I’m interested in social media for my research paper, and it’s not necessarily as relevant to my economic/financial responsibility here, but I’m going to try and make it work. There are businesses involved here, too.
IBM doesn’t want people to do business with companies. They’re adamant that people do business with people-hence, the need to become a social business. This doesn’t mean a company with Facebook and Twitter accounts. These “social businesses” are not just striving for more fans or followers, but software and hardware tools that enable them to foster people’s new relationships and to help them “accomplish tasks, make decisions, and inspire new ideas.” These improvements in business operation seek to remove the obstacles between “creativity, innovation, and alignment” and business needs.
This invented culture seeks to combine expertise and insight from anywhere in the business network at the right time to quickly adapt and improve business outcomes. This would mean customers, employees, and partners would all aid in speeding up business information. Opportunities would evolve with everyone’s help. This kind of information sharing is similar to the advent of the Internet, but not limited to the web in people to people interactions. People ultimately drive business, so the thought process is that they should be included at every step. They can drive business results themselves, just given the right information.
With the abundance of technology currently available, I see the useful ness of a “social business” classification. But right now, it’s just a classification. I’m not surprised that IBM wants to attract attention to itself by this new way of defining itself. It’s all very easy to say about yourself, but it’s more difficult to find concrete results that are based not on correlation, but causality.
No comments:
Post a Comment