Oy. Its been a month and 2 days since last I posted. That is far too long. I will endeavor to tighten up. Ok, when last we spoke, I wrote on the use of the Social Quotient to determine the likelihood of success in a Social Media initiative. So its just sorta hangin out there now... how do you assess a companies' SQ? So here are my measures, feel free to recommend your own.
1. Are there Grass Roots Social Media efforts underway current -- Award 1 point for Yes, 0 for No
2. Is there someone at the organization "in charge" of Social Media - look to the comms and marketing orgs typically, there may be more than one person doing this job. - Award 1 point for Yes, 0 for No
3. Innovation Measurement - I think propensity for innovation is a key indicator of the ability for an org to fulfill the promise of Social Media - to me it represents an openness to new ways of doing things.
- Compensation tied to Innovation & Innovation initiatives (bonus pay typically) -- 6 pts
- Dedicated Innovation Function in multiple functional groups - 5 pts
- Employees encouraged to experiment and Fail Fast - 3 pts
- Dedicated Innovation Function in one group (R&D) - 2 pts
- No innovation function - 0 pts
4. Cultural Fit - this is a completely subjective measure and one that some may find useful and others not but here goes:
- Risk Embracing (use failure as a means to drive success)- 6 pts
- Risk Tolerant (don't like failure but not afraid of it) - 3 pts
- Limited Risk Taking (failure and risk are not liked much and failure is looked down upon) - 2pts
- Business Laggard (fuggedaboutit) - 0 pts
5. Management style - is the company consensus-driven or command-and-control oriented or somewhere in between. Too much of either style is no good. Consensus is inherently more social but slower, C and C is less social, more controlling but faster. You need a balance of the two:
- Balanced Management Style - 3 pts
- Command and Control - 1 pt
- Consensus - driven - 1 pt
- Its a mess - 0 pts
6. Action Orientation - while not a prime indicator of success or failure in Social Media, I view a companies action orientation as indicative of the length of time it takes companies to move from insight, to strategy to execution. The more Analysis driven an enterprise the longer it typically takes it to get in market. Conversely Seat of the Pants decision making can be just as detrimental - granted you get to market fast but with the right thing? Again, a balanced approach is warranted.
- Balanced Action Orientation - 3 pts
- Analysis Orientation - 1 pt
- Seat of the Pants Orientation - 1 pt
- Its a mess - 0 pts
7. Co-innovation - does your organization regularly co-innovate with customers? Do you listen customers? Solicit feedback regularly? Do you create with them?
- To a large degree - 6 pts
- To some degree - 3 pts
- Rarely - 2 pts
- Not at all - 0 pts
8 Customer-centricity - how customer centric is your organization? Do you tend to put the customer at the center for all your efforts? Is there inherent transparency between your brand and your customers? Are customers "valued"? Do you use Net Promoter Score to measure your loyalty and engagement with customers?
- To a large degree - 6 pts
- To some degree - 3 pts
- Rarely - 2 pts
- Not at all - 0 pts
I've also considered adding a "Millennial Infusion" rating. What is the Make-up Millennials in your organization. Millennials and Gen Xers are digitally native and tend to have a higher propensity to adopt social tools than late and early stage boomers - although this is in no way a hard and fast rule. However, I don't have any data suggesting where the tipping point is on how many Millennials are needed to ratchet up adoption. Suffice it to say that the more the better.
These are the major metrics I like. There are more and for a complete assessment I would use more. But this in my opinion is directionally credible.
This data can be gathered via an on-line survey of hundreds of employees or you can do this as part of a risk assessment.. I typically recommend a broader based approach. I'd also recommend the use of ethnographic techniques to sound out the true orientation of a given enterprise - participant observation, guided interviews and facilitated sessions would work well here.
So how did you score?
High SQ: Strong Propensity for Success: 25 - 32 Points
Medium SQ: Likely to succeed but there are Risks which must be managed: 17-24 points
Low SQ: Substantial Risks to a Successful Implementation: 10 -17 points
Abysmal SQ: Likely to Fail: 0-10 points
