Your Custom Text Here
(I know that technically it's a bit early for this but here goes anyway...)
On the twelfth day of Christmas, my true love gave to me:
Twelve knowledge assets
Eleven open questions
Ten strategies
Nine knowledge cafes
Eight AARs
Seven deadly syndromes
Six social networks
Five lessons learned
Four knowledge jams
Three anecdotes
Two peer assists
And a tweet from the APQC
Click here to sing along from the start! [audio http://www.chriscollison.com/documents/12days.mp3 ]
Last week I had the pleasure of providing my final virtual webinar for the first of the UN's KM Online blended learning programme. Geoff Parcell and I have taken turns over the past 6 weeks. Last week the focus was on KM Strategy and Implementation, and we had an excellent interactive discussion about different options for implementation.Here's a shot of our discussion in action...
So with particular thanks to Eric, Harald, Svetlana and Miguel who added some great ideas - here are ten different options for KM Strategy implementation.
1. Top Down, Big Bang.
This is the traditional "someone at the top has said this needs to happen" approach, usually accompanied by a cascade, a change initiative, communications and engagement plan, brown-bag presentations, training programmes, mugs and mouse mats. We've all seen these initiatives in action - and in some organisations they can be the only way to get people's attention. The challenge, of course is to find ways to keep people's attention - particularly when the board or senior sponsors have moved onto their next big bang. You might consider setting up a programme board with some of the senior players, which will keep them collectively on-the-hook for your programme. It's much more difficult for the whole group to shift their energy away than it is for a single sponsor to become distracted by the next big idea.
So it's the challenge of sustainability, which leads us neatly to the second approach - Top Down, Bottom Up.
2. Top Down, Bottom Up
This approach is a sophistication of the Big Bang approach, using the same level of visible senior support to send a clear message across the organisation. The critical difference is that there is a deliberate effort to harness the energy and passion of workers at the front line, and to involve them in the programme, perhaps as group of advisors or a community of practice. These people are key in helping to translate the messages from the top and set them in the right context locally. BP had a two-year programme with a team of 10 with a brief to define and demonstrate the value of KM. But it was KM Community of practice - around 200 enthusiasts who recognised the value that it brought to their day-to-day roles - this was the group who helped KM to be more sustainable. They were also an excellent source of anecdotes and credible stories of where KM had made a difference at the sharp-end.
3. Slipstream.
In most organisations, you can guarantee that there will be a number of organisational initiatives in flight at any one time. Rather than wait for a gap in the traffic which will never come, or to launch a competing campaign to capture the attention of an already saturated workforce, there is a third way! Slipstreaming is about working in partnership with other initiatives or "transformation projects" (don't you just love that phrase?), looking for ways in which you can feed of each others' momentum. The beauty of KM is that it's such a broad discipline that it is easy to find ways to complement and support other programmes and functions. I have seen KM effectively slipstream behind business improvement and Six Sigma projects; operational excellence, new project management methodologies, SharePoint deployments, acquisition integration activities, customer management and asset management initiatives, culture change movements and the roll-out of new corporate values. [You might question whether you can change culture with an initiative, or roll-out values - we'll leave that for a future post - but you get the idea...]
One thing to be wary of, which affects competitive cyclists and athletes who slipstream - is the danger of getting "boxed in". If you're slipstreaming the roll-out of SharePoint with a view to sharing a broader set of knowledge-sharing behaviours and methods, then watch out that the technology doesn't grab all the headlines and rob you of impact. It's always best to agree these things up-front as part of the partnership, rather than "pop out" unexpectedly and assume that you can push KM to the forefront!
4. Outside In.
This approach is a little higher risk, but does come with its own in-built parachute. Sometimes things just sound better when they are heard from the outside. People who would treat an internal newsletter or intranet article with a degree of scepticism will pay attention to the same story when it appears in a journal or arrives via their RSS feed – or when a friend of customer mentions that it just arrived in their RSS feed. It’s the power of outside-in. Geoff Parcell and I found that when we published the first edition of Learning to Fly in 2001, it gave reach, awareness and credibility to the KM programme way beyond anything we could have achieved ourselves. Rio Tinto experienced a similar unexpected impact when they published their video on Communities of Practice on YouTube. It just works, and it creates momentum inside the company to fill in any gaps between what is said externally and what happens internally.
And if you do over-reach? Well, all that publicity should help you to find a soft landing somewhere else!
