Testing. The very word can send shivers down my spine. In the sports realm, it means finding out who’s the fastest, strongest, most agile – and no one likes to be the slowest, weakest, or least agile. In school, it can mean a variety of things. It can mean a big exam that students spend hours, days even, preparing for. Other times it could mean an unpleasant surprise for students, intending to find out who has been diligent with their reading and who has not.

With all this prior experience with testing, I didn’t know how to react to the handful of threats thrown at me to test GroupSwim. First of all, I had no idea how I could possibly test GroupSwim. Would it entail testing GroupSwim or testing my own performance on GroupSwim?

Then I heard talks of finding and filing “bugs.” What could this possibly mean? I knew there weren’t insects crawling through the Internet, so was GroupSwim sick? I later realized that “bugs” were defects in the system that are fixed by re-writing the respective html. Is this what I would be testing? How would I find these “bugs”? The very idea that there could be bugs on GroupSwim baffles me. All the websites I visit seem to function easily and quickly – in fact, I would be upset if they didn’t. So does this mean that every website has a team of programmers constantly filing and fixing bugs? I guess you learn something new everyday.

In the end, testing was like a finger prick. Anxiety built up in anticipation of finding out what testing was, just like how it builds up between the time the doctor tells you you need a finger prick and when the nurse walks in with the stick and band aid. But then afterwards, it was like “that’s it?”  Naturally, it was very tough to find any bugs in GroupSwim since it is such excellent software

When we get together to work on new products, business challenges or anything related to making GroupSwim a better (insert noun here) product, company, service, etc; we always try to make sure we are asking the RIGHT question. This is an age old topic that came to great popularity when Larry Bossidy wrote the book “Execution: The Discipline of Getting Things Done”. It pointed out the common sense issues of tracking the RIGHT metrics relative to your business.

I thought of this recently when thumbing through an issue of Newsweek. N’Gai Croal wrote a piece on Twitter called “Thoughtcasting: U R So Vain“.  In the start of the second paragraph, N”Gai asks this question;

The question I’ve been asking myself lately is this: just because I can publish my every thought, does it mean that I should?

His story goes on to explain how easy and seductive Twitter and Tumblr are to use.  He seeks guidence from the founders about what to include and (more importantly) what not to include in your micro-blog.

I think that he asks the right question, but seeks the wrong answer.  I think it gets back to the original point.  Just because I am technically able to broadcast my micro-thoughts, should I?  Besides my mother, who really hangs off of every word I am saying?  Do people really need to know that I am waiting for a bus or had junk food for lunch?

I see how the popularity of these services has grown as traditional bloggers realize how hard it is to keep feeding their blogs with new content (In media theory we refer to this as the Aborhent Vacuum).  It is MUCH easier to post a 140 character statement than create a complete blog post.  So they use Twitter and Tumblr to feed the vacum with snipits.  I get it.  But in the world of attention scarcity, do I really want to use my time to hear that so and so is waiting in line somewhere?  Obviously, the answer is no.

So, in asking the right questions, what are the appropriate uses for a service like twitter?  How long will it take our society to injest this new technology to cut through the clutter and make this useful?

I have heard of two useful applications of Twitter and Tumblr since I started questioning active users.  One was a sales manager at a small, fast growing start-up.  He uses Twitter to let his team know how to get ahold of him when they have time sensitive issues.  The other was an industry analyst that use Twitter to get feedback on new ideas. Neither is using it to satisfy some ego centric need.  They are trying to make their respecitive work processes more productive.

So, how do you use Twitter?

Traditionally, TMI was a TLA (three letter acronym) for “Too Much Information”.  It was historically used as a joke term when someone went too far in describing a personal situation or problem that was off color or too detailed.

In practicality, it was a simple moniker for information overload.  This is something we of the computer age are dealing with everyday.   Since the growth of computing infrastructure in business, government and the home, we have seen large industries evolve to manage the TMI problem.  We have seen post-facto solutions such as Google search to simplify the ability to find things.  While definitely progress, it is still rather primitive relatively speaking.

The trouble is the challenge is growing exponentially.  I believe the definition of TMI today refers to both “Too Much Information” and “Too Many Inputs”.   We have moved from newspapers and broadcast media, to the early web of AOL and Yahoo, to over 1 billion websites and blogs.

