As per the latest conducted survey reports by HBR (Harvard Business Review) are concerned, using social media to accomplish a meaningful purpose involves more than providing new technology and praying for success. Successful mass collaboration places new requirements on an organization, particularly on its managers. While many organizations are technically ready for social media, they should question the readiness of managers to embrace new ways of working collaboratively to achieve social success.
Why???
Because social media and mass collaboration fundamentally challenge the relationship between responsibility, resources and management. Normally, managers accept responsibility provided it comes with the control of resources required to deliver on that responsibility. The connection between responsibility and resources sits at the heart of the management authority, control, accountability & organization design. If we look at an organization chart, we will see the distribution of resources & responsibilities - the currency by which managers measure themselves and compare themselves to their peers.
Unfortunately, this control is the antithesis of collaboration. Relinquishing control to create a space for collaboration challenges managers who rely on their authority, experience and positional power to achieve results. And managers who exercise their authority over a collaborative community will defeat the purpose of social media-based collaboration and turn energetic and innovative communities into just another form of corporate task force.
While it sounds obvious that managers can compromise collaboration with prescriptive control, the relationship between resources, responsibility and management is one of the most frequently asked questions in organizations looking to apply social media to achieving meaningful business purposes.
Collective responsibility is a thorny(causing distress; difficult) issue and it takes a different level of management maturity to break the idea that if there isn't one person responsible, then no one is responsible.
Manager/ sponsor as guide rather than a leader is found more effective these days. In this role, the manager/ sponsor works across three levels to drive three important outcomes:
1. Participation ~ Increased participation can be created when managers/ sponsors work within a community to ensure an open dialog and discussion of issues, ideas and contributions, plans, etc. Participation is critical to community engagement and creativity, especially when pursuing a meaningful purpose means fostering and allowing a difference of opinion.
2. Purpose ~ Purpose requires the manager/sponsor to step outside the community and assess its progress toward achieving its overall goals and objectives. Purpose reflects the foundational idea behind the community. Managers/sponsors act as guides by knowing when to ask how a particular thread contributes to the community purpose.
3. Performance ~ Performance of the community requires that the manager/sponsor bridge collaborative innovation or ideas and the organization's formal management structures and processes. Without a focus on performance, community-based ideas often stay within the community. In this regard, managers/sponsors are advocates for community ideas and insights across the enterprise.
Participation, purpose, and performance represent the goals for guiding management and the requirements for effective managers/sponsors in mass collaboration. However, it takes a particular type of manager and management team to foster the type of mass collaboration that taps into the collective genius of your customers and employees.
Now what's our concern ???
We should self-observe the following facts in order to analyse ourselves whether we (as future managers) are ready to lead such social collaboration:
(This is one of the crucial activity program designed by Anthony J. Bradley & Mark P. McDonald of Gartner Group. Both of them have mutually suggested to demonstrate these facts by undergoing a technical survey over your managers through this questionnaire.)
- Do managers rely on their formal authority to deliver results and fulfill their obligations, or do they achieve results through influence, teamwork, and engaging the talents of their team?
- Do managers have to be the most senior, experienced, or knowledgeable person on their team? Have they achieved the position based on being the best in their discipline? Is their influence based on personal capability or interpersonal leadership?
- How does executive leadership respond to ideas, insights, or innovations that emerge from the organization rather than going through formal channels? Does the executive team believe that the future of the organization is his or her responsibility alone or is it a shared responsibility of everyone in the organization?
"This is a fancy way of saying that starting small and scaling based on the expanding capability of collaborative communities and growing management capacity provides a path for every organization to become a social organization. "