5. Viral
This is a variant of the pilot approach and usually involves technology. BT experienced it with the launch of their BTPedia internal wiki back in 2007, Russian financial services giant Sberbank encountered it with the launch of their ideas management system in 2011, and the roll-out of many micro-blogging environments like Deloitte's Yammer have taken on a life of their own this year. With a viral approach, you need to be prepared for it to be messy - it's a case of let a thousand flowers bloom, pick the best ones and do the weeding and gardening later. However, it's hard to imagine "lessons learned", "knowledge retention" or the creation of knowledge products spreading like wildfire. You'll need to make the most of the extra momentum and have a plan up your sleeve to connect the parts of KM which spread virally with the other techniques and methods which require more effort to adopt.
6. Stealth
Sometimes labels get in the way.
Sometimes you have to find ways to build up your organization's capability to manage and share knowledge without them realising what your master plan actually is. You get smart at making small adjustments to processes, spotting political opportunities and allies, tweaking the configuration of information-sharing platforms and the wording of competency frameworks and values; encouraging networks and facilitating conversations which improve performance and learning. After a few years, you'll be able to look back and say to yourself "you know what, we're pretty good at managing and sharing knowledge. - but you probably won't get a plaudit or bonus - just the satisfaction of having helped to build a knowledge-friendly environment which is probably more sustainable than any managed programme would have achieved.
If you like the sound of that, and can live with the lack of recognition, then perhaps a career as an independent KM consultant awaits you!
7. Copycat
This is more of a tactic than an implementation strategy per se - but it's often successful to point to examples of successful KM from other organisations (competitors and customers are particular impactful) to create some "me too" or "me better" demand. Find a good example and invite them in to tell their story. Check whether your board members have non-executive directorships or recent prior experience of other companies. They might be good ones to pursue! Copycat can work well internally too, encouraging business units to out-do each other in successful knowledge sharing, but make sure that the measures you use to compare and celebrate don't create a new set of competing silos. ConocoPhillips' '4G' awards (Give, Grab, Gather, Guts) and Syngenta's TREE awards (Transfer, Reuse, Embed, Experience) both focus on giving and receiving - hence they compete to out-share each other - which has to be a good thing!
8. Pilot
A Pilot approach will often take a subset of KM methods and apply them locally - in contrast to the big bang, which usually takes KM as a whole and attempts to apply it globally. It's all about lighting a number of fires to see what spreads. A pilot enables you to try the aspects of KM most likely to make a difference quickly, to build credibility locally, and to learn from each implementation. That could mean launching a community of practice for one part of the organisation whilst closing the learning loop on major projects and working on knowledge retention for retiring experts. Criteria for a successful pilot?
9. The Buffet Menu
The success of a buffet approach depends on a high level of demand for knowledge. Rather than investing effort in creating an appetite, or a willingness to experiment - this approach works with the demand already present, and provides an array of tools and techniques which the organisation chooses from at will, once their "palate" is sufficiently educated.
The International Olympic Committee is a great example of this. They set out a veritable smorgasbord of learning processes, observation visits, secondments, extranet platforms, access to experts, databases, distilled recommendations and lessons learned. A knowledge feast for a future organising committee, who enter the 7-year process with a tremendous appetite for knowledge. On a smaller scale (and let's face it, everything looks small compared to the Olympics!), management consultancies operate their KM programmes using the demand for knowledge which accompanies each new assignment.
Demand-led programmes are more likely to be sustainable - no need to persuade people to change their behaviour - adrenaline drives them to it!
10. Phoenix from the ashes
For a lot of organisations, KM is not a new idea. For many of them, there have been several historical big bangs, pilots and copycat initiatives. Talk with people about what has happened in the past and learn from it. Corporate KM started in the mid '90s, so you'll be looking for people with grey hair (working in KM does that to people). Sometimes just having these conversations can rekindle enthusiasm, tinged with nostalgia. Why didn't we make more of that? What did we lose momentum then? Perhaps now the timing is better? Perhaps now, with a new sponsor, or now that we've addressed that particular barrier? It is quite possible for KM to rise, phoenix-like from the ashes and fly higher than it did before.
So whether you're a viral copycat or a phoenix stealthily approaching a buffet from the outside in, here's ten options to consider, with a little help from the inaugural UN KMOL class of 2013.
