A wonderful article was recently posted by Marcia Conner and Steve LeBlanc over at Fast Company entitled "Where Social Learning Thrives". The entire piece purports that a fun, productive and consistent culture will help ensure social learning takes flight.
What struck me, however, is the following line itself:
Is it the CLO who single handedly is required to change the culture, in order to ensure social learning thrives?
Will the social learning quest succeed if the executives don't help foster the 'culture of collaboration', connected by fun, productive and consistent attributes?
Frankly speaking, the 90-9-1 phenomenon scares me greatly. If a company's culture is one that is suppressed, or driven by a 'culture of fear', there is no way 90-9-1 improves, and to me, there is a very difficult path ahead to drive the social learning quest itself.
I am a firm believer in social learning. I am an advocate, a poster boy, a model citizen describing its inherent benefits. If the culture of a company, however, is riddled with apathy, even bleeding edge people like me could find the ultimate success of the social learning quest extremely difficult to achieve.
What do you think? Is your company culture linked to how successful your various social learning/media/networking initiatives, projects and actions will be?
Social learning thrives in a culture of service and wonder. It is inspired by leaders, enabled by technology and ignited by opportunities that have only recently unfolded.There are those companies that certainly have instilled a fun, productive and consistent culture (see Zappos, SouthWest Airlines, Google, etc.) but what happens to your social learning quest if your company culture is, well ... anti-fun, anti-productive and anti-consistent?
Is it the CLO who single handedly is required to change the culture, in order to ensure social learning thrives?
Will the social learning quest succeed if the executives don't help foster the 'culture of collaboration', connected by fun, productive and consistent attributes?
Frankly speaking, the 90-9-1 phenomenon scares me greatly. If a company's culture is one that is suppressed, or driven by a 'culture of fear', there is no way 90-9-1 improves, and to me, there is a very difficult path ahead to drive the social learning quest itself.
I am a firm believer in social learning. I am an advocate, a poster boy, a model citizen describing its inherent benefits. If the culture of a company, however, is riddled with apathy, even bleeding edge people like me could find the ultimate success of the social learning quest extremely difficult to achieve.
What do you think? Is your company culture linked to how successful your various social learning/media/networking initiatives, projects and actions will be?
