My colleague (and new GovLoop friend) Andrew posted a bang-up deck on measurement earlier today.
I love metrics and poring over data, so I refer you to it. Good stuff. Already, organizations that are focused, proactive and disciplined about measurement are seeing good results.
For example, last week, my nGenera colleague Laura Carillo presented at our members meeting the results of her private sector research on “the ROI of collaboration” which highlighted these outcomes, to date, by example:
– SeaWorld –Spent $44,000, Generated $2.6M!!
– Intrawest –Saved $500,000 on a $2M project
– TransUnion –Spent $50,000, Saved $2.5M!
– Best Buy –Decreased voluntary turnover by 90%
– Bell Canada –25% of sales revenue
– Threadless –Margins above 30%, No sales force!
But, the thing that Laura would tell you and that Andrew highlights – although in different language and perhaps with a little less volume than I am – is the absolutely essential nature of identification and alignment around what we call “collaborative intents,” which appears roughly equivalent to what Andrew identifies as “mission tenants.”
This is the missing link to success. As the phrase implies, “collaborative intents” specifically addresses the issue “what am I intending to do?” with and through collaboration. Unfortunately, the most common error is not (a) identifying as precisely as possible the collaborative intents and then (b) aligning and committing the team around them.
It turns out that – when you interview and survey the principals in lots of enterprises and review the case write-ups of many successful and failed collaborative initiatives – the list of collaborative intents boils down to a handful.
Here are a few examples (we’ve identified about a dozen in total so far):
1. “Connecting previously unrelated ideas” – with the target outcome(s) being: consistent and effective innovation, amplified knowledge, capability, creativity.
2. “Coordinating in time and space” – with the target outcome(s) being: individual and group productivity, employee engagement, flexible and asynchronous work arrangements
3. “Distributing work, cost, or risk” – with the target outcome(s) being: specialization and cost reduction, process performance
You can read more about what another of my colleagues, Tammy Erickson, who was the chief architect of the collaborative intents research, wrote about the subject a little earlier this summer on the Wikinomics blog.