By Thierry de Baillon
Version française ici.
While social media is slowly earning a place inside companies, they still have none or very little impact on the rigid business processes of the enterprise. A major cultural change, along with deep redesign of corporate governance and internal working, are needed. Ironically, the seeds which might nurture the organic development and integration of networks and social tools were present in the model Philip Crosby took when he wrote Quality is Free in 1979, setting the basis for most of present processes: the Japanese concept of Kaizen.
Back in the eighties, when the principles of a quality managed enterprise emerged, US companies were outperformed by Japanese ones, whether in creativity, innovation or quality. Learning from the Japanese approach to management seemed the best way to revamp Western companies, and the Total Quality Management system took every sector of the economy by storm. These revolutionary principles soon turned into processes and certifications, with the rise of the CMMI model, followed by ISO 9001 series of norms. The modern, predictive and productive enterprise was set up.
A 25 years old misunderstanding
While the principles of constant amelioration are at the heart of the Kaizen concept and philosophy, some crucial aspects were completely left over by occidental theorists, most of them inherent to the Japanese psychology.
Doing the right thing. Honesty and transparency matter, of course, but also the sense of being at the heart of processes and implicitly acting in the right direction. The human factor is what powers the enterprise, not the procedures.
Amelioration through participation, and constant innovation. First time I assisted a meeting in Japan, I was stroke by its apparent ineffectiveness. Everybody was discussing and questioning every point, going through the process again until a consensus emerge. But, most surprising to me at that time (1981), it did emerge each time, or was induced by a manager.
Kaizen is part of Zen. Zen tells us not to focus on results, but on the act of doing. By improving the way you manage a task, you obtain better results.
Valeria Maltoni recently gave insightful advices for bloggers, based on Kaizen principles. Sadly enough, most of the barriers which prevent us to easily adopt Enterprise 2.0 concepts come from a misunderstanding.
Where should we go from now?
Take a look at the above illustrations. It is no rocket science to see they don’t fit. The first one is the picture of a typical business process workflow, while the second illustrates a small network activity. To go any further, we now need to get back at the roots of the quality driven enterprise, and, one step at a time, redesign the processes with the help of social media. By looking back to the implications of Kaizen into enterprise, and how social media organically fits into it, we will correct a 25 years misunderstanding. Kaizen IS Enterprise 2.0.
By Thierry de Baillon
English version here.
Bien que les médias sociaux gagnent lentement leur place en entreprise, ils n’ont encore que peu ou pas d’impact réel sur les rigides process business qui président à leur fonctionnement. Un changement culturel majeur, ainsi qu’une reconception de la gouvernance d’entreprise et de son fonctionnement interne, y sont nécessaires. Ironiquement, les graines qui permettraient d’ensemencer le développement organique et l’intégration des réseaux et outils sociaux en entreprise étaient présentes dans le modèle dont s’est inspiré Philip Crosby en 1979, lorsqu’il écrivit Quality is Free, jetant les bases de la plupart de nos process actuels : le concept japonais du Kaizne.
Pendant les années 80, lorsqu’émergea le principe d’une entreprise gérée par la qualité, les entreprises américaines étaient largement dépassées par les japonaises, tant dans le domaine de la créativité que dans ceux de l’innovation ou de la qualité. Tirer la leçon de l’approche japonaise du management sembla être la meilleure solution pour tirer les entreprises occidentales du marasme, et les principes du Management par la Qualité Totale prirent d’assaut tous les secteurs de l’économie. Ces principes révolutionnaires furent rapidement transformés en processus, avec l’apparition du modèle CMMI, puis celle de la série de normes ISO 9001. L’entreprise moderne, prévisible et productive, était née.
Un quiproquo de 25 ans
Bien que les principes de l’amélioration continue soient au cœur du concept et de la philosophie Kaizen, certains aspects cruciaux furent entièrement laissés de côté par les théoriciens occidentaux, la plupart d’entre eux indissociables de la psychologie japonaise.
Faire ce qui semble juste. L’honnêteté et la transparence sont importantes, bien sûr, mais plus encore le sens d’être au cœur des processus et d’agir implicitement dans la bonne direction. C’est le facteur humain qui fait fonctionner l’entreprise, et non les procédures.
