Can IT Lead the Social Business Strategy Formulation Process?

Tags: social-business, strategy-formulation, leadership, CIOs

Share :

| More

Participate

You must be registered and signed in to vote and post content.

Other Topic

Session Description

Who should lead social business strategy formulation? HR leaders focus on social networking. Marketing leaders focus on social media. IT focuses on the cross-functional flow of information. We argue that CIOs should lead the strategy formulation process to devise the enterprise social business strategy. This session explores this question.

Session Format

Panel

Target Audience

Intermediate

Principal Speaker

First Name

Keri

Last Name

Pearlson

Title

President

Company

KP Partners

Professional Biography

Dr. Keri E. Pearlson is an expert in the area of managing and using information. She has worked with CIOs and executives from some of the largest corporations in the world. She has expertise in helping executives create strategies to become Web 2.0-enabled enterprises, designing and delivering executive leadership programs, and managing multi-client programs on issues of interest to senior executives of information systems. She specializes in helping IT executives prepare to participate in the strategy formulation processes with their executive peers, specifically around building social business strategy. She's a skilled relationship manager, an accomplished meeting facilitator, an often-sought-after information resource, and a proven leader. Keri is the Founding Partner and President of KP Partners, a CIO advisory services firm.

Keri has held various positions in academia and industry. She regularly works with CIOs and their leadership teams. She has designed programs for the CIO Executive Council at CIO Magazine. She's an Adjunct professor at Babson College, in the Boston area, where she co-designed and teaches an Information Management and Social Business course in the Fast Track MBA program. Her past affiliations include nGenera (formerly the Concours Group), The Research Board (A CIO Think Tank), Harvard Business School, Stanford Business School, AT&T and Hughes Aircraft Company. She's widely published, including a text book use in about 100 schools around the world, a trade book about providing instant customer value, and a variety of case studies, columns and articles. Keri holds a Doctorate from Harvard Business school and a Masters and Bachelors from Stanford University. Learn more at her LinkedIn profile: www.linkedin.com/in/kpearlson

Company Background

KP Partners is a CIO advisory services firm, with cross-industry clients from large, global companies. KP Partners is also a partner with CIO Magazine in the design and delivery of Pathways Leadership Development program.

Co-Speaker

First Name

Jim

Last Name

McGee

Title

Managing Director

Company

New Shoreham Consulting

Professional Biography

For over 30 years, Dr. McGee has helped executives and organizations become more effective by making better use of information and communications technology. Jim attacks these problems as an entrepreneur, senior executive, professor, author, blogger, speaker, systems developer, designer, and consultant. Today, he works with senior executives in organizations to formulate, structure, and solve problems in the effective use of information technology in complex knowledge work settings.

His strength is his ability to work with organizations to recognize patterns and make sense of complex situations. His clients and he then collaborate to design and build new business patterns and practices to take advantage of these situations and opportunities. Jim has a Doctorate and an MBA from the Harvard Business School and an undergraduate degree from Princeton. Learn more from his linked in profile at http://www.linkedin.com/in/jimmcgee

Company Background

Additional Panelists

TBA

Posted on 11/12/2009 08:47 AM CST , Last Modified on 01/21/2010 12:03 PM CST

Comments (4)

Esteban Kolsky - Jan 16, 2010

I voted for this because i want to see where this argument goes. I am not going to say that I am 100% against it, but probably close to 97%. I think it is close-minded (and very much in line with the blame that IT has to share in this enterprise 2.0 "revolution" so far) to say that a single department or the head of one department should lead this. organization's users and business stakeholders are the ones that should, jointly and collaborating, set a strategy.

would love to see where you go with this.

I am also waiting for someone to come in and comment that the word "lead" is very anti 2.0. :)

Keri Pearlson - Jan 17, 2010

Esteban, you make some very good points here...'Lead' may be the wrong word, 'coordinate' may be more 2.0ish. Thank you for your support of the session, even though you don't agree...the discussion is what this conference is all about, and I hope we get the chance to have this discussion.

The argument goes something like this...managing the brand discussions is done by the PR group, managing sales is the sales group, managing customer communities is the marketing group, managing customer support is the service group, managing employee networks is HR or possibly one of the business units, managing innovation is R&D. But to successfully managing the overall strategy for 2.0, there needs to be a cross-functional leader...not someone making all the decisions (re: dictator) but someone who sets up discussions with all appropriate stakeholders so there is a coordinated effort.

Why do we need a coordinated effort? well, just as an example, if the enterprise sets up a facebook page for 'sales and customer community' do they set up another one for employees? or do employees have discussions on the 'customer' page? How do those decisions get made? So there is a need for some overall, corporate coordination.

Now, why IT? well in my world, IT leaders are business people first, and technologist second...or perhaps it's better to say they are business people with a technology expertise. Their agenda is to help the enterprise identify, and then make the best use possible of, information technologies. Their role is not to tell the business what to use, but to be at the table when strategy is formed and then help execute it..be part of the team. Sometimes they call together all the interested stakeholders to get the discussion going. They are the ones with the cross functional view of the enterprise. So they are a logical choice to "lead" or perhaps 'coordinate' the social business strategy across the enterprise.

Why isn't IT doing this now? that's another whole story and something to be discussed.

In a nutshell, that's the argument. I'm hoping we get a chance to have this discussion at e2.0, and to hear opposing arguments from the audience, too. Thanks for asking!

Esteban Kolsky - Jan 20, 2010

Keri,

Very interesting argument, really hope that you get the chance to present it -- will try to get you some support tomorrow, I know it is the last day -- but you never know.

I initially agree with everything you said until you brought in IT. I think that throwing the technology aspect in there is what stalls and, in some cases, kills the case for E2.0. This is so much more than technology, alas most people just focus on the technology (why else would MSFT have such a presence in this area -- except for the fact that they have SP2010 coming out?).

Anyways, will see what I can do with my limited power to bring you more votes --- I think that if tell people you can prove me wrong they will come to vote in droves :)

Thanks for the reply, sorry it took me this long to answer, I thought I was watching this but just found out i was not.

Break a Leg!

Benn Konsynski - Jan 17, 2010

Happy to support the theme and the particular speakers. Important question and from the writings of the participants - fresh thinking, aligned with the themes of the conference.