Getting out of the Box and Making UC Social

As this series on thinking outside the box about UC continues, more ideas come to mind as I look for examples in my research. Of course, there’s nothing wrong in considering UC for all the reasons most businesses adopt – it’s what they know and it’s what gets budget approval from senior management. If this describes your situation, I would encourage you to read a bit further before making any final decisions.

What’s your hurry?

UC can do wonderful things for your business, not to mention enhancing IT’s value to the organization, but there’s never really a right time to deploy. As you may know, UC is a perpetual work in progress – it will never be done, so it doesn’t matter whether you move forward today or next quarter. More importantly, UC isn’t deployed to fix something essential that just broke down. UC introduces new capabilities, but is largely a productivity platform to make existing things better – not necessarily new or different.

As such, if you’re not aiming for transformative results, then you’ll be deploying UC just like everyone else. I’m making a dangerous assumption here in that every situation is unique and that every business wants to stand out. However, I would also contend that most will follow the path of least resistance, especially for something where a hard ROI is difficult to demonstrate.

UC requires a leap of faith, and that generally narrows the window of risk-taking in terms of going beyond table stakes. With this thinking, UC will never provide long-term competitive differentiation, and if that’s needed to seal the deal, you need some out of the box thinking. That’s the focus of my current theme on this blog, and I’ll continue now with another example.

Making UC social

This is easier said than done, but put yourself(ie) in the shoes of a Millennial employee. Observe their behaviors, both around how they communicate and interact with other people. Presuming you are not a Millennial, then reflect back on how you do those things. Now think about who has been developing today’s UC offerings, and is it any wonder why UC has not taken the IT world by storm?

First off, most UC solutions are either telecom-centric, or rooted in that space. After all, UC initially emerged as the successor to the IP PBX, as these vendors saw a declining market in phone systems, and needed something for the next generation. That is hardly the only storyline in UC today, but it speaks to where the lion’s share of the market is coming from.

Secondly, UC is built on conventional communications applications that we rely on to get things done. As with the highly familiar world of telephony, the other core applications –  chat, video, email and conferencing are first nature to everyone. Remember, UC is not about reinventing communication – it’s about making what we already do better.

Having said that, I have long described presence as the secret sauce of UC, as it holds the key to making communications better. Presence is very much an IP-based concept, so it’s new relative to everything else cited above. However, it is highly intuitive and works quietly in the background, posing nominal obstacles to UC adoption.

While all of the above makes for a workable UC offering, there is nothing that brings social media into this virtuous circle. This is understandable, since social media activity largely takes place in personal spaces, beyond IT’s control. Vendors have tried incorporating social media tools into their UC offerings – with Cisco Quad/WebEx Social being a prime example – but none have really succeeded.

This isn’t to say end users don’t want those capabilities – in fact, the opposite is probably true. If UC was being designed today from scratch by Millennials, it’s fair to say it would be unthinkable for social media to not be a core capability. Think about how anxious younger people get when they can’t check their social media updates every five minutes – this is their oxygen, and this is what collaboration means to them.


You won’t find a social media-centric UC platform any time soon, but that day will come. When Millennials become the decision makers and prime buyers for UC, their sensibilities will demand it. Until that time, you should talk to your younger employees and learn how they think UC can be more social in order to reflect what works best for them – not just personally, but in their jobs and working in teams with co-workers.

Similarly, you need to ask vendors where social media is on their roadmap. A key indicator will be their ecosystem of applications developers and technology partners. UC’s amorphous nature means it is highly adaptable, and if you lean hard enough on them, you should find at least one vendor willing to push the envelope and customize some social elements for your deployment. Again, it’s all about making communications better, and if this tweak works, you’ll probably have a new competitive edge. Isn’t that what thinking outside the box is all about?