A simple scan of my computing environment reveals that I have RSS feeds, meme sites, news sites, IM, email, and voice communications that I access from my computer and my mobile device.  I have Yahoo IM, Skype, AIM and 6 different email addresses.  Now I have multiple social networks to manage including Facebook and LinkedIn.  In the work environment, I commonly have 4 or 5 applications running at any time.  I usually access multiple websites and services via the web.

The resulting chaos is a real productivity killer.  In thinking this through, the compounding problem seems strangely similar to Metcalf’s law.  Metcalf hypothesized that the power of the network is equivalent to the square of the number of computers connected to it (Note: there is some controversy as to the validity of this concept).  In the context of TMI, I propose that the amount of overload from TMI is the square of the number of inputs associated with a single user.  I represent this as follows:

Chaos = (Inputs + Devices)2

•    With “Inputs” referring to applications, websites, email accounts, chat, RSS etc.
•    With “Devices” referring to PCs, Laptops, Mobile Phones, Kindles etc.

In my case, my Chaos score is (at least) 3844
In contrast, my father’s Chaos score is 36

We at GroupSwim think deeply about Chaos and its resulting impact on the work environment.  We believe that thriving in Chaos is ultimately a requirement for success in the modern workplace.  Pragmatically, we see that Chaos in the workplace is here to stay.  We believe a team or an organization can be smart about controlling the level of Chaos by controlling the inputs and improving the quality of the inputs that remain.  With the GroupSwim collaboration environment, our goal is to reduce the inputs and improve the quality for a team or organization while delivering all the access to information they need to be successful at their task at hand.

So, the real question is; what is your Chaos score?

Check out the coverage here.  Ben Kepes, an accomplished blogger, is a guest blogger on the site and was kind enough to feature GroupSwim.  Enjoy!

Paul Kedroskry captures the collective mood (and an approach for a moment of relief) in his “Uplifting” post.  While I have seen Matt’s video earlier, I initially missed the bigger point.

It is really all about people.  So, while the market tanks, the earth burns, and the mortgage crisis takes new shape on a daily basis, don’t lose site of having a little fun with friends and family.

One of the advantages of my position at GroupSwim is I get to see lots of customers and their sites.  It affords me the opportunity to observe what works and what doesn’t work.  I’ve concluded that there is one thing that is very effective in getting people to collaborate effectively - using very specific groups to guide people on where to post discussions, documents or wikis.

I know this sounds simple but it isn’t.  For example, if I’m creating a collaboration site for a professional services project, I might use these groups:

1. Project Management Meeting Notes
2. Executive Interview Results
3. Technical Infrastructure Issues
4. Gruntmaster 2000 Training Documents

Instead of:

1. Project Planning
2. Technical
3. Training

I see this over and over again where customers using specific groups like the first list see significantly higher volume and more value than those using groups like the second list.  There is a psychological barrier that people need to overcome when using a collaboration tool like GroupSwim.  As I’ve discussed in previous blog posts, it is so easy to fall back into the habits of using email or nothing at all.  What I’m observing is if you are very proscriptive in how you want employees or customers to collaborate, they will respond.  I’m not saying limit their options.  If they want to create additional groups and collaborate more, by all means turn them loose. However, when getting things started, the more specific you can be, the better results you will achieve.

The first list is a good example of internal collaboration; it is the same thing with external customer collaboration.  One of our clients created an external community and the groups they use are very detailed.  They don’t just go by products, but have different groups for specific modules.  They also have groups for roles and technologies.  What this does is make it very easy for users to see where they should post content.  EVERYTHING we do to encourage collaboration should remove friction from the process.  This is one very easy way to do it.  It reminds me of a golf swing; if you set-up correctly over the ball with the proper grip and alignment, you have a higher probability of hitting a great shot.  The same thing holds true for collaboration.  If you structure your groups and tools correctly, you have a higher probability of achieving great results.

There is one thing we do here at GroupSwim that we never boast about; all of us bike to work (both in San Francisco and Sweden).  I admit I was a little intimidated when I first joined the team.  I don’t think I had consistently rode my bike to anything since grade school.  However, the whole team does it so I thought why couldn’t I.  I’m not saying there wasn’t peer pressure because that would be a blatant lie.

