Twitter usage in corporate settings

Note: This blog is based on a comment I made on Sam Lawrence's blog "Twitter: A Two-way social computer" . I felt that I hadn't said all that I wanted to say about the topic. I also read @shelisrael's blog about Laura Fitton where she talks about corporate use of twitter and found some other points on which I wanted to "dwell".

I'm a twitter addict like most and as one cog in a large corporate machine, I (and many others) have been imagining if and how this technology and/or metaphor (which in my opinion is more interesting) could be applied in a corporate context. I think the marketing aspects of twitter usage ("a great vehicle for a brand extension") has been discussed in various blogs but as Laura Fitton said " To leave social media in the marketing/publicity layer is a HUGE mistake -- akin to saying email is only a marketing tool". I agree completely and in my comment to Sam's blog I attempted to examine this issue.

The success of twitter-like systems in corporate settings (internal usage only) would depend a lot on the characteristics of the particular organization in which they are being used:

• Corporate size would have a huge impact on the viability of such systems. Compare a start-up with 20 users and a corporation with 1000, 10,000 or more users. One comment refers to the productivity loss with a company of a few 100 users. Think of what the “public timeline” in a multi-national with multiple divisions would look like. The potential of twitter-like systems is that you can post a question or comment into the “flow” and get a response from someone in the corporate social network with whom you have had no previous contact. In order for this to work, these individuals must pick out your comment amongst the thousands of other questions, ideas, random thoughts. This is difficult to achieve without the users doing nothing else but watching the flow (as I have discovered with twitter).


• The difficulty in creating one single social network that depicts the corporate reality: In reality, individuals in the corporate setting are also part of many smaller social networks that represent their actual situation - the unique set of attributes that are associated with them. They are in various projects, based in certain location, etc. Based on the particular question that a user may toss into the flow, the involved social network changes as well. Maybe, I want to combine social networks: projects in China with projects dealing with dam-building. The tool in question should be deal with such request. Ideally, other tools in the corporate arena would also be able to identify which social network is appropriate based on the context of the work in which I am currently performing. If I’m working on a project plan, then it would be great to be able to watch the “flow” from other project members.

The definition of social networks is another difficulty: The value of such twitter-like systems is largely based on a correct definition of the network involved. I’m assuming that in larger corporations that the definition of social networks will be a mixture of automatically created social networks based on the individual’s current characteristics (See my blog Talkin’ through the Machine: Thoughts on Indirect NetWeaver Participation in Social Computing Environments for more details) and an selection of followers / friends based on the individual’s own choices. The critical factor is in the creation of a network that enables you to perform your job as effectively as possible. This must be of course be counter-balanced by the innovation potential of having conversations with people who are outside of your “corporate-created” networks.

I think it also critical to see twitter not as an isolated tool but part of corporate IT infrastructure with other forms of collaboration. In this environment, the transition from the twitter-like system to a wiki or some other tool would be interesting to explore. The conversations that happen in the twitter-like systems are useful but what happens based on these conversations is more important. If you look at some of Laura's ideas - "Provide extensive personal and professional support" - how is this connected with other support tools). For example, I post a question into the “flow” in a bridge-building social network. Someone in another country sees my comment and responds. Based on this conversation, we decide to view the engineering drawing in question. The transition to some sort real-time collaboration environment should be easy and supported by the corporate infrastructure. Of course, you might consider the usage of such systems are akin to a spoken conversation between two employees but the technology adds a whole another angle to it.

Archiving is another issue that must be examined. In a large corporation (just as in twitter itself) flow is active at all times - weekends, middle of the night, etc. How do you assure that those great ideas that are added at inconvenient hours aren't lost forever.

The idea of separate social networks: I think that notion that there are two separate social networks (viewed at the meta level) - one based on my corporate experience and one based on my existence outside of the corporate arena - is still valid. An artificial attempt on the part of corporations to keep these areas apart is short-sighted and, in all likelihood, impossible to achieve. My current twitter network represents a combination of both worlds. - the corporate firewall make stop usage of twitter tools but an individual’s network itself exists outside corporate control.

From a corporate perspective, the power arises when these two networks start to merge - when I as an individual - if desired - can exploit their combined power to accomplish tasks. When I’m working on a large outsourcing project, there are individuals from different organizations - inside and outside the corporation - involved. To draw the line at firewall and say, “My social network can’t cross this line” no longer mirrors reality. It might be useful to distinguish between Intranet-, Extranet- and Internet-based social networks. From the corporate perspective (based as well on the tasks involved), a network that spans Intranet - Extranet might be more acceptable than Intranet-Internet (such an interaction is of course useful when talking to end-users / customers).

It would be interesting to discuss the various use cases - the processes involved - in the corporate arena where twitter might be useful and to examine the associated pain points that must be solved. Examining the ideas that Laura describes, I think the following ones have the most promise:

• Summarize core ideas
• Flatten the org chart to create feedback and mentoring
• Fast sharing of ideas, news and information
  

I think these are also some of the reasons that makes twitter outside the corporate arena so fascinating. It's also curious to see that the topics are deal with improving communications between individuals in a network. Both environments are based on the successful creation and exploitation of a social network. The fact that the goals that motivate individuals in these two settings are usually different is also are reflected in the expectations regarding twitter and other similar systems.

