The Issue At Hand
The necessity for large, dispersed groups to work together efficiently has increased almost as rapidly as advancements in technology. Decades ago, when I first got started in business, interoffice mail carried by people was the way to communicate. Then the advent of interoffice messaging systems removed the necessity for what had become known as Sneakernet.

The creation of memos was almost an art form. A great deal of work went into the writing of one. Unfortunately, the time that it took to develop the memo and then the time it took for everyone to respond to the memo was more than consuming. This is one of the reasons large companies couldn’t turn on the dime as quickly as a smaller firm (less people to communicate to, hence a faster response time). Electronic messaging systems significantly reduced the time from idea conception to policy acceptance.

This was a great way to manage things that did not require additional documentation, external resources or multiple steps in the vetting process. Of course, there are a lot more shortcomings that may be identified. However, the point is clear. The necessity for managing idea development, document management, version control, access control and a plethora of other issues brought a need for more collaborative environments. Preferably, collaboration grew into true teamwork (that’s a different article).

We have grown from Sneakernet to single office electronic messaging systems, to interoffice messaging systems to over-reaching email platforms. Each of these advances in technology and practice has helped businesses propel themselves toward new successes. The flip side is that those same advances began to create fiefdoms or reinforce the ability to horde information and control. Moreso, with each advance, the problem became more and more apparent.

The latest version of SharePoint takes communication and collaboration to a whole new level. Where previous versions ushered in a new era for communication, managing the environments from an administrative perspective was still lacking. SharePoint 2007 brings a new perspective from the team environments to the administration of those environments. In fact, the SharePoint now poses a new question: How do we begin to break down the silos without destroying the company?

Keep in mind the common traits of such silos:
• They are entrenched
• They control key processes or other elements required for business operations
• They are inherently protected by the leaders of those silos and possibly by their bosses so the boat doesn’t get rocked
• They are usually well-connected, revered or even feared
• At times, they are the ones that know where the skeletons are no one wants discovered

A Real Life Scenario
Rebel Visions was engaged by a company that had a person in a key role as the de facto CIO. This person not only controlled technology throughout the organization, but he also controlled logistics for manufactured products. In a day and age where the greater percentage of development is based on object oriented methodologies, he kept his company reliant on database applications structured on flat-file formats. Not to mention his organization had grown far beyond the usefulness of those mom and pop applications. He never explained what was on his plate as far as technology was concerned and he did not reveal any processes or procedures. Also found wanting was the documentation and training on the existing platforms. Technology decisions were based on his own interests rather than the betterment of the organization. The lack of strategic vision and poor tactical implementation of technologies core to the business were only over shadowed by his mentality of “It is not about winning. Rather, it is about not losing.”


How can you run an organization when you do not share the processes you have nor work to identify the missing processes? Exactly! The organization was in need of understanding the core processes in order to increase efficiency and affect positive impact to the bottom line. The sales team was going full throttle and increasing the top line. However, operational inefficiencies resulting from a dysfunctional collaborative environment were causing the company to hemorrhage money. Although the company had been in business for over 30 years, every new product was approached as if it was the first time they had developed a product at all. There were no repeating processes or procedures. Each department in the development chain worked almost autonomously, only sending information when specifically solicited or when that department deemed it necessary. To make the problem worse, ideas were being lost in the mix.

Imagine what your shareholders are thinking when you increase your top line by 30 percent, but only realize a 7% overall gain. Every step in the product development process required almost twice as much time necessary in order to move the project along. In some cases, the problem stemmed from poor document management. Another large portion of the problem was born from poor communication and tracking of thoughts. However, by far, the genesis of the inefficiencies was the inability or unwillingness of the various departments to accept responsibility, take ownership of their mistakes, and share crucial or impacting information that could be a game changer for the project at hand. And, in retail manufacturing, there are several junctures in the process where a product can be dropped from the line. So the earlier you can obtain information, the better you can determine whether or not the project moves forward. If the project is not moved forward, you can realize development savings and put those resources to work on other initiatives.

Enter the SharePoint Solution
Before implementing the solution, time was taken to identify and document the flow of work spawned when a new product idea is brought to the table, as well as the current governance model. As it turns out, each affected department head has a say in new product development with the final decision coming directly from the CEO. The team was introduced to the SharePoint environment and was directed to place the information about each product idea on the site. This included artwork, competitive product information, manufacturing guesstimates, potential market penetration information, etc. By the time the New Product Meeting was to be held, almost half of the decisions necessary were completed online via SharePoint. This meant an all-day meeting was cut by more than half because each executive was able to chime in and interact with each other throughout the previous weeks, almost at their leisure or as their schedules permitted; an incredible efficiency gain.

SharePoint provided an environment where communication was promoted, rather than impeded or even stifled. The introduction of the new environment also introduced a level of accountability, since everything was time stamped and visible for all to see. Ah, the word accountability. This word only carries weight if there are ramifications for one’s actions or inactions. We had to make sure to also implement rewards for participation and penalties for continuation of isolationist practices.

