I’m in Washington, DC this week: so far, I’ve seen two plays; seen the presidential motorcade whiz by; shopped at the Eastern Market, and visited the technology exhibit at the Smithsonian. The Smithsonian exhibit made me think of Jun’s overview of technology – Generation of knowledge and process in order to develop systems to solve problems that extend human capabilities. This HRIS class has definitely changed the way in which I think about things, and not just in terms of Human Resources. I am much more cognizant of technology all around me. Given that this is my 16th blog, this seems like a good opportunity to briefly reflect on what I’ve learned over the past 8.5 weeks.
What I hoped to learn from the class was an overview of HRIS technologies, including the basic systems set up and how the technology has changed the basic functions of HR. I have learned the processes that HR-related computer software can improve (hiring the right people, increasing employee productivity, managing employee records, managing employee benefits, payroll, performance management, compensation managements, learning management, and succession planning). While I’m still a little hazy on how that old-fashioned “back-office” HRIS stuff functions, I think that I’ve been given enough information to study it on my own. I learned that the architecture of these systems is relational databases, which I am very familiar with in a different context. Moving forward, I hope to explore newer HR systems like Zoho or OrangeHRM on my once the class is over. I’m actually excited to continue my learning through demos/sandboxes in this manner.
I have learned that the “back-office” HRIS systems were primarily intended to address administrative functions (that ever-replenishing mound of paperwork that still sits on my desk as a result of being a manually based HR administrator). HRIS has automated many of these laborious tasks, which has created the space for HR professionals to expand into more strategic areas. In hand with this, innovators are expanding the capabilities of HR technology to match. Web 2.0 has created user interfaces that allow for great ease in self-service that streamlines many processes. The rapid pace of technological improvements makes me realize that what is trendy today may be passé in a year, so it is really important to stay current.
Social networking has become an important component of communication. As more and more people connect in this manner, businesses are recognizing its value and figuring out ways in which they can utilize the technology in the workplace. HR Technologies are incorporating social networking to bring people together.
The changing demographics of the workforce will impact HR. Millennial, Gen Xers, and Baby Boomers will all be collaborating in the workforce, but they have very different work and communications styles. These differences are highlighted in the ways in which people use technology and their comfort in the ever-changing technological landscape. Businesses need to be conscious of this and create mechanisms for keeping technologically current to engage millennial, and ensuring that Baby Boomers can keep up.
I’ll be leaving class better equipped to handle social technology. I have my twitter account, my blog, my LinkedIn account, and now my Facebook account (and, yes, my daughter is my very first Facebook friend). I feel generally comfortable navigating these sites, and I will do my best to remain engaged in these technologies after the class is over. I have a much better understanding of the way in which Web 2.0 and SaaS have changed the Internet landscape, and I truly appreciate the possibilities this creates for business processes.
I will leave class feeling better prepared for the Future of Work, whether within the realm of HR or beyond. I may not have the ease and fluidity in technology use as a millennial, but I’m not afraid to get out there and give it my best effort. During my vacation, I was telling one of my friends about what we’ve been studying in class, and she said it sounds like something everyone should be required to learn. I wholeheartedly agree.
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
How to get the scanners to like your resume
The demonstrations of Avature and Taleo amazed me. But it also made me curious about how a recruiter could possibly handle all of the information that they would receive from prospective candidates. Talk about information overload. I thought it would be interesting to find out more about the selection process when using these recruiting tools. I found an article in Fortune Magazine about Taleo recruiting for its own open VP of Product Marketing. The Chief Marketing Officer said they normally would get about 50 resumes for this type of position, but in this economy the received 250 resumes. But while the applicant pool quadrupled, the time he spent on reviewing candidates did not because he used Taleo’s own .candidate-screening program to narrow the candidate pool. He was able to quickly narrow down the applicant pool to a manageable 20 candidates. How? The automated resume scanning process that picks out key words to determine if the candidate’s resume is a good match to the posted position.
