WelchmanPierpoint - Web Operations Management

Web Enabling Your Business Strategy: Blockbuster & Nordstrom

Lisa Welchman — Mon, 30 Aug 2010 17:28:17 +0000

I’ve been spending a lot of time this summer working with leaders to help them crystallize web and digital strategy for their business. At first, they seem to be disinterested because they think I’m asking them to determine their organization’s web design, content or technology strategy. But I try to hold their feet to the fire and explain to them that an organization’s online strategy is about business, about profit and meeting the mission and performance indicators. I tell them if they aren’t driving the organizational digital strategy, then there is a high likelihood that the strategy is missing the mark. I tell them that if they think they don’t have to understand the fundamental capabilities and impact of the web because they are executives, then they are missing the mark. In the web age, digital strategy and business strategy are the same thing. People who are accountable for profitability need to engaged in setting the digital agenda. Even then, digital direction can go very right or very wrong depending on who is in charge and how in tune they are with the substantive business change that has occurred since the advent of the web. There are two examples that have been in the news this summer that illustrate what can happen when business leaders “get” the web—and when they don’t.

Nordstrom

There was a great article in the New York Times in August: “Nordstrom Links Online Inventory to Real World.” If you work with the Web in your organization and are trying to get your executives to be more engaged, this is a good article to bring to their attention. In short, Nordstrom (a US retail department store) decided to surface real-time inventory information on its web site so that (for example) a San Franciso buyer can buy that last Prada bag from the Towson, MD Nordstrom and have it sent to them. It seems very simple but, according to the article, this type of real-world/web integrated inventory management isn’t common for department stores and that in the 11 months since Nordstrom made the inventory change, its same-store sales has “out-performed it’s competitors.” That’s real dollars and web sense-- not just a feel good social media experience (although Nordstrom does a bunch oft hat as well). Nordstrom effectively merged data from an aspect of traditional supply chain management with its digital presence for a positive result. This type of change generally requires internal collaboration and sponsorship at the executive level.

Blockbuster

On the other hand, there’s Blockbuster (video rentals) that has been steadily going out of business over the last few years. I like this CNET report from earlier this summer at CNET "Blockbuster stock to be delisted from NYSE". And then there is the more recent news of a possible bankruptcy. For some reason, it has been particularly hard for companies that distribute and sell media and information products to figure out profit strategies in the face of the web (despite upstart competitors showing them the ropes). But, unlike newspapers and another print periodicals, the consumer market never really believed that the were going to really get movies for free. Blockbuster had the market and didn’t react fast enough to the change in distribution channel from brick and mortar stores to (of all things) snail mail, then kiosks and now streaming media. And that's not to mention the missed opportunities at building communities around folks that watch movies. That means someone in the executive suite at Blockbuster didn't get it; so, at a critical moment, the Blockbuster business strategy didn’t include a mature view of the web and its capabilities.

Only time will tell how many more market leaders will get Blockbusted by more innovative and web-saavy competitors. The web has a way of changing rules that seasoned executives think of as immutable business fundamentals. So, if you work in the web arena of your organization and see the holes in the approach to web strategy, do your best to get the attention of your leadership and help them bring you organization into the web age.

Social Media Policy - Dos and Don'ts for Federal Agencies

Christine Pierpoint — Fri, 27 Aug 2010 16:07:41 +0000

Federal Register 2.0 is the Real Deal

Christine Pierpoint — Wed, 28 Jul 2010 20:16:15 +0000

To anyone who thought government is too big, too set in its ways to truly embrace Web 2.0, I say, "phooey."

On July 26, just in time for it's 75th anniversary, the Office of the Federal Register rolled out Federal Register 2.0. Perhaps the "2.0" name isn't all that innovative, but the site itself is a fantastic example of what happens when agencies collaborate, citizens are engaged and Web standards are enforced.

The Federal Register originated in 1935 as a result of FDR's New Deal. With so many new programs, rules and regulations coming out of the executive branch, government needed to ensure that the public had transparency into Federal rulemaking -- sort of the original push for Open Government. The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) and the Government Printing Office (GPO) were given joint responsibility for aggregating and printing the Federal Register, and that's the way it's been done for nearly a century. If you've ever seen a printed or online copy of the Federal Registry, you know it's not exactly what one would call "user friendly".

