Strategy Trumps Technology Every Time

Community Topic(s):

Keywords: E2.0, strategy

Current Rating:
(0 ratings)

Last week Pie broached the subject of whether you could have an enterprise content management (ECM) strategy without ECM technology:

You can’t buy Enterprise Content Management. You can buy products that support an ECM Strategy, but without a blueprint, it is just a bunch of stuff…The thing is, you don’t need an Enterprise CMS Platform to implement an ECM Strategy. Heck, you can do it with what you have now.

I’ve offered my two cents on this issue elsewhere and definitely agree with him, not only for ECM but for E2.0 as well.

And keeping in the spirit of provocation that’s animated my last two posts here, I wanted to push this idea of implementing an E2.0 strategy without technology a little further, maybe even past the boundaries of what most folks would find reasonable in order to see where it gets us.

So here goes:E2.0 technology implementations without an E2.0 strategy will almost always fail, but an E2.0 strategy without technology will almost always succeed.

A technology implementation becomes self-justifying

The tactical, short-term concerns during an implementation have more to do with getting the environment up and running, closing all bugs during testing, and successfully launching the solution—none of which will intrinsically deliver value to the organization. And if the goals and aims of the technology solution are unclear or poorly chosen, delivering it may actually subtract value.

There is never time to do all the things that are required during an implementation to get the solution up and running, let alone things that are not. Program level activities like policies and procedures tend to fall by the wayside when the implementation gets hot—heck, even tactical things related to the implementation like user interface and training and communication get dropped, so what chance do the strictly program activities stand of getting done?

The fire that cannot be quenched

What about after go live? Things are as bad if not worse because either (1) all the stuff that got dropped from release 1.0 to make the project deadline is now top priority or (2) application problems have now transitioned from being considered project issues to being considered production issues (with all the increased severity and attention that brings), or both.

Given this, good luck getting folks to pay attention to program activities.

Here’s the deal

We all know that technology cannot succeed without the people-process work that scaffolds it, but we often overlook the fact that the same people-process work can succeed without technology (although in a more limited way).

If you want to get your finances straightened out, buying Quicken and changing nothing else will be a colossal failure (other than enabling you to see your poor financial decision making in full-color charts). You need to change the people-process aspects of your finances for Quicken to make a difference…but if all you did was address the people-process side of things and skipped the software, you would still benefit.

The same is true for E2.0 (and for ECM as well).

After all, if you don’t have a technology implementation to think about, you’ve got lots of cycles to focus on things like delivering value to the business—which is what you should be solely focused on anyway.

Admittedly, without a technology platform to implement, you’ll be achieving business value through quick hit, lo-fi, people-process means, but who cares?

When you succeed, you’ll be head and shoulders ahead of most technology projects in terms of realized value to end users…and you’ll have spent lots less money.

The final word

So there you have it: you’re better off without technology if you’re not going to approach E2.0 strategically—just forget about doing anything.

But if you can motivate your organization to approach E2.0 strategically, it’s a win-win: if you get money for technology, you’ll be in great shape, but if you get no money for E2.0 technology, you’ll still make headway versus where you’d otherwise be.

Not sure what’s coming next week, but in the meantime, I’d love to hear your thoughts on this issue—stand up and defend IT, throw some cold water on my fanboy devotion to the cult of strategy, or just share your own experience trying to do the right thing for your organization with technology and strategy…let’s get the conversation started!

Report

Rate Post

You need to log in to rate blog posts. Click here to login.

Add a Comment

You need to log in to post messages. Click here to login.

Comments

Mark Bean

Social Business Strategy and Road Map

Great article. Social business can fill the 80% gap left by the 20% reality of ECM when it comes to improving collaboration and communication.

Trying to implement a social business platform without a good strategy in place as to WHY you are doing what you are doing is ludicrous and filled with dangerous possibilities.

A good strategy and a great business and technology road map is the first place to start your social business journey.

We can help you take those first steps http://c7group.com
Report
Was this helpful? Yes No
Reply
Joe Shepley

You need to know where you're going to know if you've arrived or not

Mark,

Definitely agree that strategy and road map is the place to start--thanks for jumping in and sharing your thoughts...

Cheers,

Joe
Report
Was this helpful? Yes No
Reply

Douglas Schultz

A little struggle with the argument

Interesting thoughts, Joe. I getting hung up on if you have an E2.0 strategy without technology, do you really have E2.0? Or are you saying that getting an E2.0 strategy in place is just the first step toward E2.0? I don't disagree that you need a strategy in any technology implementation, whether it be E2.0, Records Management ECM. But while ECM strategy can be implemented without technology, I'm not sure I agree that you've really implemented E2.0 without technology if all you have is strategy.

I don't like the approach of some that want to just put some technology in place and "see what happens." That is a recipe for disaster.

I go back to Andrew McAfee's definition from May 2006 - "Enterprise 2.0 is the use of emergent social software platforms within companies, or between companies and their partners or customers." (http://andrewmcafee.org/2006/05/enterprise_20_version_20/). His definition has the idea of a software platform or technology embedded within it.

I'm not disagreeing with the argument that technology without strategy is a mistake - I have seen it too many times with ECM. I'm struggling with have you really done E2.0 if you haven't implemented some technology. If the E2.0 strategy is just a first step in a longer-term roadmap, then I'm OK. Otherwise, I'm not sure you have made significant headway in E2.0 with just strategy and no further steps.
Report
Was this helpful? Yes No
Reply
Joe Shepley

You raise a good point

Douglas,

You raise a good point about whether you can have E2.0 without E2.0 technologies...and the comparison with ECM is instructive for a couple of reasons.

First, ECM went through a similar "gold rush/frontier" phase back in the day and has since matured, so it's enlightening to compare E2.0 to it to try to glimpse what E2.0 might look like once mature.

Second, I think the maturity of ECM makes "doing ECM without technology" seem more plausible, but really it faces the same challenges as E2.0...we just tend to have lots of ECM technologies laying around that we can use (ala Pie's "use what you got" line of investigation in his post). Most orgs don't have in-house E2.0 tools laying around fallow, waiting for someone to use them--it tends to be more greenfield.

Given that, I think I would reply that you cannot do either ECM or E2.0 without technology (but these days, you need technology of some sort to do just about anything in business, right?), so maybe a way to sharpen my point is to say that "doing strategy allows you to do E2.0 (or ECM) using what you have at hand and be successful, and that doing so has a greater chance of success than buying some new technology and implementing it without strategy."

In the case of ECM, "using what you have" typically means shared drives, email, c-drives, Access DBs, SharePoint, elderly versions of FileNet or Documentum, etc.

In the case of E2.0, "using what you have" would mean things like Twitter, LinkedIn, Facebook, Wordpress, YouTube, Flickr, Tumblr, etc.--commercially available tools that are free (or nearly free). A good E2.0 strategy could get pretty far at most orgs leveraging only these kinds of tools for a long time.

Anyway, appreciate your willingness to jump in and your feedback--thanks for encouraging me to sharpen my thoughts!

Cheers,

Joe
Report
Was this helpful? Yes No
Reply

This post and comment(s) reflect the personal perspectives of community members, and not necessarily those of their employers or of AIIM International