We identified the key departments as well as the silos of operation that were most entrenched in their practices. The next step was to involve each of the succeeding departments in the new environment. Then we created departmental environments, then project environments, all the while constructing and implementing a strong governance policy and interdepartmental workflow. Saving the IT department for last, we took deep dives into the analysis of each department, identifying practices that could be honed into processes and examined resources with their respective habits with regard to external communication and collaboration.

When it came time to include the technology team, we provided them with an issue management workflow and space for them to provide users with common FAQs. The thought was the new tool would become depended upon in a rather short time and win over even the most ardent skeptics. The IT staff used to be bombarded with issues and never had a management system to track issues to resolution, not to mention staff accountability. Now they had a way of reporting on what steps were taken to resolve the issues and were able to create a knowledgebase for future use. The introduction of a document repository with version control also allowed them to create a self-service atmosphere and retrain employees to help themselves. This had a 30% positive impact on the workload for the IT staff. Moreso, the IT staff was more inclined to request additional features and new environments to be used for things such as auditing and budgeting. Without forcing the issue, the IT staff was beginning to voluntarily undo the authoritarian routines. In a step further, the department began revealing thought processes albeit inadvertently. That is what we were trying to accomplish: finding a way to impose accountability at the decision-making level. Once this was discovered, it was increasingly easier to challenge decisions before they were enacted.

As the efficiencies increased throughout the organization from within each department, the more the managers began realizing the necessity for increased interaction with their first level counterparts, both electronically and with in-person meetings. That was an extreme breakthrough allowing for the company to begin working as a single entity rather than several autonomous parts. Increased awareness of where each department lies within the framework of the business and how the dependencies affected the parts as well as the whole.

The game plan used was to implement a new policy centered on interdepartmental communication, transparency, accountability and prosperity for all concerned. From the onset, the tact taken was to document the current processes and have each department sign off on the respective processes thusly creating the Product Development Life cycle. Once the PDLC was created we were able to hold feet to the flame for timely submission of work product against the agreed upon workflow and timeline. Using the PDLC and a handful of completed projects, we were then able to fine tune the amount of time specific tasks took to complete and were then able to revisit each department with the discrepancies. Sub-processes that may be in need of optimization or evolution were identified and vetted. The processes being explored were those that directly affected other departments where the PDLC was concerned. The more we chipped, the more the layers were peeled back. The more we peeled back the layers, the more people became comfortable with the new policies and practices born from such discussion. Unbeknownst to them, the silo mentality was well on its way to being removed and irreversibly so. This repeatable vetting process became common practice in the organization and allows for continued improvement over time.

The Conclusion
An old dog can indeed be taught new tricks. You may have to coax him, prod him or discipline him, be he can learn. So too goes the company with silos instead of departments and groups of people instead of teams. In this case, there was a technology-based solution that could be executed. But, unlike most software implementations, the technology could not be deployed without a more strategic plan in place along with the necessary power and authority to ensure its success. Anything short of that top-down drive and you may be destined for failure.

Throughout the engagement we had to impress upon the client the need for the executives to remain fully engaged. If your champions are not engaged, no one else has reason to be engaged. To keep them in line with the initiative and the sought after end results, we had to make sure they became dependent on the knowledge flow or at least the fruits of the labor being undertaken. Key reports, updates, new insights and key metrics (i.e., cost savings, time savings, increased workflow capacity, etc.) were all given each step of the way to demonstrate the value of the program. We also evolved data as the program progressed to include charts, graphs, and dashboards, providing management with new information or information served in ways that were more valuable and impacting. This became a tool in the arsenal for cultural change in an environment that was being exposed to the practice of Knowledge Management for the first time.

We also learned that some old habits indeed die hard. A mouse is most dangerous when it is cornered. Inasmuch, a person with a strong silo mentality is also prone to lash out when he or she feels pressured to change. Instead, we took the approach to give those people avenues to travel down while still guiding them to the finish line. Almost like a mouse in a maze, you can lead people toward something they believe is fruitful for them without eroding their sense of power since they are convinced that moving forward was their idea. It is a fine line to walk, but with much attention and with even more patience you may be able to save and retool that resource rather than having to take alternative action. Of course, there are always those that must be removed from the equation. However, this method went a long way to curb the amount of such actions.

There are some technologies that can and should be implemented as standalone solutions. There are also business practices that can be optimized or evolved in the same fashion. However, from time to time, there are such points in time where business thought processes, new technologies and new business practices each take a leap forward simultaneously, demanding changes be made to the model in which businesses use to operate. We are at such a juncture, where we must make a firm decision to either continue down the same old road or embrace that paradigm shift in order to realize the potential gain.

As email has become as ubiquitous as the fax machine once was, so too does SharePoint offer that same game-changing opportunity. The level at which SharePoint can change the game is far beyond what the common thought is currently. The factor that provides this leap is actually outside of the application itself and in the preparation for its deployment: the uncommon practice of Organizational Culture Analysis (OCA). Although not a common practice, it should be as it can increase the impact of the deployment almost exponentially and lead to employee empowerment for the betterment of the organization. SharePoint ushers in a new breed of application. It is an application that is actually an extension of the culture and is multiplied by the aggregation of knowledge, experience, and all else to become a living organism. SharePoint can become the basis of a constantly changing, evolving corporate organism.