Adaptability is becoming an ongoing theme. There is no point in complaining about constant change. Constant change is part of the new normal. Change has always been "normal". The new normal involves more rapid change. Three years of rapid change feels like an eternity.
We re-started in 2019 with an underutilized Yammer network. While Yammer was technically available to staff since 2016, it had been launched in a meaningful way. The new corporate strategic plan launched in 2019 created new opportunities to leverage Yammer and engage our global workforce more effectively.
And yes, we immediately encountered the confusion and at time frustration that employees felt with the multiplication of tools for collaboration and communications. In particular, it wasn't always clear why people should use Yammer when Teams seemed to be the way to collaborate. By the time COVID-19 sent everyone to work from home, Teams was where people worked with their immediate colleagues, and Yammer became the place where you could share much more broadly and keep up with corporate events even if you were not in the office. That was what I was saying to anyone who would listen but it took a while to sink in.
As of the end of 2022, there are still a few who think Yammer is a waste of their time and prefer to use other tools (beyond Teams). However, a number of factors have helped us get in the right direction in terms of finding the right balance between Yammer and Teams.
1. Leadership Support: Yammer has had strong support from the very top of the organization to move from corporate emails that went to everyone to Yammer announcements in the All Company community. This has led to a significant reduction in corporate communications via email listservs and created more opportunities for staff to engage with leadership in Yammer. Leadership engagement in Yammer is critical and it should be several layers deep.
There are still legacy instances of Teams sites that should have been created as Yammer communities. In most cases, these were created by people who specifically wanted a closed group approach. However, it goes counter to the corporate approach of having open, accessible conversations to harness collective knowledge.
- Notifications changed. Announcements no longer automatically went to all community members' email inbox. The community admins must specifically select "send to all" every time if they want to make sure all community members see the announcement as an email.
- Notifications in the Teams feed only cover announcements. People need to understand the full set of notifications (in Yammer) to get the specific highlights they want either as email notifications or in a more limited manner, in Teams.
- Announcements became overused as the primary mechanism for getting "views" on messages and the great majority of posts became announcements. These generated reactions, but very limited engagement in the form of comments or replies. The Yammer network was turning into just another channel for corporate communications, displacing email announcements via listservs but not really creating engagement.
- We are seeing increased active engagement (posts) in the All Company community. This is very encouraging because these posts come in two varieties: 1) engagement with polls and questions that are tied to corporate campaigns and posted by corporate leaders; 2) posts by project leaders describing project activities, progress, success stories. It is particularly encouraging to see the number of views and level of engagement with posts in the All Company that are NOT posted as announcements.
- Smaller, topic-specific communities are not experiencing this increased engagement. This is partly due to lack of active community management.
- New Features: I am still somewhat hesitant to launch Storylines and Stories. There is no added cost but launching these two new functionalities in Viva Engage would create added complexity in terms of communications. We need to rationalize these additional tools based on existing and emerging corporate strategic plans (and say "no" or delay as needed). In addition, without being able to test/pilot with a smaller group, we will inevitably be very reactive in our communications, addressing questions and concerns as they are experienced. We can also wait for other organizations to launch and look out for their immediate lessons.
Caveat: There is a broader layer of project communications that happens completely outside of my purview. Therefore I am only seeing a narrow slither of our internal communications.