact work processes. It's a lot of what CRM did before it was a more mature industry. Sales went from content living all over the place to having a managed system. The same will be true for social productivity software in the enterprise. Cheers, Sam Sam Lawrence CMO, Jive Software Hi Cornelius,

Great blog post.

Wanted to offer a few follow up comments. Wikipedia is a good, iconic example of different people working collaboratively to create something faster and better than the way traditional dictionaries were created. It’s merely an example that everyone can relate to that can serve as a proxy for social productivity within an enterprise. Inside the enterprise, it could be the product development process, for example. Or training. Or an RFP.

As well, when we talk about involving potential stakeholders outside the company we mean vendors, consultants, or highly engaged customers. While it’s true these folks are not employees, they are stakeholders and each has incentive to add value to the process. So, I’d argue, they’re not helping “for free” as you mentioned, rather they are chiming in to help add value because of their stake and relevancy.

For example, last week I worked on a marketing strategy with folks in marketing, sales, professional services, our PR contractors, a consultant and an analyst. I plan to involve key customers for feedback, too. With social productivity, I can do this quickly, effectively and the outcome will be a much higher value then if done in a vacuum. Not to mention, ever individual who contributes will be associated with this project, so their value and reputation as individuals is recorded as well. Next time we are looking for expertise in this area, we’ll be able to quickly find those associated with this project.

Ultimately, social productivity will help capture the unstructured, collaborative content not currently captured within companies and their constituencies and aim those efforts at high-impact work processes. It’s a lot of what CRM did before it was a more mature industry. Sales went from content living all over the place to having a managed system. The same will be true for social productivity software in the enterprise.

Cheers,
Sam

Sam Lawrence
CMO, Jive Software

]]>