There was a very interesting post over at WATBlog, on whether Indian companies should provide employees the freedom to engage online. The advice to organisations is to at least listen to the conversations happening about them, since these conversations will happen anyway. The solution the post offers is to use prolific users of social media as brand evangelists. It reminded me of an earlier post on the evolution of the brand manager. And I agree almost completely to the WAT post.
Almost, because, I lean quite a bit towards extreme transparency, and am of the opinion that it’s not just the evangelists who should be online and doing their bit, it should be the whole damn system. Why not only the evangelists? Evangelists, to me are slightly utopian styled creatures, who love transparency, and organisations, which are just giving this whole conversation idea a customary spin, might have a problem dealing with it. There are two options then – the evangelist gets ‘corrupted’, (I’d hate compromised use of social media) or he refuses to conform. In the second scenario, the organisation will strive for ‘control’, and the evangelist will be sacked, but what if the whole system is doing it? Which is one of the reasons why I think organisations will fight this thought. But there might be hope yet, check out Unilever’s efforts in this direction.
There’s a great argument here on candour at the workplace, it also gives some interesting links. That last link looks at a ‘getting to know you’ level before complete transparency. The article calls this tact, and I have a problem with that too. It is precisely these kinds of convenient gray areas that led to white lies, which in turn spawned the complete opacity that we see around now.
Meanwhile, there’s something else that might be forcing organisations- Users/Customers. Because once the conversation about the organisations, which will happen with or without their assistance, reaches a deafening pitch, it might force them to listen. To quote from this neat post on Enterprise 2.0, “when the irresistible force of social media hits the immovable force of a traditional enterprise, it makes a loud noise”. The last part of this post also throws light on this.
And hey, its not any favor that the organisation is doing. In the long run, this will only help the organisation’s equity from an HR and Brand perspective. As talent sourcing becomes even more difficult, this might be the edge that an organisation can get.
The earlier generation of organisations did not ban the water cooler though it was reputed to be the source of a lot of conversations. Lets hope today’s organisations can look at the internet in a similar way, recognise that their employees are simultaneously part of not just their workplace, but a larger world outside, in which reside the organisation’s stakeholders and think carefully on how it makes sense to let their employees talk to the world at large.
until next time, break the walls down
hey manu…
really nice read.. it puts across my point much better… I personally feel it has to be a collective effort in creating a certain respect and perhaps a passion for responsibility in people.. and then things would flow into a perfect string on their own..
really liked the water cooler example 🙂
thanks maneesh, though let me assure you that you made the point loud and clear. This was just another perspective. I agree that the onus is on the organisation to create a culture thats conducive to openness.