After all that time, getting the government to change the way it operates would be difficult... difficult, but NOT impossible. Props to everyone from the Office of the Federal Register, NARA and GPO who saw the opportunity to use Web 2.0 technology and best practices in user experience to create a whole new approach to the Federal Register. Equally exciting is the work that was done by Andrew Carpenter, Bob Burbach, and Dave Augustine who developed the site and originally caught the attention of the Office as a result of the work they did in Sunlight Lab's Apps for America 2 competition.

Overall this is an exciting case study for Federal agencies who are looking to their peers for best practices in Gov 2.0. I can't wait to see who's next.

The Gov 2.0 Condundrum

Christine Pierpoint — Tue, 27 Jul 2010 09:23:38 +0000

Without a doubt, there's a lot to be gained when government leverages Web 2.0 tools to provide better communications and service. But for every success story there seems to be an equal number of roadblocks preventing public servants from venturing into Gov 2.0.

Last week there was a Congressional hearing before the Information Policy, Census and National
Archives Subcommittee on the use of Web 2.0 Technologies by Federal agencies. The hearing was a review of Federal use of Web 2.0 technology and an examination of the records management implication of those technologies.

Dr. David McClure, Associate Administrator of the GSA Office of Citizen
Services and Innovative Technologies gave testimony about the strides US Federal agencies have made to leverage Web 2.0 technologies. Several case studies were cited such as the State Department utilizing social media to mobilize their response to the Haiti earthquake or the numerous mashups that have spawned from Government data. Reading McClure's testimony and accompanying timeline reminds that the Federal government has not merely jumped on the 2.0 bandwagon, but uses the technology to innovate the way agencies deliver on their mission.

Despite these examples, not enough agencies are fully leveraging Web 2.0. A recent study by Harris Interactive found that 57% of US citizens feel that agencies are not taking the Open Government Directive seriously. My experience working in the Federal sector has also shown that many agencies struggle to formally adopt Web 2.0 practices.

The reasons for slow (or no) adoption of Web 2.0 can be linked back to restrictions that are unique to Federal government. Gregory Wilshusen, Director of the Information Security Issues of the General Accountability Office (GAO) also gave testimony before the Congressional sub-committee and spoke about the privacy and records management risks that inhibit agencies from jumping into the 2.0 fray.

The potential value of using social media and new technologies to enable government is great, but at the same time, agency leaders are confronted with very real concerns related to Federal privacy and records management issues. Increasingly, agency leaders will find themselves confronted with conflicting expectations. On the one hand, the demand for Gov 2.0 increases, while at the same time, the outcry against collecting personally identifiable information and maintaining and providing access to public records are equally high.

At the Federal level, steps are being taken to evaluate existing laws and mandates in light of Web 2.0. OMB recently clarified how the Paperwork Reduction Act applies to social media and use of third-party tools, like Facebook. During the Congressional hearing, David Ferriero, U.S. archivist at the National Archives and Records Administration testified that NARA
will release updated policy and guidance on how Web 2.0
platforms affect records management.

GSA, OMB and NARA are all making a strong effort, under the direction of the current administration, to re-think standard operations for government in light of new technology and citizen expectations. Agency leaders should follow this example and evaluate their own policies to determine if they need to be updated to keep pace with Web expectations. Existing policy concerning privacy, records, security and information quality are critical for maintaining the credibility of government agencies. But given the change in technology and the need for citizen engagement online, leaders should be proactive in making sure those policies are current. Without clear direction and top-level policy leadership, Federal Web managers will be limited in their ability to realize the full potential for Gov 2.0.

Buildling Processes to Create and Govern Web Sites Panel Discussion

Delia Konizeski — Thu, 24 Jun 2010 17:52:09 +0000

Web Governance in (Federal) Action

Delia Konizeski — Fri, 18 Jun 2010 15:44:18 +0000

Oftentimes, clients express that setting up governance in their agency seems like a very academic exercise. They are skeptical (though also very hopeful) that such a time-intensive task will be worth it. I know my federal client was recently feeling the same. After all, we’d spent countless hours in working sessions carefully reviewing more than 100 Web standards to go along with newly drafted Web policy. We had set up a new governance structure in which my client was established as the Web Product Manager and given the authority to approve standards drafted by ad-hoc standards teams dedicated to hot topics like social media and 508 compliance.

So there we were toiling in a working session and reviewing Web standards related to domain names one particular day. The standards are quite detailed and answer questions like, ‘Are vanity domain names permissible in all cases?’ and ‘Is it OK to create a domain for my department’s campaign site that does not use .gov?’

