Friday, 5 August 2011

HR Technology and Social Innovations


   I’ve had this article on Social Innovations published in Human Resource Executive as a lead into my presentation at the US’ HR Technology conference this October.

I argue that those responsible for managing and leading people in organisations, and therefore their relationships, need to focus not just on social activities, which tend to be performed within silos, eg HR, OD, Communication, Enterprise 2.0, Facilities Management etc, but on the outcomes of these activities, ie social capital. Doing this helps ensure that these activities can be identified appropriately and more effectively integrated and combined.

I present innovation as an example of one of these social outcomes, and discuss how it can be developed in an integrated way. You can read more about this in the article which is available online here.


My presentation at the HR Technology conference, ‘HR 2.0—What It Means to You’ will focus on how HR can create social outcomes in innovation and other areas. You can find out more about this conference, including a discount code, here.


Cross-posted at Social Advantage.


  • Consulting - Research - Speaking  - Training -  Writing
  • Strategy  -  Talent  -  Engagement  -  Change and OD
  • Contact  me to  create more  value for  your business
  • jon  [dot] ingham [at] strategic [dash] hcm [dot] com



  1. Jon,

    I shared the artikle with my colleague and he was curious as how does reducing pay differentials and introducing pay transparency make it easier for employees to connect and share ideas with each other?


  2. Hi Saqib,

    If there are big pay differentials in an organisation it's going to make people feel less equal. Inequalities and other differences have a big impact on peoples' propensity to collaborate. So by paying people significantly differently amounts, you make it less likely that 1, the lowest paid is going to take a risk talking to the more highly paid, and 2. the highest paid is going to feel that they need to speak with the lower paid.

    Collaboration is impacted even more by unfairness. So even if pay differentials aren't excessively large they may be perceived as such, and if this is deemed unfair, it's going to have an even bigger impact on propensity to collaborate.

    Lowering differentials and communicating these by being open about what people are paid sends a clear signal that while some people are more important than others, everyone is important. And that the organisation is prepared to stand behind its decision to pay some people more than others. It should therefore reduce perceptions of difference and unfairness and lead to greater collaboration.

    Make sense?


Please add your comment here (email me your comments if you have trouble and I will put them up for you)