This ease in screening resumes is theoretically great for busy managers who do not want to wade through 250 resumes, many of whom probably shouldn’t be considered. Many companies are using this type of candidate selection software. According to the article, Taleo has 3,900 customers, including 48 of the Fortune 100 companies. Every quarter, 10 million new candidates apply to companies such as Starbucks, IBM and JPMorgan through Taleo software.
In order to have your resume be competitive these days, you have to understand how these systems work so that you can make sure that your resume is scan-worthy. Your enthusiasm and years of experience may not help you if your resume doesn't get picked by scanning software.
These systems function by the software parsing and scanning each submitted resume and breaking out the applicant's levels of experience. This information is summarized some for the hiring manager, who can also filter and define criteria. If an applicant’s resume meets all the criteria, s/he goes to the top of the list as a qualified candidate. Hiring managers set the candidate requirements - years of experience, level of education, location, etc. - and also can determine how many of these parameters the applicant must match.
The fact that an applicant can apply on line makes it tempting to assume that you can create a single resume and send it out en masse (what the article terms “spray and pray”). But, this is not an effective strategy because you need to tailor your resume to meet the specific parameters of the job postings. Otherwise the scanner will pass your resume right by. To be effective in this process, you must research each position you are interested in, and carefully read the position description posted online. Then, you need to figure out how to add the key phrases into your resume to directly reflect what the business is looking for in a candidate.
Here are some tips from the article:
If you just don't have a skill listed on the posting, you should not embellish but you can add the keyword in creative ways. If, for example, the job calls for someone with knowledge of SAS, a way to get around it is to say "SAS familiarity," "currently studying SAS," or even "SAS interest." You might not have the skill, but at least it puts you one step closer to having your resume read.
Along with reflecting the skills and experience listed in the job posting, you should use words that are industry specific. For human resources candidates, for example, terms like "leadership development," "talent management," and "succession planning" are key. Passé terms like personnel should be left out. Some professional resume writers suggest having a section at the top of your resume where you list core competencies or areas of knowledge. It's a good place to repeat some of the requirements in the job description. But make sure you're able to back it up with something in the body of the resume that speaks to those core competencies.
Most importantly, the article states that the resume needs to make sense to both the software and a human reader. It doesn't do you any good to get flagged by the software only to have a hiring manager think your resume looks like gibberish because you've overloaded it with key words."
Source: Beth Kowitt, Fortune Magazine, April 2009
This ease in screening resumes is theoretically great for busy managers who do not want to wade through 250 resumes, many of whom probably shouldn’t be considered. Many companies are using this type of candidate selection software. According to the article, Taleo has 3,900 customers, including 48 of the Fortune 100 companies. Every quarter, 10 million new candidates apply to companies such as Starbucks, IBM and JPMorgan through Taleo software.
In order to have your resume be competitive these days, you have to understand how these systems work so that you can make sure that your resume is scan-worthy. Your enthusiasm and years of experience may not help you if your resume doesn't get picked by scanning software.
These systems function by the software parsing and scanning each submitted resume and breaking out the applicant's levels of experience. This information is summarized some for the hiring manager, who can also filter and define criteria. If an applicant’s resume meets all the criteria, s/he goes to the top of the list as a qualified candidate. Hiring managers set the candidate requirements - years of experience, level of education, location, etc. - and also can determine how many of these parameters the applicant must match.
The fact that an applicant can apply on line makes it tempting to assume that you can create a single resume and send it out en masse (what the article terms “spray and pray”). But, this is not an effective strategy because you need to tailor your resume to meet the specific parameters of the job postings. Otherwise the scanner will pass your resume right by. To be effective in this process, you must research each position you are interested in, and carefully read the position description posted online. Then, you need to figure out how to add the key phrases into your resume to directly reflect what the business is looking for in a candidate.
Here are some tips from the article:
If you just don't have a skill listed on the posting, you should not embellish but you can add the keyword in creative ways. If, for example, the job calls for someone with knowledge of SAS, a way to get around it is to say "SAS familiarity," "currently studying SAS," or even "SAS interest." You might not have the skill, but at least it puts you one step closer to having your resume read.