L’amélioration à travers la collaboration, et l’innovation continue. Lorsque j’assistai pour la première fois à une réunion de travail au Japon, je fus frappé par son apparente inefficacité. Tout le monde discutait tout et mettait tout en question, reprenant chaque point depuis le début, jusqu’à ce qu’un consensus émerge. Et, ce qui me surprit le plus à l’époque (1981), fut que ce consensus émergeât à chaque fois, et était au pire amené par un manager.
Le Kaizen est une démarche Zen. Le Zen nous enseigne à ne pas nous focaliser sur les résultats, mais sur les actes eux-mêmes. En améliorant votre manière d’appréhender une tâche, vous en améliorez les résultats.
Valeria Maltoni a récemment donné de judicieux conseils aux blogueurs, en se basant sur les principes du Kaizen. Malheureusement, la plupart des barrières qui, aujourd’hui nous empêchent de facilement mettre en œuvre les concepts de l’Entreprise 2.0 proviennent d’un malentendu.
Quelle direction pour l’avenir ?
Regardez les illustrations ci-dessus. Il n’est pas nécessaire d’être ingénieur pour comprendre que leur association ne fonctionne pas. La première représente le workflow typique d’un process d’entreprise, tandis que la seconde illustre l’activité d’un petit réseau. Pour aller au-delà, nous devons maintenant revenir aux origines de la gestion de l’entreprise par la qualité et, pas à pas, en redesigner les process en y intégrant les médias sociaux. En regardant à nouveau ce qu’implique le Kaizen en entreprise, et la manière dont les médias sociaux s’y intègrent organiquement, nous arriverons à corriger 25 ans de malentendu. Le Kaizen EST l’Entreprise 2.0.
By Thierry de Baillon
A few months ago, several articles (like this one) pin-pointed the slow and deceptive growth of Facebook and Myscpace in Japan, compared to the overwhelming popularity of a local social netork: Mixi, explaining it by a so-called Japanese shyness in social media, or a lack of mobile-enabled services.
As a long-time Japan lover, what stroke me was that these articles, written by anglo-saxon journalists, somehow missed the point. Japanese are among the most social people on earth, mostly due to a demanding geography. They are also heavily socialized and present online, Mixi counting more than 15 millions members. Despite focusing on cultural differences, the articles fall short in explaining why services like Facebook or Myspace do not take off while Twitter got so popular in Japan in a very short time.
The 3 circles of relationship
We often refer to our relatives and close friends as our “inner circle” of relationships, while our professional contacts and loose relations reside in an outer circle, the frontier between both being quite fuzzy and lightly defined. For a Japanese, instead, the concepts of inside and outside are preponderant, and relationships vastly differ from a circle to another.
The inner circle is dominated by the concept of amae, which is proper to the Japanese mind, and which reflect an informal, albeit very empathic attitude toward each other. This is the place where strong relationships take place.
In contrast, the second circle is the place where all formal relationships occur, wether with professional contacts, or more distant friend, or even with the Japanese society as a whole. A strongly networked world made of reciprocal constraints and obligations, where trust is given as a collateral of social conformance. This is the place for giri.
On the far outside, where neither amae nor giri take place, is the rest of the world, dominated by indifference toward the other. Depending on the kind of relationships in play, the second circle can expand to the whole Japanese society vs the rest of the world, or contract to only encompass someone’s company or district.
Networking in a constrained world
One can easily see what values or behaviors are engaged when a Japanese deals with online networking. Protecting his inner circle is a fundamental need, and that’s why so many people are protecting their profile on Mixi, keeping the conversation private.
On the other side, publishing a profile on Facebook or Myspace involve claiming your identity while exposing it to the rest of the world diving deeply into a world dominated by giri. What would your boss think about you if he sees your profile ? How could you bear to manage relationships which engage giri and amae in the same place ? This is quite unconceivable for Japanese people. Anonymity is, in this case, a solution, but keeping a coherent false identity for a long time on Facebook is quite a challenge, wether for a Japanese or for a Westerner.
Twitter is quite a different and interesting case. If, on Facebook, you have to be somebody, on Twitter, you can be anything, a person, a brand, a rugby team or whatever you want, coherence is given by the context (or lack of), and you can tweet anonymously while maintaining close relationships with those you really care about. For the Japanese mind, Twitter is an open bridge between his inner circle and the far outside, where you don’t have to care about the image you give.
As different they might be, we can learn a lot from Japanese behaviors in our use of social media. More on that soon…. stay tuned! In the meantime, I would love to read about you remarks about how cultural habits condition our online behaviors.