Turns out, riding to work isn’t so hard.  Once you get in the routine of it, it is actually fun.  Here are some things to consider if you decide to take up bike commuting:

1. Linkage with public transportation if you have them.  I take the Ferry across the bay so I need to consider the schedule for departure times
2. Meeting with customers - we have a locker in the office so I keep a change of clothing there to change into when we have face-to-face meetings
3. Weather - this is an obvious one.  In the summer, it is very straight forward.  During the winter, having good rain gear on hand is crucial.  One night I was riding from the ferry back to home, and it was dumping.  I was wearing my gear, but after a while, I was so wet I started aiming for puddles because it was physically impossible to be any wetter.  I felt like a little kid again
4. Equipment - my bike has become my main form of transportation.  It requires a similar commitment to maintenance that you provide for a car
5. Death buds, otherwise known as head phones.  I ride with them on certain routes home as I’m mostly on trails or sidewalks, but I don’t recommend them if you do much city riding as you never know where an opening car door or distracted driver is going to pop up

While I (and my colleagues) like saving the planet, I think I speak for all of us when I say we really enjoy it.  It provides great time to think and get some exercise.  Try it out; it isn’t as hard as you might think.

I’ve been thinking about the difference between implementing a collaboration application for business versus more traditional applications like ERP, CRM, etc. (insert other acronym here).  I’ll try not to be biased but I believe that implementing an application like GroupSwim is different and easier.  First, let’s list a couple of assumptions and my conclusions:

Assumption #1: The amount of archived/older information that people rely on for their day-to-day knowledge-based jobs is relatively small

Conclusion #1: The need for collaboration software to integrate with older documents and information stores is minor but often overblown.  I know this flies in the face of tradition, but I think it is true.  From what I’ve experienced, people use a small subset of documents, resources, etc. and do most of their work from their inbox and on specific documents that are part of their current plate of work.  This isn’t necessarily a good thing but is reality; people aren’t accessing 1 year old plus documents very often.  For example, if you are product manager, you probably do most of your work on current product specs, analysis, customer focus groups, etc..  If you are a sales person, you use a small set of documents (marketing collateral, emails you like to send, account plans, contracts, etc.) to find and close deals.  The list goes on but you get it.  So, I don’t think making every single document every created available to a new system is important.  There is no doubt that there is a group of documents (training, in process files, etc.) that are important, but they can be added manually or integrated without trying to integrate everything.

Assumption #2: Collaborative work is dynamic and constantly changing

Conclusion #2: There are few examples of a “best” time to roll-out a collaborative solution.  Employees are constantly collaborating on something so just get started.  There are reasonable examples of where it makes sense.  For example, if a group get reorganized, or a new project or process gets kicked off, etc., these are good times to start using a collaborative solution like GroupSwim.  However, my conclusion is that now is as good a time as any to get started.  I think that most “knowledge” work requires collaboration on an every day basis, so there is no time like the present to bite the bullet and get started.

Assumption #3: Collaboration is an ill-defined process at best

Conclusion #3: The change management and leadership required to make people collaborate differently is even more onerous than traditional systems.  For example, when you implement a new CRM, ERP or whatever, your work process to get things done “must” change.  You are essentially forced to modify the way you work whether you like or not based on the new system you must use.  With a system like GroupSwim or other collaborative solutions, you can still use email and other means to get work done even though the outcome and process might suck.  So, it is incumbent on a champion and other internal leaders to make sure people buy-in and use new collaborative tools like GroupSwim to change the they work.  Eventually, they will get it and not require the oversight but it is critically important in the beginning to change habits.

Taking all three points into consideration, I think the collaboration implementations generally overestimate the need to integrate and deal with technical issues and underestimate the need for leadership and change management.  It is always harder to change people’s work habits and soft skills versus changing a discrete process or operational system.  What do you think?