Groups in twitter

As my twitter network increases in size, I am becoming more aware that the number of twitter messages increases accordingly. Duh. Initially, I just looked at the twitter archive when I arrived at work every morning to see what sort of conversations had occurred during the night. Lately, however, I have realized that this is slowly becoming impossible. There are so many messages in the archive that after a while I just give up. So, I usually look at few pages in the archive and then look at my "replies" and "directs". I have no idea how other twitter users with hundreds or thousands of users in their network work with this flow.

I'm actually a little bit saddened by this tendency, because there were probably great tweet streams that I would enjoy. When I think of twitter now, I am sort of reminded about the title sequence for the Matrix movies where you see this jungle of characters growing and intertwining like snakes.

What I'd like to see is the ability to group twitter users. I know there are some sites that already do this but I'd like to see a client that supports this. The characteristics of this feature would be

• I can define my own groups of users and share this group with others (either privately or publicly). Sort of like Chris Brogan's twitterpacks . You often see new twitter users being introduced by well known users. What about the ability to "import" a group from one of these well-known users for example, important twitter users who talk about social networks from the perspective @shelisrael . You could then use this group and add members to it or delete it when necessary. You might also get messages when Shel adds or deletes users to this list.
• The groups should be able to be hierarchical.
• A client should be able to sort messages. For example, I come in the morning and I want to read tweets from those in my "friends" twitter group. Then I read the tweets from my group "technical gurus" and so forth.
• If I'm feeling frisky, I can then take a look at the timeline that includes my entire network.

As twitter becomes more popular, such a feature would definitely make things easy for users.

Note: This feature isn't new. There are other blogs that describe the problem: Groups for Twitter; or A Proposal for Twitter Tag Channels and even a twitter user

What corporations should not do on twitter

Lately I’ve been seeing more and more corporations moving into the twitter arena:. @oracle, @capgemini, @accenture, etc. I’ve been thinking whether this is really an appropriate usage for this technology. Many of these corporations just use their tweets to either announce blogs or use the platform as a mechanism to make PR-like announcements. This usage is probably more useful in an RSS feed. Some might say that the misuse of twitter to publicize such events is an attempt to use twitter as an aggregator for social networks and RSS feeds. Personally, I use twitter for a more personal reason – I like to see what people are doing and thinking. As I follow Jeremiah Owyang (@jowyang), I like to see what he is doing (who he is visiting, etc.). Based on his tweets, you can understand how his ideas develop and you can help influence his ideas.

Of course, behind many of these corporate accounts is one or more individuals impersonating the corporation. In my opinion, this really doesn’t make any sense. A corporate account can’t tweet about a few crazy ideas about Facebook or ask you where he/she should stay in San Francisco. For me, twitter is personal – as my followers grow I can interact with these individuals on a personal basis. Interaction with a corporation at the same level is impossible.

If I want to complain about Macy’s, then an exchange of tweets with @Macys twitter user is probably going to be unsatisfying. I can exchange tweets with others in my social network about a particular product or corporation. If I want to interact with a corporation, there are better environments such as GetSatisifaction. As James Governor (@monkchips) once said, twitter must be fun.

If you want to represent your corporation in twitter, then it is probably better to personalize your account @acme_marketing for the Marketing director of Acme widgets. Still better might be a real person with a profile that links with your company. When I check the profile for this user, I’d like to see a real name of someone and an twitter avatar with a picture of a person. If users are looking for your company, they will find you via other search-related means.

If you are planning to use twitter as a corporation, be aware of the expectations that accompany its usage. Twitter is not a blog – it is a lifestream whose usage is much more intensive. Followers expect multiple tweets per day and to see that those being followed respond to interaction request by followers. Thus, it would be unexpected to see a CEO to use twitter - although this would definitely be an interesting experience.

I just found the Editorial Policy Guidance Note from the BBS regarding their presence on social networks. In this policy, it emphasizes the importance of "conversations, participate online; don’t “broadcast” messages to users". I then checked out @bbc on twitter and discovered that it is just a news feed. I don't consider this a "conversation".

I obviously see a value in corporations joining twitter but such an association must be based on the environment’s unique characteristics and not the usual assumptions that accompany traditional marketing campaigns.

The effect of relationship type on social networks

If you look at social networks (Facebook, twitter, LinkedIn, etc.), you will see that they are usually based on relationships between individuals and on occasion (corporations). These relationships are based on individuals with common characteristics and are purely voluntary. Individuals represent themselves. They can act as experts on various topics or provide advice.
Usually relationships in social networks are very loose. Involved users don't have to use their real name and may join and leave the network as they please without experiencing any real penalties. Although certain behavior is frowned upon, the worse that can happen is that their account for that network is deleted.