Permanent link to this article:


Federation and out of the Box Thinking with UC

In my last post, I outlined the idea of thinking differently about how you roll UC out in your organization. I stressed the need for an active approach and to take ownership since so much is at stake here. With an IP PBX, you can afford to be passive – everyone knows how to use the phone, and they’re going to use it regardless of how you handle the deployment. Not only that, but there is no upside for IT to go above and beyond – the phone system is first nature and there’s not much value to be added.

UC is another story, and once you view it as an opportunity to do something different, you’ll key in on this “out of the box” theme. Think about this in two ways – first, it’s an opportunity to enable employees to be more productive with something new, and that will serve the business very well. Perhaps just as important, UC also gives IT an opportunity to contribute in a more strategic way and be more involved in making business-level decisions.

You’d be right to say there’s a bit of ego at play here, but it’s more than that. Think about the pressures facing IT today and how hard it is elevate the role beyond one of managing the plumbing. If IT takes the right steps to “own” UC – and if tangible results are achieved – management will view IT more favorably as a driver of change and keeping the company on the leading edge of technology. Now think about what that could mean for getting budget increases, or faster approval for deploying other new technologies.

So, how do you think outside the box? First and foremost, you need to identify where and how UC can add business value. Where can it have an impact beyond just making communications more efficient? Another example is using UC to engage employees in new ways that empower them to adopt higher-order capabilities that can truly drive productivity. I’ve got a few examples to share, and let’s get to the first one for the balance of this post.

Using UC for federation

This can be an abstract concept, but federation offers distinct value in the right situations. In its most simple form, UC creates internal federation by having all employees on a common directory. That’s the starting point for any communications platform, and for UC, the key is to integrate everyone regardless of what IM client they’re using. UC vendors can do this to varying degrees, and the real value comes from doing more than just checking presence or trading chats on the fly. Any IM platform can do that, but you need UC to support real-time multimedia communication, which in turns leads to collaboration via sharing of information across multiple modes.

With that in mind, think about how UC could be used to federate employees with groups from outside your organization. Not only is UC flexible enough to do this in a variety of ways, but it offers up a new role for IT to play, especially as a neutral party to negotiate and manage these connections.

One example would be with select customers your company works very closely with. Perhaps there might be a desire to have ongoing collaboration to develop new products. This could be done just with a specific department or region with your customers to keep the engagement manageable. To some degree, you can do that now with conventional modes – email, phone calls, conference calls, etc.

However, if all parties see a benefit for a tighter environment to support more intense collaboration, the conditions would be right for federation. The key is establishing enough trust to integrate across the various directories, and then ensuring that the UC platform will support all the various networks and endpoint involved. Presuming this can be done, UC now provides a new way of working that benefits everybody.

You can also extend federation across your supply chain and even with industry peers. For the former, think about the efficiencies that can be created with this kind of integration among suppliers and partners. Similarly, there are numerous scenarios where peer level collaboration is needed, and UC would be an ideal solution to tie everyone together. Consider a scenario where new regulations are coming, and all the players need to develop a united response. Or an unforeseen event creates a need that no company can address on its own, and an industry-wide effort is needed. Presuming all the technical hurdles can be addressed, this type of federation offers a powerful use case for UC.


I’m sure you can think of other examples, and the main idea is that federation is one way think outside the box for everyday UC applications. The above scenarios really should serve to start a conversation inside your organization for IT to take UC beyond the expected. This is just one possibility, and I’ll move on to a few others as this series continues.


Permanent link to this article:


Thinking out of the box with Unified Communications

Summer has come and gone, and my “top 10 list” theme has run its course. We’re all back to work now, and I’m going to move on to themes that are more practical, but also provocative in terms of how you should be thinking about Unified Communications.

Thinking out of the box isn’t easy for anybody, but you cannot afford to take a passive approach with UC. If you read my last two posts here, you’ll know that UC carries risk, and it can be significant without the right preparation. A big part of that preparation is about thinking outside the box, and I’m going to explore that over the next few posts.

