What if someone says something bad about us on social media? We cant do that!
Isnt that one of the bigger hesitations of orgs using social media? It is easy to think through what to do if the comments are just wrong, but what if the comments are bad but correct, just plain mean or pose a real risk?
I am a huge fan of the Air Force Blog Assessment chart! This is what we used to guide the discussion around how and when we should reply to comments on our social media sites. This visual worked great to allow non-tech staff to think through and understand all of the options. It also helped leadership to feel more comfortable with our ability to reply.
But what do you do when the same comments start to cross boundaries and exposure your participants, your members or your organization to real risk?
So in addition to the Air Force Blog Assessment we decided to create a comment escalation flow chart. This is intended to help our social media authors decide what action to take in addition to the reply. We wanted to have a documented process for our employees to use and to find a way to keep our Communications & Risk Management departments in the loop. So here is what we came up with. We are also working on documenting the actual steps they take but wanted a visual to make it understandable and simple.
What are your thoughts on this? Do you have similar things in place?
Here is why I decided to share this. Moderating comments may seem like just another task that has to be done by our authors. But in this particular pilot launch the authors are working with Teens. So when they take action on an inappropriate comment, they are actually working toward the goals of their program. By having a conversation with a program participant about responsible behavior online, they are reinforcing the program goal of strengthening self image and how you present yourself.
Showing posts with label policy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label policy. Show all posts
Friday, June 4, 2010
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Software randomly creates policy where none exists & other stuff I learned
If there isnt a documented process, policies or set of standards that your organization uses to define it's best practices on how business is conducted, then by default your software may create it for you. Software and the solutions you use will have built in policies and processes. So in lieu of you picking the best way to run your business you allow the software to do it for you. WOW! How come I had never really put that thought together in my head?
Ok, so in many cases following the rules and policies dictated by your software is a good thing. Many times these are based on regulations, business practices and audit standards. But beyond that should you determine the most effective way to run your organization, then try to adapt those practices to your software. Rather than seeing how the software works, then letting that dictate your process?
Slow down Steve, where is all of this craziness coming from?
I was excited to be given the chance to present my #10ntc Ignite session for a small group over at the Great Book Foundation. My ignite session tries to relay a point about how technology staff talking about tools and solutions can kill your audience. After that I spend about 20 minutes talking all about IT Alignment stuff from the NTEN book. Then we opened it up for some questions and answers.
There was a group of questions that revolved around determining policy, planning technology strategy and staff roles in all of this. That is when someone asked about how do you manage a multi-layer technology strategy that meets the needs of the individual staff, each department and the full organization. If you are meeting all of those needs wouldnt that require multiple technology strategies and require those strategies to start from very different perspectives?
That lead me to try to explain how you do need to have a few parts to your IT Alignment strategy. This goes back to John Merritt's idea of the ART of the Technology. ART = Alignment, Relationship, Transparency. First, have a strategy to make the technology work so well that it is transparent, second work to build relationships between IT and the rest of the org, third move technology to meeting the mission through Alignment. So yes, it is a bunch of strategies, not just one focused on mission, but that is still the end goal.
Steve, you are so off track yet again, wasnt this post about software creating policy? Yes, it is about that and I am trying to get back to that if you would just let me.
This then loops us back to the comment about software creating policies and practices where there are none. If you dont have a well rounded technology strategy that is focusing on all three elements Alignment, Relationship and Transparency tied to the mission it is easy to let the tools take over.
WOW! Did you see how I just tied that all together and referenced the ignite session as well? ZOINKS!
Ok, so in many cases following the rules and policies dictated by your software is a good thing. Many times these are based on regulations, business practices and audit standards. But beyond that should you determine the most effective way to run your organization, then try to adapt those practices to your software. Rather than seeing how the software works, then letting that dictate your process?
Slow down Steve, where is all of this craziness coming from?
I was excited to be given the chance to present my #10ntc Ignite session for a small group over at the Great Book Foundation. My ignite session tries to relay a point about how technology staff talking about tools and solutions can kill your audience. After that I spend about 20 minutes talking all about IT Alignment stuff from the NTEN book. Then we opened it up for some questions and answers.
There was a group of questions that revolved around determining policy, planning technology strategy and staff roles in all of this. That is when someone asked about how do you manage a multi-layer technology strategy that meets the needs of the individual staff, each department and the full organization. If you are meeting all of those needs wouldnt that require multiple technology strategies and require those strategies to start from very different perspectives?
That lead me to try to explain how you do need to have a few parts to your IT Alignment strategy. This goes back to John Merritt's idea of the ART of the Technology. ART = Alignment, Relationship, Transparency. First, have a strategy to make the technology work so well that it is transparent, second work to build relationships between IT and the rest of the org, third move technology to meeting the mission through Alignment. So yes, it is a bunch of strategies, not just one focused on mission, but that is still the end goal.
Steve, you are so off track yet again, wasnt this post about software creating policy? Yes, it is about that and I am trying to get back to that if you would just let me.
This then loops us back to the comment about software creating policies and practices where there are none. If you dont have a well rounded technology strategy that is focusing on all three elements Alignment, Relationship and Transparency tied to the mission it is easy to let the tools take over.
WOW! Did you see how I just tied that all together and referenced the ignite session as well? ZOINKS!
Monday, April 13, 2009
ROI of Flexibility - I believe in it, do you?
ROI of flexibility. OK, I have to say I love that phrase. My friend over at Earth Justice posted a blog entry on www.idealware.org called ROI of Flexibility. Great thoughts in there. This was in response to a great post from Beth Kanter about how IT can support your social media strategy.
Read their blog entries, they are great and much smarter than myself. Enough said. Well maybe I will go ahead and add my thoughts.
This is a great example of this whole IT Alignment stuff I have been blabbing about for a few weeks now.
Since when does IT want to be the enforcer and police of the organization?
I know it takes more time and maybe more money to have unique and personal relationships between IT and different staff across the organization, but isnt it more important to meet their individual needs (like meeting the mission) than it is to be completely standard? Isnt that what exceptions are for?
Simple explanations of why policies are in place and then allowing for easy requests to be made to get exceptions can go a long way to making IT more approachable.
Like they always say, "try to make it easier to ask for permission, rather than asking for forgiveness."
OK, no idea if those thoughts made any sense, but I have a lot of work to do now. Gonna go try to break the WebSense filter at my org.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)