My shaggy-dog story.In April we had a new addition to the family. Alfie the Labradoodle came into our lives, and for 98% of the time, we haven’t looked back.
You can put that 2% down to unscheduled early mornings, a chewed laptop power supply, a hole in the garden – and a very disturbing barefoot encounter on the lawn after dark. I’ll leave that to your imagination.
The thing I find most remarkable about being a dog owner is that it’s as though you suddenly become visible to people. I have had more conversations with complete strangers in the last three months than in all the 10 years we have lived here. For the first time in my life, random women approach me with a “hello gorgeous” (OK, not me exactly), parents stop me and ask if their toddlers can stroke him, car drivers stop and ask what breed he is and grown men share their innermost ideas about dog training tips and anti-pull harness choices.
It was a bit disconcerting at first, but it’s actually quite pleasant. Perhaps this new social norm is what it was like in the 60’s?
So why so people feel OK to engage in conversation, share their experience and impart wisdom in ways that they never would have done before?
We’ll, it’s obvious I guess – because the dog is obvious. Everyone can see that I’m a dog owner, so my membership of the dog-lovers’-club is visible to all, at the end of a lead. That gives permission for other club members to approach me and ask or share.
This reminds me of Etienne Wenger’s famous definition of Communities of Practice
A group of people who share a concern or passion for something they do, and they learn to do it better as they interact regularly.
You can see where this is going. How much more effective and productive would our organizations be if we made our expertise, our experience, our concerns and our passion more visible to our colleagues? Here are six to consider.
So much better than leaving your knowledge in its kennel...
Sometimes I come across organisations which have a way of working which naturally encourages the sharing of knowledge – so naturally, in fact, that they don’t realise that the way they operate is different from most other companies.
Posters – perhaps the most effective (and overlooked) social media?
I spent most of last week with a knowledge-friendly Swiss company which has developed a “poster culture” over the past 5 years. Corridors, office walls – pretty much every piece of available wall-space has a poster describing a project, initiative, programme, summary of an event, description of a team and its responsibilities. Every corner you walk around, you pause and think “hmmm, that’s interesting!”. They prompt interaction and conversation.
It’s a surprisingly simple low-tech thing, but it goes a long way to helping people discover what’s going on. No surprises. No closed doors. It puts clear labels on the silos. (see my earlier post – “in defence of silos”)
The same company ran a workshop/conference to update the group on progress on several projects. Rather than using PowerPoint, went to the trouble (and expense) of producing large posters so that people could be walked-through their story. I joined the groups who were circulating between different poster sessions, found myself reflecting on the dynamics.
Yes, in many cases, the posters looked a lot like several PowerPoint slides arranged side-by-side. But even where that was the case, as the reader, I was still in control of which ones I read. Whilst the presenter was talking, I could still flick my eyes back to the material she had just covered, and get a sense of what was still to come. If she’d showed me exactly the same slides, but in the more conventional linear sequence, projected on a screen, driven by the presenter - it would have been different – and I would probably have lost the plot. In the poster environment, I had more control over my own journey through the story. Pointing and asking “could you just clarify what you meant in that bit”, is much easier than interrupting the flow with “could you go back 4 slides – I think it was 4, perhaps 5 – no one more...”
In other cases, the poster-makers took full advantage of their canvas, and drew timelines, rollercoasters and journeys to illustrate their talks, and provided pockets of depth and detail in parts of the poster. You just can’t do that with a conventional 4x3 slide.
Did it cost more?
Yes – $100 per poster – and large posters are unwieldy, require space and take time to put up. Most companies don’t have 2A0 chart-plotters/printers in house – but don’t let that stop you.
Did it add more value?
Disproportionately yes, I would say. Spend the money. Plant some trees to offset the extra paper. Revel in the fact that you don't have a projector in the room.
Did it make best use of the knowledge in the room and encourage dialogue?
I hardly need to answer that.
Yes. After my poster renaissance moment last week in Switzerland, it’s a +1 from me for this form of social media.
There was a helpful thread in the sikm-leaders forum last week when someone asked for ten responses to complete the statement “You know knowledge is being effectively managed when...” I thought it was a really practical way to explore how it feels, and looks – how people behave, when KM is really working. Here are my ten suggestions:
You know knowledge is being effectively managed when...
Leadership. Leaders in the organisation are role models, challenging people to ask for help, seek out, share and apply good practices this inspires curiosity and a commitment to improve. The organisation is learning!