And that’s when the client realized just how timely and practical (and productive) our working sessions had been. He’d recently been asked similar questions and didn’t have a sound answer. Having these standards in place, he said, would solve a couple of key issues for him. First off, he wouldn’t have to run around figuring out the answers or worse, make something up. Second, he’d now have a definitive source for the answer so that its validity could not be readily questioned.

What a relief this was to him—he had the support of a Web governance structure and definitive answers in the form of Web standards tailored to his agency:

Vanity domain names are allowed so long as the domain name redirects to a Web site using the agency’s .gov domain name

Any agency domain that is not a .gov domain must redirect to the agency’s .gov Web site. (Exception was given to Web sites developed in partnership or through grants or cooperative agreements with non-Federal organizations.)

I bet you’re thinking you’d like to have answers to those questions and lots more. Perhaps you have a style guide that answers questions related to content and visuals. That’s a good start, but there’s lots more topics there to consider.

For those who are interested in learning more about Web governance best practices—including Web policy and standards creation—but are not quite ready for a comprehensive consultation, consider the workshops we offer. Our next workshop, “Federal Web Governance,” is set for July 12 in DC and covers all you need to know about getting started on Web governance in your agency. You can also get the scoop on Web policy at the Potomac Forum next week where I’ll be talking about the significance of federal Web mandates.

"Hitting the Wall: Why Web Governance Matters More than Ever"

Lisa Welchman — Thu, 17 Jun 2010 13:36:38 +0000

Federal Web Governance Workshop

Lisa Welchman — Thu, 03 Jun 2010 18:55:20 +0000

Ensuring Your Site is Compliant with Federal Web Mandates

Delia Konizeski — Tue, 01 Jun 2010 18:51:48 +0000

Web Execution (Web Team): A Definition

Lisa Welchman — Fri, 28 May 2010 17:43:14 +0000

One of the oldest Web management problems is determining the structure and make-up of the Web team. A well-formed Web team allows an organization to build its Web presence effectively and efficiently. Historically, the organizational Web team has evolved from a single individual who had the foresight to purchase a domain name and post the organization’s first Web pages. From the 1990s do-it-all Webmaster, this sole person eventually developed into today’s more sophisticated Web division, with organizationally distributed content publishing, application development and data management, and a gaggle of external support vendors.

In consulting practice, I use “Web Execution” instead of “Web team” to broaden the scope of what the latter typically brings to mind. More specifically, I transform that image from a group of folks off in a corner working on a Web site to the reality of what it takes for an organization to produce and manage a Web presence—that is, an execution strategy. Solid Web development requires a number of resources, both in and outside of the organization, solidly executing against the Web standards and towards performance indicators established by their organization.

Some of the questions addressed in the Web Execution realm include: When it is appropriate to hire new resources? When is it appropriate to outsource development? What should the senior roles be for the Web and where should they be seated in the organization? The specific answers to these questions will be unique for every organization. Every business will have to determine how to: 1) organize those functions; 2) optimize their interactions; and 3) specify what job roles will be derived from these functions. It’s an art, not a science. So there is no universally “correct” team structure for producing a Web presence. There are, however, some things to keep in mind when you are staffing for Web Execution. There are also some good practices for Web Execution and Web team formation.

The Business Case for Web Execution

Fifteen years ago, most organizations interacted with their constituents, customers, members, or citizens via print, the phone, or face-to-face communication channels. Today, many organizations find that their first, primary, or only point of contact with these same people happens on the World Wide Web. Despite this change, very little formal attention has been paid to the appropriate structure for getting Web work done. There are two main dynamics that contribute to this lack of attention:

Organizations, led by senior management teams that grew their careers prior to the advent of the business Web, have frequently segregated their Web Execution efforts. Their experience (or lack thereof) of business success did not include the World Wide Web. So despite the Web’s operational primacy in communications and transactions, the Web team is frequently off in a corner, serving as an after-thought in business process. Subsequently, a lot of business opportunity is being missed.
Conversely, Web management personnel, while forward-looking with respect to the use of technologies, are frequently weak in the area of business management. So although they understand that the Web Execution function is not being properly funded or managed, they lack the management skills to turn the situation around. In response, Web personnel thrash about, executing on project after project, in quest of the magic bullet that will solve the Web problem. Consequently, resources are wasted or misdirected given the strategic objectives of the business.

