In an earlier piece I looked at Dell’s social business strategy, which is impressive but incomplete. IBM’s is also comprehensive, but again I think lacks a moral position on the future of business that is essential to the social business.
There’s no question IBM is already a category leader in social software but as yet we have not fully articulated what the social business category consists of.
As we do I think IBM will have to place more emphasis on transforming the sense of value it creates. Social business is ultimately about creating shared value and we need to codefine that with companies like IBM.
For now though IBM has gone a long way to defining the range of initiatives that make up a good social business infrastructure. Next stop – redefining business values.
Very interesting posting on the definition of Social Business. I do agree that we still have a way to go. Two things coming into my mind right away at this moment: Transparency is for me one, if not the most impessive pillar of Social Business. Information, even information you don't want to be pubic, and knowledge becomes transparent and the business needs to learn to deal with this. This is revolutionary if you compare it with the good old way of keeping informations in silos and use it as "Herrschaftswissen". Unfortunately this German term seems not to translate. It is about keeping information to dominate and maintain the personal power.
A second still open question for me is, how we postion the Yunus definition of a Social Business and this broader definition. Again transparency may be the characteristic to bridge the gap and connect both definitions in a meaningful way while maintaining the specifics.