Learning. People instinctively seek to learn before doing. Lessons from successes and failures are drawn out in an effective manner and shared openly with others who are genuinely eager to learn, apply and improve. Lessons lead to actions and improvement.
Networking. People are actively networking, seamlessly using formal communities and informal social networks to get help, share solutions, lessons and good practices. The boundaries between internal and external networks are blurred and all employees understand the benefits and take personal responsibility for managing the risks.
Navigation. There are no unnecessary barriers to information, which is shared by default and restricted only where necessary. Information management tools and protocols are intuitive, simple and well understood by everybody. This results in a navigable, searchable, intelligently tagged and appropriately classified asset for the whole organisation, with secure access for trusted partners.
Collaboration. People have the desire and capability to use work collaboratively, using a variety of technology tools with confidence. Collaboration is a natural act, whether spontaneous or scheduled. People work with an awareness of their colleagues and use on-line tools as instinctively as the telephone to increase their productivity.
Consolidation. People know which knowledge is strategically important, and treat it as an asset. Relevant lessons are drawn from the experience of many, and consolidated into guidelines. These are brought to life with stories and narrative, useful documents and templates and links to individuals with experience and expertise. These living “knowledge assets” are refreshed and updated regularly by a community of practitioners.
Social Media. Everybody understands how to get the best from the available tools and channels. Social media is just part of business as usual; people have stopped making a distinction. Serendipity, authenticity and customer intimacy are increasing. People are no longer tentative and are encouraged to innovate and experiment. The old dogs are learning new tricks! Policies are supportive and constantly evolving, keeping pace with innovation in the industry.
Storytelling. Stories are told, stories are listened to, stories are re-told and experience is shared. People know how to use the influencing power of storytelling. Narrative is valued, captured, analysed and used to identify emergent patterns which inform future strategy.
Environment. The physical workplace reflects a culture of openness and collaboration. Everyone feels part of what’s going on in the office. Informal and formal meetings are easily arranged without space constraints and technology is always on hand to enhance productivity and involve participants who can be there in person.
Embedding. Knowledge management is fully embedded in people management and development, influencing recruitment and selection. Knowledge-sharing behaviours are built-into induction programmes and are evident in corporate values and individual competencies. Knowledge transfer is part of the strategic agenda for HR. The risks of knowledge loss are addressed proactively. Knowledge salvage efforts during hurried exit interviews are a thing of the past!
Now your top ten will probably be different to mine (although you’re very welcome to borrow and adapt them). This kind of approach encourages us to look well beyond the technology which often disproportionately demands our attention.
Taken from the Consulting Collison Column in an upcoming edition of Inside Knowledge
Came across this courtesy of npr via John Allan. Nice post, interesting research. It got me thinking about social media, and the exuberance (now perhaps that's a collective noun for social media?) of sources available stimulate us, if we choose to be stimulated.
See what you think.
He rocks. He rolls. He sucks. He kicks. He tongues. He handles. He flips. He touches. There's not a single item in this living room that 9 month old Charles-Edward (aka Edward) doesn't explore (for a while I thought he'd ignore the chair in the upper left corner, but no...). Edward (son of Quebec City journalist/photographer Francis Vachon) is a rolling demonstration of what the neuroscientists call "synaptic exuberance." You can't see what's happening in his brain, but he is forming ten, twenty thousand new connections every second. Watch him go.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8vNxjwt2AqY&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3]
Here's the thing about babies. When we're born, we get the brain cells we need, but the connections between cells haven't formed yet. In those first few years as we explore the world, the cells begin to link up at a dizzying pace, forming tens of thousands, even millions of new links. When you watch Edward you can almost feel it happening.
Look inside a baby brain and you can see the brain cells getting bushier with more and more links to other cells.
But the strange thing is, we babies overdo it.
All of us, not just Edward, form more connections than we need. Then, later on, (different regions of the brain do this at different times, but it goes on into our teen years) there's a strange reversal. Millions of connections start to die. Why does this happen? Why do babies have a sudden burst of synaptic exuberance around Edward's age and then start losing the connections?
Why does a child's brain demand twice the energy of an adult's brain? Why do some areas in the brain mature before others? And what about one of the most fascinating aspects of brain development — the discovery that the brain produces "too much" of various neural elements and then eliminates the excess? In some ways, this is analogous to the sculptor who begins with more material than is required and then subtracts the excess material to obtain a desired form. Unlike the sculptor, however, who eventually achieves a final form, the brain is able to undergo some remodeling throughout life.
