In the wake of the observation that mobile is the next step in intranet strategy, a sentence like “you better be ready for it” is often added. It is a message that strongly resembles earlier variants, such as “internet is, wees punt.nl”, “click is for winners, brick is for losers”, “blogging is the way to go; anyone who doesn’t blog is old (and doesn’t matter in the new economy)”, and “social intranet is hot, if you don’t participate you’re not”. The means, the technology is the goal in these digital platitudes. The same principle is hidden behind pitches on gamification, which you see more and more often, now that social is losing its hip feathers. Once again, the platform, in this case the game, is the goal, nicely embedded in easily digestible 2.0 vocabulary.
Over the past decade, fear has been repeatedly cited as a good advisor in digital innovation processes. See the platitudes above. The means, product, is usually the remedy for that fear in such advice… This sounds rather 1.0. And it is. For the simple reason that much 2.0 and 2.0+ advice is still fueled by 1.0 rationale and sales rhetoric. And by that I mean 'rationale from the end of the previous century', in line with the economic thinking of that time, in which the main message was that you should always strive for more.
Where platforms become the goal in communication policy, communication problems are canada telegram data created quite automatically. Incidentally, the questions are no longer about magazines, media and resources, but about people and their interaction with their environment. As soon as the communicating person is not central in (internal) communication policy, but a new tool or application, then that tool takes precedence over the person in the policy. This order is also always implicit in the presupposition that as an organization you automatically become social if you unleash the right software on it. It may seem as if social is central - and who does n't want to be social? - but in fact the platform , the 'social' software, is central.
Social as an IT concept
The meaning of 'social' has thus been largely 'automated'. It is a strange idea, but social has largely degenerated into an IT concept. In short, as a communications person, you need to be on your professional qui vive when someone starts talking about 'social' in relation to intranet and (internal) online communication. The proposition cited above, which is still regularly written down as social media or intranet 'strategy', is after all crooked and can largely be traced back to fear as a good advisor.
I have previously made the comparison with a car that you can equip with a social kit , so that you will not hit anyone with that car (see my discussion with a wink of social technology in Socar Kit ). You will probably agree with me that in the social technology reasoning, humans are no longer a social factor at all. After all, the car itself has become social, thanks to technology. Compare this reasoning with an average social intranet strategy.