These two dynamics produce a Web Execution quagmire, from which most organizations have been unable to escape. The Web team is in an organizational blind spot. Consequently, the Web Execution function is compromised, and Web presence quality and effectiveness are generally low or otherwise off target.

While a low-quality Web presence can be a liability, the real inherent risk in a segregated and immature Web Execution function lies in an organization’s inability to proactively take full advantage of the Internet as a business platform. This oversight is illuminated not only with respect to e-commerce transactions, information, and data dissemination but also with regard to the invention of the 21st century integrated real-world/Web products and service that will be demanded by the maturing digital native population. An organization that refuses to take steps to improve its Web presence quality may ride rich and happy on legacy Web-disabled products and services. But in reality, there’s likely a slow leak in the business’s bottom line or ability to meet mission objectives.

A mature approach to Web Execution can help stop this leak and move the organization’s business practices into the 21st century.

What Is Web Execution?

Web Execution is the definition, coordination, and support of all the tactics required to produce and maintain a high-quality Web presence.

There are two core sub-functions of Web Execution:

Product Management
Program Management

Web Execution must be tuned to the objectives of the organization (ideally expressed as Web performance indicators) and must be supported by a mature approach to Web Governance. When executing within these considered and relevant constraints, the freedom and flexibility to break away from linear, slow, and traditional IT development processes increases. This flexible liberty allows the organization to react quickly to new possibilities in Web Execution while maintaining the quality and effectiveness of its Web presence. Standards will enable both collaboration and fast, quality development, not hinder them. Key performance indicators will provide a framework of organizational relevancy for the Web team so its members can make the right decisions about which content, data, and business processes should be enabled via the Web channel. Without standards and key performance indicators as a nucleus for orienting it, Web Execution will be chaotic.

Web Execution Atom

(click here or on image for more eye-friendly PDF- new window)

What Web Execution Means for the Organization

When Web Execution is functioning properly, the old broken Web team function becomes an optimized and flexible Web production machine. As a result, the organization is able to react quickly to new requirements, technologies, and business goals. In this world, the organizational Web site contributes to the bottom line and/or mission of the business in a substantive and measurable way. Web personnel morale also improves, and, in the best cases, the entire organization becomes Web-enabled as the collaborative best practices of the Web team extend outward into the organization and interact with legacy informational and operational management arenas, such as records management, human resource management (Intranets), sales and marketing, or IT.

Web Program Management

Web program management has to do with the administrative and communications functions of the Web team. It entails getting the money and headcount for projects and evangelizing and communicating the value of the Web internally to help align non-Web personnel with the organizational changes that might need to happen because of the reality of the Web. Some of these changes might be tactical (e.g., learning to write for the Web); others might be strategic (e.g., helping the organization understand that a core operational function is obsolete or of minimized value as-is in the face of the Web.) A traditional support call center is an example of the latter.

There are several main areas to consider with respect to Web program management:

Tending to the Web budget;
Emplacing mechanisms to evaluate Web performance;
Managing the Web portfolio;
Supporting the Web stakeholder community; and
Optimizing business process management as it relates to Web Execution.

What Web Program Management Means for the Organization

Web program management functions can be addressed by a Web team Program Manager. Alternatively, they can be outsourced or distributed across the organization. Completeness is more important than the organizational placement of these resources. In other words, a complete Web program management function that is ill-placed will outperform an incomplete Web program management function that is well placed. That said, don’t get hung up on where the Web team should “live.” Rather, when looking at Web resources in aggregate across the organization, get hung up on making sure the function exists and is complete and orchestrated.

Web program managers tend to spawn from both the traditional management arena and the Webmaster arena. But no matter where there initial experience is derived, Web program managers understand the value of the Web as a transformative tool for business. They are good managerial diplomats and can effectively navigate the sometime bureaucratic channels of management as an advocate for the Web program. As such, they send a message of value and opportunity upward and bring down guidance so that Web product management is relevant.

Web Product Management

Product management is the orchestration of the full arena of Web development, from editorial to technical. This is the area most think of as the Web team—where actual Web pages are designed, systems and applications developed, and Web sites are spawned and maintained. Ideally, Web product management has both operational and research and development aspects. While requiring strong elements of creativity and invention, Web product management must execute against a standards-based framework in order to scale. Therefore, product management should be guided by Web measurement tactics, both qualitative (in the form of user experience testing) and quantitative (by way of Web analytics). When consistency and horizontal alignment are not required, a more individualistic craft model of Web product management might be feasible.