After two weeks of being an intern, I feel like I’m getting the hang of it. For starters, my feelings towards BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit, e.g. subway) have changed dramatically. What was once a form of public transportation with dirty seats and pushy people has now transformed into a convenient and affordable way of getting into the city. Although my thoughts on the germs and fellow patrons have not changed, I’ve come to accept BART in all its grunginess and be grateful for the independence it has provided me. No matter what time I leave the office, I always know there will be a Pittsburg/Bay Point train coming to take me home within ten minutes of racing down the escalator of the Montgomery Station. And as long as I text my aunt upon passing through Rockridge, I know that there is someone waiting to pick me up from the Walnut Creek station. Whether or not this makes me feel like I’m back in middle school or not is insignificant when compared to the inconvenience I get to avoid every morning of searching for an open parking spot – which does not exist - in the parking structure at 9:30. The icing on the cake is the seemingly foreign thought - to a native of Dallas, where bikes are for recreation not transportation - that I make an effort to “free the air” everyday that I ride BART.

Besides my growing familiarity with BART, I’ve also become used to an “office life.” I’ve learned to expect a cry for lunch once the clock strikes twelve. I’ve watched the minutes crawl past two o’clock when my food coma (from lunch) officially sets in. I’ve also learned that seven-ish hours in front of a computer can make the thought of getting on Facebook at night revolting – a feeling I never thought I’d experience at the thought of logging onto the beloved Facebook.

So, I’ve gotten used to getting to the office and being at the office. But what exactly am I doing at the office you might be wondering? In the absence of my GroupSwim mentors, Tom and Jason, while they were at Enterprise 2.0, I explored GroupSwim by making my own trial site. I also helped out with a project the team was hired to do, which involves the use of the GroupSwim technology. I did a great deal of research, observed meetings, and sat in focus groups. With no prior experience with focus groups, I had no idea what to expect, but I found them to be very interesting; what I found to be especially interesting was how the participants interacted with each other and how these interactions sometimes swayed the opinions of all involved.

My current task is creating a customer database to help GroupSwim take on a marketing campaign with hopes of expanding their current pool of customers. In order to do this, I am using current lists of high tech companies, researching these companies to find the information I need about them, and loading them into Salesforce.

I have also been threatened many a time with familiarizing myself with this vague thing called “testing” so don’t be surprised if I start talking about this in upcoming weeks.

The thought occurred to me that we could use tags in GroupSwim to manage workflow.  What I mean by this is use tags to dynamically assign work to users/groups/teams in a GroupSwim site and monitor them in real time.  I’m not talking about a structured, pre-defined workflow engine like applications such as a help desk might utilize.  However, using tags and discipline, you could accomplish similar tasks for planning or project work.  I would not recommend this for an operational system like supply chain or customer service, but it could work for less formal activities that may not have the kinds of dedicated systems the aforementioned functions have.  Furthermore, small businesses might not have anything so this kind of system might be better than nothing.

Here is how it could work:

1. Define how you want the tags to work.  For example, you could use this system for managing issues for a project, for steps in planning a marketing campaign, and other less formal operations.  You should pre-determine status or other kinds of tags that apply to different work streams.  For example, you may want to add Open, Closed, Stalled, or whatever to issues as you post and discuss them so they can be tracked.  You could use a similar arrangement for other activities like NeedCustInfo or whatever.
2. Have every user/team in the GroupSwim site you use add their Username, first_last name, or some other unique identifier as a tag they watch; they could also add tags for groups like ProjTeam or EmailCampaign3 and every person in this group should add that tag to their list as well.  In my case, I would add the tag JasonR to my watchlist to monitor it.
3. Each activity should have a manager making sure things get assigned appropriately.  Then, if an issue or activity needs work, the manager or person responsible merely adds the tag of the person who should either work on it and/or monitor it.  As soon as a tag gets applied (JasonR in my case), the person would get an alert through email and/or RSS that there was something they needed to address.
4. Each time a person finishes a task, they can add the tag for the next person or group that needs to work on it and they would be similarly alerted.  They can also delete the tag for themselves taking it out of their queue.
5. Once an activity or operation was complete, the manager or designate could add the tag Complete or some other indication that things were resolved.

As you can see, this method would require some discipline.  It’s flexibility is both its strength and its weakness.  I intend to test this internally when the opportunity comes up.  Please let me know what you think and if I’m missing something.