...This way, brain circuits are created and strengthened, in part, by whatever environment and experiences the baby encounters.
This allows for a fine-tuning of neuronal circuits, based on early exposure and environmental nurturing, that makes the neuronal architecture of each person unique.
What he's saying is babies go wild making connections and then, as we grow into our preferences, our personalities, life is like a scalpel. We slowly shed what we don't need or use or want. Having watched Edward for those time lapsed four hours, it's hard to imagine what he’s going to give up later in life but he's got to give up something. We all do.
So, for example, a spell in Twitter can feel very much like young Edward's 4 hours - rolling around between information sources, picking some up, putting some down, clicking-through, retweeting, favouriting...
I'm most struck by the idea that we "go wild making connections, then as we grow in our preferences, we shed what we don't need or want".
So even though we're all significantly older than Edward (although he shares my hairline), does it still work for us when we roll, crawl or toddle around the information playroom?
Does the same principle of "shedding what we don't need or want" help us to develop a new set of preferences and personalities which can handle an explosion of information sources and stimuli without suffering overload? Or does social media do the scalpel work on our behalf, so that our synapses don't need to re-live their childhood?
I'd like to think so. That floor looked hard!
I love this! The media changes, but the story is timeless. Happy Christmas to all my readers, RSSers, followers, friends, linked-in connections...
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZrf0PbAGSk&fs=1&hl=en_GB]
With thanks to Jane McKenzie at Henley Business School for pointing me in the right direction...
Having been working in this field for over 15 years now, I've finally got around to recording a short video which describes what's "under the umbrella" of knowledge management! David Gurteen has been asking people this question for years and recording their responses, but never seems to have his camera when we meet.... (at least, that's what he tells me!)It's harder than I thought - KM is such a "broad church" now, so I've done my best to be reasonably succinct. There are still bits which I missed, like the contribution it makes to ideas generation and innovation - but perhaps I'll leave that for another video, another time!
Here's the transcript:
Knowledge Management is a set of tools, techniques, methods, ways of working, even behaviours - that are all designed to help an organisation to be more effective. Simple as that.
So how then does knowledge management differ from other toolkits or management movements like SixSigma or Lean?
To me the difference is that Knowledge Management focuses on the know-how and the know who – how do you put that to work more effectively in an organisation. How do you share the key points, rules of thumb? How do you ensure that the right contacts are made such that people have the conversations they need to have at the beginning of a project, before everyone gets into action? So for that reason Knowledge management is quite a broad church of techniques and approaches (for me, that’s what makes it so interesting!).
So you could find yourself looking at tools which help you to identify and support the networks or communities ofpractice in an organisation, ways of mapping how people are connected, ways of improvingthose connections - looking at who talks to whom, who trusts whom, and how you can optimise that.
You could equally look at how good an organisation is at learning – learning before activities, learning after activities. How do you ensure that the lessons you capture after a project are meaningful and full of recommendations and useful actions points for somebody.
It could be about how you encourage a team to learn continuously, rather than waiting until the end of major project before they take the time to pause and reflect.
It could equally well be about how we capture knowledge such that the value can be multiplied. How do you take a nugget or insight and capture it in such a way that people are intrigued, interested, want to read more and want to get in touch with the person who wrote it. How do you package that up in a way which doesn’t destroy all of the emotion, the context, but seems to carry it with it . Much more use of multimedia, much more use of connections to some of the social media tools, so that you’re only ever one click away from a conversation. Finally it has a lot to do with the way we behave, the way in which we work, the culture which we establish and support or nurture, or come against as leaders in organisations. How do you come against a “Not-invented-here” culture? How do you support and make it safe for people to share their experiences and learn from those, to share their failures as well as successes?
Knowledge management encompasses all of these things, behaviours, technologies, processes. learning, networks - and for me, that’s what makes it such an exciting discipline.