There are, however, a variety of other types of relationships in which we as individuals are involved. For example, a user may represent his corporation when collaborating with other individuals from other corporations. In such a relationship, there are certain legal requirements that must be met in order for such collaboration to even take place. There are governance issues. Before such individuals can interact, there must be legal agreements that must be present - or there must be some common agreement regarding which rules (moral, etc.) are valid and which must be followed. In a collaborative project environment in which individuals work together, there will be a big difference between environments in which individuals can come and go as they wish (such as open source development projects) and situations where individuals have a certain responsibility (regarding commitment of time and materials) that must be met.

This idea isn't just restricted to corporate cooperation. What about a social network from a clinic that is based on group therapy between an experienced therapist and a group of out-clinic patients. If the group understands that the therapist is obligated by his legal responsibility to not pass the discussed information on to others, the patients may be more willing to speak freely. Thus, such a "closed" group bounded by a legal document / responsibility might be much more effective than a normal chat room.

What effects can different relationship characteristics have on social network technology? One impact may be linked to admittance to the social network itself or to certain parts of the social network. For example, in order to join certain groups, users are required to provide certain legal documents that act as a "governance gate" and which spell out the restrictions and expectations of joining the network.

Thus, it can be expected that as social networks on the Internet expand in their popularity than such networks will expand to include other types of relationships. The technology involved must also change to meet these new restrictions. For example, interaction with other systems (for example archives from notary publics or attorneys) where the presence of documents may be checked. Another possible scenario involves the use of other authentication schemes (besides username/password) where the real identification of users (perhaps via PKI or other stronger methods of authentication) is known.

Currently, this necessary changes in existing social network software is usually the result of custom development work. There is definitely potential here for niche players to move into this area.

Finnegan's Wake in Twitter: New forms of fiction

If you try and define twitter and distinguish it from other types of communication, one thing that has always fascinated me that tweets could be seen as snippets from someone's thoughts. Sort of like James Joyce's Finnegan's Wake where you can read someone's thoughts. In twitter, you can act as a voyeur (as a casual follower) and just read what the others are saying / thinking: or you can also communicate with them and join in / effect their thought process.
The opportunity exists for a new type of fiction based on tweets. If you look at current attempts to use twitter to create fiction, the usual attempt is to create a work of fiction based on the individual tweets of interested participants . In my opinion, this really doesn't capture the true essence of twitter.
I am imagining a another type of fiction based on twitter where you jump into a story by reading the tweets that characters are writing - real time. Picture a story of a political campaign in which the two candidates create tweets that express their thoughts before certain events - a television debate or an election. Followers could just read and enjoy or they could contribute to the story with tweets of their own reflecting their role as campaign manager or television moderator or voter who is getting ready to cast his vote. Or another story might concern a murder mystery where the murderer and the detective each reflect on the "hunt" and "chase". Users could take over characters such as a television reporter covering story, etc. Of course, you might have sort of a War of the worlds effect where uninformed followers might think these were real thoughts. If you had too many people tweeting on the story line (maybe using #hashtags to coordinate things. Of course, the created story may get out of control if too may people start getting involved but hey life is complicated / chaotic as well.

Twitter-like systems in corporate environments

I was thinking about the use of a twitter-like environment in a corporate setting that would allow users to send tweets that contained more „appropriate“ (at least in a corporate setting) content than those usually sent in Twitter. Users working on particular projects might keep their followers abreast of their activities (creating marketing proposal for customer x, working on CAD design for Ford Viper 10 air intake value, etc.). Those users who wish to comment could then send a tweet back with advice, comments, etc.

This is of course the goal of most corporate uses of social network technology. Managers know that there will probably be some degree of „personal“ traffic in such environments. Those tweets that are of a more collaborative character will be critical in efficiently using the knowledge and experience of its workforce. Once those individuals who grow up using this technology enters the workforce in greater force then such behavior/opportunities for collaboration will be acceptable and expected in corporate settings.

One critical issue will be the creation of the social networks in the corporate setting. Will individuals be allowed to create their own? Will the corporation add individuals with a certain profile (same division, same customer, etc.) to an employee‘s network in order to achieve the desired efficiency. This might be expected inasmuch as the huge number of potential followers in a global company will be unknown to the individual employee. I‘ve talked about one variation of „dynamic“ creation of social networks in a corporate setting in one of my SDN blogs. There are probably of variety of other options available depending on industry and corporate culture.

Thoughts on Twitter and ITunes Integration

What about a closer association between iTunes and Twitter. You could tweet not what you are curently listening to (see Steve Clifford's Current-Track-to-Twitter for the Macintosh ) which might occur automatically but I think a more interesting approach might include your quick (two words) review of the content (either song, tv show, etc.) that you have just consumed.

Integration on a song level might overflow your followers and might be time-conmsuming, so albums might be better.

You'd have to look at privacy issues as well if you started streaming your iTunes content in the background. Remember the problems that Facebook had.

If you were looking at a windows box, the ITunes API -which appears to be based on COM- could be accessed via JAVA and combined with the Twitter API.