Buying a phone system doesn’t require an active approach, but UC sure does. As you know, with an IP PBX, you’re either updating another IP PBX or replacing an end-of-life legacy PBX. This is basically swapping like-for-like, and aside from some network tweaks to support VoIP, it’s pretty transparent to your employees. This may seem moot if you believe – as I do – that we’re in a post-PBX world now, but this scenario still speaks for most businesses.

Who cares about the IP PBX?

I’m stressing this point because most of you will still be in this mindset when it comes to UC. There is no precedent for investing UC, and that’s where the risk comes from. There is no like-to-like replacement, and by default, the phone system is the closest proxy for driving your buying decisions. UC may be very different from an IP PBX, but in many cases, you’ll be assessing offerings from the same vendors. You may have had a decades-long history with your phone vendor, and that history will invariably come into play when they now try to sell you UC.

The worst thing you can do in that situation is to continue taking a passive approach, where you basically buy it, deploy it and move on to the next IT project. If you’ve been reading my posts, you’ll know that approach will be disastrous for UC. The fluid nature of UC means this is not a plug-and-play deployment, not just at the network level, but among end users as well.

Engaging end users is where you really need an active approach, and you should expect this will be harder to do than it looks. When rolling out a new phone system, end users really won’t be doing anything new or different. There is only one phone system, and everyone will use it on a regular basis. With UC, you face a much bigger challenge. While you know what UC is – and the vendors know what UC is – your employees do not.

So, right off the bat, this is different from IP telephony, and you have to go on the basis that you’re starting from scratch. The applications that comprise a UC offering may be familiar and in everyday use already, but UC itself is a vendor-driven concept. Employees don’t think about communications technology this way, and they may well be “doing” UC now but don’t realize it.

Shift your thinking

Hopefully, it’s clear by now why you have to move on from the IP PBX mindset – and your employees have to as well. This is where IT’s job gets harder, since it’s up to you to figure out ways to engage employees and get them schooled in the UC “way” of doing things. For UC to earn its stripes, employees have to move on from using communications applications in a standalone fashion – and they won’t do that unless they know how, as well as see why this is a better way to work.

You can certainly rely on the stock benefits and use cases that UC vendors provide – and even from the channels. These will lay the foundation for mainstream adoption, and that may be sufficient for however you define success. That’s a safe plan, but you don’t have to stop there. In fact, if you do, you’ll never really own UC; this is the passive approach where employees find their own way and IT doesn’t really put a stamp on it.

That’s the difference between a passive and active approach, and I’m only interested in the latter. My message is that you need to think outside the box to really make UC yours, as well as show employees the higher order benefits that can transform the business. Isn’t this where you’d rather be? If so, you’ll want to read my upcoming posts, where I’ll be examining what this kind of thinking looks like.

Permanent link to this article:


Top 10 Risks you take with UC, Part 2

As summer’s end approaches, it’s time to close out my season-long series of “Top 10” themes for UC. My intent has been to provide short reads with concise lists of items that you can quickly glean to ensure you stay on the right track with UC. Some are cautionary reality checks and others have focused on the various forms of upside that come with a well-planned deployment.

My last post focused on the former in the form of risks you take with UC. The first five were covered there, and this post brings things to a close with the second set of five for ten in total. For all of these, the main message is that UC can be a great move, but all forms of change carry risk, and these are the key factors to be aware of.

6.  No perceived benefit for UC

This form of risk is subtle, but very real. Note that I haven’t specified who is doing the perceiving here. Chances are good that employees won’t perceive any benefit since they know little about UC in the first place, and they aren’t the economic buyers.

Things get more complicated with senior management, especially if they see UC as an abstract concept, and that’s not a big stretch. If the value proposition does not resonate for them, they could dismiss UC on the basis that the existing applications work just fine and they don’t see how UC is additive. The power of this perception should not be underestimated since the proof points are difficult to demonstrate.

7.  No actual benefit for UC

Prior to making the decision to deploy UC, perception is reality, and that’s why the above factor is so important. However, once the decision-makers get past that, all that really matters is performance. Of course, by getting to this point, the perceived benefits set the bar for expectations, and the burden of risk shifts from perception to reality.