A sneak preview of my up-coming column in the next edition of Inside Knowledge... During my childhood, I wiled away many an hour with school friends and a pack of Top Trumps cards. For the initiated amongst you, Top Trumps consists of a set of cards based around a particular topic. (In my day, it was ships, racing cars, Olympic medallists or dinosaurs. Today, it’s more likely to be X-Factor contestants or Harry Potter characters). Each card contained statistics about the car or dinosaur in question, which enabled you to compare scores with your friends and - if you chose the right category - to win their favourites until you possessed all of the cards. One of the side effects of overdosing on Top Trumps would be the ability to recall facts and figures about any card. To my slight embarrassment, I can tell you without pausing that the 0-60mph acceleration of a 1978 Lamborghini Countach is 5.6 seconds. Too bad my short-term memory is unable to recall where my own car keys are right now!
Last month I had the opportunity to work with a network of business improvement professionals (the I&I Network) who wanted to understand where knowledge management tools and techniques could complement their world of LEAN, Six Sigma and Kaizen. Sensing an audience of potential Top Trumps sympathizers, I made up packs of “KM Trumps” for them to play with in pairs for ten minutes. For my categories, I chose: Cost, Return on investment, Learning curve, Geek Factor and Engagement Effect. I had difficulty stopping their game to continue the workshop with them! I found that even in those few minutes, everyone picked up on the breadth and variety of tools which we place under the KM banner. When all 36 cards were laid out, with their categories visible it was easy for my group of improvement specialists to make an informed selection about the tools and techniques which might best fit their own organisations. They could tailor their own custom toolkit with just the right amount of “Geek Factor” and not too much learning curve.
One of my bugbears in KM circles is the way in which the labels KM 1.0, KM 2.0 and even KM 3.0 are used - as though knowledge management is only allowed to exist in a number of quantum states; or it’s a branch of scientology... Don’t get me wrong, I’m a big fan and big user of social media, and I think it has brought energy, connectivity, serendipity and a real-time edge to the field of knowledge management. What it hasn’t done is to supersede the fundamentals of KM – the value of conversation, the importance of learning and reflection, the power of communities of practice, the need to both summarise and provide stories to preserve context. Superceded? No. Provided a welcome shot of adrenaline? Absolutely.
I believe that as KM professionals, we have a duty to remain aware of, and open to, the new tools and techniques which come our way. Where we add value is in explaining how and when an approach or combination of approaches can have the biggest impact. That might mean that this year, your organisation is KM 1.6, and next year it’s KM 2.17. It’s our job to find out what number our organisations need.
Sometimes we might be surprised that a simple, established KM tool has the biggest impact, just like I was surprised when my school friend trumped my prized Lamborghini card with his Isetta Bubble Car. All because he was smart enough to choose fuel consumption as his category, rather than acceleration!
I came across this image by Joe Pemberton in Flickr the other day. It (and the discussion attached to it) sums up my predicament of the blurring of boundaries between public and private social networks.
This is some thinking I've been doing lately about the ecosystem of social networks and the problem of managing it all and of keeping the personal separate from the professional.
Some overlap will happen in social networks but maintaining boundaries helps you keep professional contacts eyes off of your private matters, your personal goings on, your family status, your childrens’ accomplishments, etc.
[DOTTED AREA] Public. Your personal brand awareness happens here. Create digital acquaintances. Network. Be a person, but be sure to balance out your travelogue with your sharing of insights.
[CYAN] Professional. Limited to people you‘ve worked with. Don’t dilute this network with digital acquaintances.
[ORANGE] Keep these limited to friends and family. These are not professional networking tools. Avoid the urge to accept every friend request. Do you really want to connect with old high school acquaintances?
[MAGENTA] Keep these close; limited to people you hang with. Old high school buddies and people you met at conferences don’t need this layer of your digital life.
This is not a prescription for others but is pretty much a diagram of my own social network. And yes, as lame as it sounds, that's how I have to view it, as a brand exercise. After all, careers have become brand management of your personal expertise, experience, insights and beliefs.
As one of Joe's Flickr respondents said, "I have a real concern with recent professional contacts having access to some of my oldest goofiest friends".
But the prospect of "de-friending" a number of professional contacts out of Facebook seems pretty tough too.
And then there are the true boundary people - the professional contacts who have become friends. What have I got myself into!?
It's probably far too late.
Perhaps it's just a fact of life 2.0 that we have to live with? Transparency. Trust. Thinking our loud.
And getting comfortable that that the rest of my social-media life will feel like my big four-o birthday party would have done last year, had I had the bottle to have one that is... and mix family, friends, colleagues, schoolmates and clients in with alcohol for several hours!
Perhaps I'll save that for my 50th. By then someone will have figured out the social media boundaries of politesse...