What Web Product Management Means for the Organization

When managed as a product and not a series of individual projects, the Web becomes a sustained operational asset for the organization. Both the Web platform and the team that supports it are available to the entire organization. They can uphold initiatives and implement cutting-edge or practical solutions that contribute to the organizational mission and/or bottom line.

Finding the right blend of resources to keep the Web site’s quality high and expedient is a challenge, but when actively defined and formalized, Web Execution can be brought under control. It can then move Web development and the organization into an arena where business opportunity is high and the ability to actualize online functionality is greatly heightened.

Implementing Open Government: Technology and Policy

Christine Pierpoint — Mon, 10 May 2010 22:36:23 +0000

Webinar: Deconstructing Web Governance

Christine Pierpoint — Mon, 10 May 2010 00:53:13 +0000

Content ROT: How to Find and Treat It

Delia Konizeski — Wed, 28 Apr 2010 20:41:58 +0000

The Digital Deca: 10 Management Truths for the Web Age eBook

Lisa Welchman — Tue, 27 Apr 2010 00:57:23 +0000

Lisa Welchman takes a fun look at how negative and positive organizational
dynamics manifest on the Web in this eBook. She explores the 10 management truths organizations must understand and implement
when retooling to be effective online and remain relevant
in the information–driven 21st century.

Open Government Standards: The Work of the W3C Electronic Government Interest Group

Christine Pierpoint — Mon, 26 Apr 2010 00:56:18 +0000

In this recorded Webinar, Kevin Novak, co-chair of the W3C Electronic Government interest group, discusses how the group is working to identify, develop, test and document standards and approaches needed by government to achieve openness and transparency online; Christine Pierpoint moderates.

A Message to Fellow Gen Xers: The Web Isn't Cool Anymore

Christine Pierpoint — Thu, 22 Apr 2010 17:01:17 +0000

The other day I was giving a presentation to a client and, in the midst of describing my background, realized that most of the people in the room were still in middle school when I started my career in the Web. It's times like this that I step back and remind myself that the mainstream Web has been around for more than fifteen years (which is about the same span as my professional career to date).

Like many Gen Xer's, I gravitated to Web work in the mid '90s because it was new and cool. When I graduated from college in '93, the Web hadn't really hit critical mass. I was just looking to start a career in Communications when I was offered a job to build Web pages for a magazine publisher. It seemed like a great opportunity to make a mark, so I bought an HTML book and hacked my way through my first Web site. And, like a contestant on American Idol, I became an instant rock star. I was a "Web Master" and went from office peon to the person invited to senior management meetings to demonstrate the latest and greatest Web practices. Every day was an opportunity to discover new tools and tricks and get well-paid for it too. And that was really cool.

We've learned a lot since those first heady days working in the 'Net. We've seen technologies come and go, survived the dot-com bust and watched as companies struggle to define how to weave the Web into the corporate fabric. So where does this leave Generation X? The Web has matured, but have we done the same professionally?

Lisa's last blog post challenged us to become agents of change in our organizations. College graduates this spring have never known a world where the Web didn't exist. To these digital natives, social networks, open source and cloud computing aren't novelties. They just are. They know how to use these tools and will be able to adopt them faster and use them more efficiently than we. What they don't have is experience. There is a real need for mentors and managers who actually get the Web and who can guide them as they bring an arsenal of new tools and skills into the workplace.

We're not the coolest kid in the cubicle any more, and that's how it should be. Our opportunity (or obligation?) is to become that Web-savvy manager we always wished we had when we came up through the ranks. Now's the time for Gen Xers to step up and lead the next generation of Web professionals. Recognize that our value lies in being leaders and inspiring those who look up to us. How cool is that?

Webinar: Open Government Standards and Approaches

Christine Pierpoint — Thu, 08 Apr 2010 20:46:49 +0000

Webinar: Whose Web Site is it Anyway?

Christine Pierpoint — Thu, 08 Apr 2010 13:21:05 +0000

Web Governance Now! Video - Part 2

Lisa Welchman — Tue, 06 Apr 2010 01:17:03 +0000

Lisa Welchman speaks about Web Governance at a Vamosa Briefing in
London.

Web Governance Now! Video - Part 1

Lisa Welchman — Tue, 06 Apr 2010 00:32:51 +0000

Lisa Welchman speaks about Web Governance at a Vamosa Briefing in London.