How did the Global Jam Pioneer slip?

Published simultaneously on Pulse.

IBM is very much in the news these days because of weak business growth. However, I’m not a business analyst and this article is not about financial issues, at least not directly. My focus here is on people. By people, I mean both workforce and customers.

I remember listening to an IBMer presenting the IBM Global Values Jam in 2001 at an online conference in London. The enthusiastic audience loved it, asked lots of questions and wished their organizations had a similar culture based on trust. As IBM explains here: “Research showed that IBMers trusted and relied on their intranet at unprecedented levels—even more than their managers or the grapevine. Seeking to develop and extend that trust, the company introduced World Jam in 2001.”

IBM adds here that Jams are “radically open and democratic—everybody has the same capacity to participate, regardless of level or expertise—jams speak to the expectations of today’s professional worker.”

Favoring shareholders over the workforce: a serious business misstep?

What went wrong with the global jam pioneer?

“They need to put customers first. They need to take care of their employees and empower them to do what ever they need to take care of customers – and give them profit sharing at the lowest level possible so that the balance of decisions between taking care of customers and providing ROI is done at the lowest level and as close to the customer as is possible. People who service customers need to be empowered to stand up to the cost accountants – and win.” (Comment from an ex-customer.)

“Execs are selling millions of shares and options, while rewards to the vast majority of employees are now given in the form of ‘Blue Points,’ which can be saved up and used to pick gifts out of a catalog. Employee morale couldn’t be worse.” (More here.)

“I could barely begin counting the number of friends ready to jump ship the moment that last kid gets out of the house, or college — assuming they last that long.” (Comment from a longtime, recently-retired employee)

Can a digital workplace help an organization refocus on people?

The glue that holds an organization together, the connector

For global companies, large and small, the digital workplace can become the glue that holds the organization together. It connects people: bottom-up, top-down and, more importantly, horizontally across the organization. It enables customer-facing people to better serve customers. It enables people to express themselves, discover each other and work outside the hierarchical boxes and flows. In this post from early 2012, I describe the five fundamentals of a digital workplace.

1. The digital workplace stretches across three worlds: internal, semi-internal and public.
2. Different dimensions within the digital workplace serve different purposes and have different “rules of the road”.
3. The three dimensions overlap and intertwine as the organization becomes more “enterprise 2.0″ enabled.
4. The digital workplace requires a holistic approach at the highest management level.
5. The digital workplace is driven by people-oriented strategies.

The notion of “people-oriented strategies” is last but not least, and speaks directly to my original question of “How did the global jam pioneer slip?”

Is a digital workplace dangerous, for management I mean?

Digital workplaces can unleash energy and creativity in organizations, but if management practices are not aligned, nothing will change.

A digital workplace as described in the five fundamentals above results in behavior and ideas that enable or force (depending on your viewpoint!) a new management style: one that is open and participatory and not command and control. IBM seemed well down the open and participatory management path, but then something happened.

Looking at the IBM Jam history, we see the first Values Jam in 2001, followed in 2003 by a second Values Jam, then by an Innovation Jam in 2006 that went so far as to include outsiders, and then a second Innovation Jam in 2008. As of 2007, IBM was offering their jam services (framework and technologies) to other organizations. It appeared that IBM knew how to tap into the collective intelligence and experience of the whole organization to get new, workable ideas from people closest to the action around the globe. The Values Jams yielded three values: “Dedication to every client’s success,” “Innovation that matters,” and “Trust and personal responsibility in all relationships.”

Somewhere along the line, the output and energy of the Jam Pioneer lost the battle against the money counters. Maybe I’m naïve but I believe that at the time, IBM believed in the Jam approach. At least that was my impression based on my contacts with IBMers over earlier years.

Does your organization have the “jam mentality”?

How would you answer these 3 critical questions?

The real purpose of my post is to ask you to think about your own organization, your own digital workplace and answer questions:

1. Is your top management in touch with the reality of the front lines?

One of the commenters on Cringely’s post says: “It’s all about customers, those people that give you the money in exchange of products and services. The C*O level of the big companies I know about don’t have a clue any more about the things their business is based upon. Those levels are the ones that in the end select the other levels. All these levels are completely alienated not only from the ‘real world business’. They play with charts, diagrams and pages with just three numbers in it. Those could be related to tires or pizzas. To them it’d be the same.”

Unfortunately, my data over past years of surveys confirms that many organizations feel that top management out of touch with the reality of how people work and that the truth lies on the front lines.

2. How much influence does the operational level have on decision-making in your organization?

The 2014 Digital Workplace survey show that the operational level of management participates in decision-making for their digital workplace in Early Adopter Organizations. In fact, they are twice as likely to be involved than in the Majority of organizations.

3. What’s your number one digital workplace strategy driver: “Efficiency and Cost Savings” or “Collective Intelligence”?

Henry Mintzberg put his finger on it in a post a few months ago: “What could possibly be wrong with efficiency? Plenty.” He makes good points that my data support: the Majority of organizations report that “gaining efficiency and cost savings” is their number one driver, whereas the Early Adopter organizations, with their more mature digital workplaces, report that number one is “increasing organizational intelligence”. More here.

Focus on people, including management!

I’ll answer my three questions myself:

1. Yes, it is a strategic error to favor shareholder value over people value – financial returns over what the workforce and customers need. The strategy will fail in the long term.

2. Yes, a digital workplace can help an organization focus, or refocus, on people. This does not mean everything is “user centric”, a popular approach in user-based design. What is does mean is that an effective digital workplace will be part of an organizational context with sufficient fluidity and adaptability that each person can realize his or her role and ambitions.

3. Yes, a digital workplace can be dangerous in that it can unleash energy and creativity that an uneducated management may hesitate to embrace. In this case, the organization is in for a long path towards collaborative ways of thinking, working and bringing value to their customers.

Please share your views. I’d like to know what you think.