Again, this is a subtle shift, but if UC does not perform as advertised, you have an even bigger problem to manage. This is why it’s essential for IT to get a defensible promise of performance from the vendor before sealing the deal. Vendors have their own pressures to make sales, but UC is still a work in progress, and you have to have a clear sense of your management’s tolerance for risk. If they expect a perfect deployment with measurable results off the bat, you need to get those expectations in line with the performance promise you believe the vendor can deliver.

8.  Channel not able to properly support UC

While much of the risk ultimately lies with the vendor, there is plenty of risk in play with their channel partners. Depending on the customer relationship, most vendors rely extensively on dealers, resellers, VARs and systems integrators for the UC deployment and its ongoing management. Businesses have their own relationships to manage with the channel, so they have two masters to serve. As such, you have to be careful about how much faith you put in the channel.

To whatever extent you do trust the channel, it’s important to realize that vendors face an ongoing challenge finding the right channel partners for UC. To date, those relationships have been built around selling phone systems, and UC requires different expertise. Not only that, but as the cloud emerges as the deployment model of choice, the economics of UC change, and this won’t be attractive to everyone. These factors point to the need to be sure you have the right channel partner in place and not to assume they’re all created equal.

9.  Employees feel imposed upon

Risk comes in many forms, and your employees are certainly part of the equation with UC. Let’s just assume that you’ve done all the right things to ensure both the vendor and channel partner are on target. As mentioned earlier, employees are not part of the buying process, but they are the ultimate end users.

This makes UC different from other forms of technology, especially those that are legacy-based. You cannot impose UC on them, since many of the core applications are already in use on a standalone basis. They need to see a reason to go with UC, and you can’t assume they’ll intuitively find the integrated environment a better way of doing things.

There is also a workload expectation that needs to be managed here. UC can be a great driver for productivity, but you’ll be adding risk if they don’t see this as a good thing. Everyone wants to be more productive, but you must take care to not present UC as a top-down mandate to make employees work harder without any additional reward.

10.  Management has unrealistic expectations

This is a variation of some earlier risks, but speaks to something different. Having unrealistic perceptions or expectations of UC and what the vendor can provide is one class of risk. However, they may well have grander expectations based on what peers are telling them, and these could also be misplaced notions.

One such idea is that UC is just a simple suite of applications that is easy and fast to implement. IT knows otherwise, and you don’t want that mindset in the picture. Furthermore, management may well only focus on the big picture benefits without considering the technical challenges that will be transparent to them.

Another bad idea is for management to think of UC like VoIP in terms of being a cost savings exercise. That outcome is possible with UC, but it’s not the main selling point. To mitigate this form of risk, you need to get management to see UC as a strategic investment that may have some short-term hiccups, but over time, the productivity benefits will far outweigh these long forgotten disruptions.


Permanent link to this article:


Top 10 Risks you Take with UC

Over the course of this summer-long series of “top 10” lists, I’ve examined many facets of UC, with much of the focus being on the benefits. Setting the right expectations is a big part of this, and my intent is for these lists to provide a set of quick reference points to make sure your thinking is on the right path.

Having said that, I haven’t looked much yet at the potential downside for UC. I’m not trying to talk you out of UC, but you need a balanced perspective, and one that’s vendor-neutral. To provide that balance, the next two posts will review my “top 10” set of risks that are attached to UC. You might find the range of risks to be quite broad, but this is the picture that emerges throughout my ongoing industry research. To get started, I’ll address five risks below, and five more in the follow-on post.

1.  Lack of vendor interoperability

This risk is more common in larger enterprises, which tend to have a multivendor environment for many things, including telephony. Even though VoIP and all things IP are in spirit, standards-based, we are still lacking universality. Vendors have varying degrees of openness, but there is a lot of lip service involved, and standardization efforts are an ongoing work in progress.

Given the fact the UC has so many touch points across the network, it’s not surprising how common this is as a risk factor. With UC, every major vendor has an opportunity to be the hub of all communications, whereas previously they had to interwork to provide a complete solution.

By retaining some – or many – proprietary elements, these vendors make it difficult for competitors to break into their customer base, and this is typical of what UC deployments come up against. For this reason, you may be best to start off with a modest UC deployment that keeps interoperability conflicts to a minimum.

2.  Complex deployment

On a broader scale, interoperability is just one facet of this common risk factor. By its nature, UC is complex, and never before has a technology offering attempted to integrate so many elements. Not only is it a challenge to pull these together into a common interface, but UC must also deliver some high value outcomes. By comparison, VoIP is a simple application that yields easy to understand results.

As such, a lot is expected of UC, even if the results are difficult to quantify. Everyone wants improved productivity, and the reason why UC has taken a long time to catch on is because this is hard to do. Again, you can minimize the complexity of UC by starting with a basic platform, but the productivity gains won’t be substantial. This really is a classic risk/reward scenario, but to get the big payoff, you have to be willing to take on the complex nature of a higher-end deployment.

3.  Nobody knows what it is

Once you get past the complexity of deploying UC, you face a different type of risk when it comes to end user adoption. Historically, IT has held all the cards whereby employees had to take what was given, but the balance of power has definitely shifted with the advent of IP. UC in particular poses risk here, as employees are not the economic buyers, but they are the primary end users. They have no stake in UC, and will likely be the last ones to learn about it.

As such, if IT simply turns on a switch, expecting everyone to hit the ground running with UC, this risk will become evident right away. UC is a vendor-coined moniker, and while it’s native to them, end users don’t think like that. In fact, they may already be doing a form of UC with their existing applications, but don’t realize the industry has a name for it.

The risk comes from assuming employees know about UC, and from there, assuming they’ll be interested or even enthusiastic. That’s truly a best case scenario, but you should assume the opposite, meaning IT has an educational job to do before employees can help UC live up to its promise.

4.  Vendor offering not market-ready

Risk comes in many forms, and some of it certainly falls on the vendor.  UC can be a winner-take-all proposition, so there’s a lot at stake here. Virtually all the telephony vendors have migrated to UC, and as the range of applications keeps expanding, they are in constant motion upgrading their platforms. This pressure can be quite manageable for applications within their core competence. However, when adding pieces such video, mobility, security or even social media, the risks get higher in being able to do these as well as what you’ve always been known for.

The same holds for vendors outside the telephony space who are rushing into UC. They may be very good at something like video, but feel there’s an immediate opportunity to grab a bigger slice of the pie with UC. To do that, they have to move now before the incumbent telephony vendor does the same with their core customers.

These are just some high level examples where vendors come to market with half-baked UC offerings simply because there’s more risk in waiting too long. As a buyer, you need to be cognizant of how long prospective vendors have been working on UC, and what steps they’ve taken to ensure it’s ready for prime time.

5.  Fuzzy business case

This is another common risk factor, but one that is borne by both buyers and sellers. I’ve often written about the challenges of building a clear business case for UC. Unlike VoIP, there are no clear-cut cost savings, and while the productivity gains are readily understood, they are difficult to measure.

Some businesses – especially manufacturers – have highly-developed processes for tracking productivity, but most do not. Unless they are prepared to engage business process automation professionals, they will only have fuzzy metrics for building a UC business case.

UC vendors are generally not in the business of measuring productivity results, so if the buyer isn’t asking for it, they’ll focus on other attributes to close the deal. In this case, there is a high likelihood that your buying decision will be based as much on wishful thinking for productivity gains as on hard dollar savings you’ll get from the VoIP component of their UC offering. This translates into risk for the buyer by going into the deal without a clear sense of payback, and the seller bears some risk by not having answers to questions that buyers really should have a better sense of purpose about.

Permanent link to this article:

Older posts «