Along with reflecting the skills and experience listed in the job posting, you should use words that are industry specific. For human resources candidates, for example, terms like "leadership development," "talent management," and "succession planning" are key. Passé terms like personnel should be left out. Some professional resume writers suggest having a section at the top of your resume where you list core competencies or areas of knowledge. It's a good place to repeat some of the requirements in the job description. But make sure you're able to back it up with something in the body of the resume that speaks to those core competencies.
Most importantly, the article states that the resume needs to make sense to both the software and a human reader. It doesn't do you any good to get flagged by the software only to have a hiring manager think your resume looks like gibberish because you've overloaded it with key words."
Source: Beth Kowitt, Fortune Magazine, April 2009
CompareHRIS.Com
I was interested in a twitter post that someone sent about HRComparison.Com (and its US counterpart CompareHRIS.com). I followed the link and, for fun, played around with the HRIS Selector Tool. I thought it would be a good exercise for me since my organization has no HRIS system in place currently, and we could definitely use something like this as a starting point should we decide to consider a HRIS/HRM system.
The Selector Tool walked me through the standard features available through all participating vendors, and asked if I wanted specific features and how important it is in my software decision. If I selected certain features, I was asked additional questions to further define my needs for that feature. The Selector Tool also asked me if I wanted to exclude vendors that didn’t include particular features. Once I completed the survey, I was provided a list of products that most closely matched the requirements of my input selection.
Based upon the information I provided, the CompareHRIS selection tool indicates that these 7 vendors would meet my needs: iVantage® HRIS; InfinityHR; HR.net Enterprise; HRA HRIS; HRnetSource HRIS; Ceridian HR/Payroll Latitude; SharedHR. The next step would be to research these vendors to learn more specifics about each company and their products utilize a demo, investigate costs, etc.
I noted that this is an advertising tool for the HR software companies, who pay to participate. This made me somewhat skeptical because I wondered how this affected the products included in the selection process. I did not recognize the names of the vendors suggested for me, but I am not well-versed in this area. I did read on the site that their goal is to create an expansive library of products; I’m just not sure how successful they’ve been at it.
This was an interesting “field trip” and a good way to me to get a general understanding of the basic features available in most HRIS systems. In addition to the Selection Tool, the site also had a Products page, articles related to HRIS selection, and tips on how to make a wise HRIS/HRMS software purchasing decision. If I were seriously initiating a search for the ideal software solution for my organization, I wouldn’t use this as my only resource, but it helped provide a framework for the selection process.
The Selector Tool walked me through the standard features available through all participating vendors, and asked if I wanted specific features and how important it is in my software decision. If I selected certain features, I was asked additional questions to further define my needs for that feature. The Selector Tool also asked me if I wanted to exclude vendors that didn’t include particular features. Once I completed the survey, I was provided a list of products that most closely matched the requirements of my input selection.
Based upon the information I provided, the CompareHRIS selection tool indicates that these 7 vendors would meet my needs: iVantage® HRIS; InfinityHR; HR.net Enterprise; HRA HRIS; HRnetSource HRIS; Ceridian HR/Payroll Latitude; SharedHR. The next step would be to research these vendors to learn more specifics about each company and their products utilize a demo, investigate costs, etc.
I noted that this is an advertising tool for the HR software companies, who pay to participate. This made me somewhat skeptical because I wondered how this affected the products included in the selection process. I did not recognize the names of the vendors suggested for me, but I am not well-versed in this area. I did read on the site that their goal is to create an expansive library of products; I’m just not sure how successful they’ve been at it.
This was an interesting “field trip” and a good way to me to get a general understanding of the basic features available in most HRIS systems. In addition to the Selection Tool, the site also had a Products page, articles related to HRIS selection, and tips on how to make a wise HRIS/HRMS software purchasing decision. If I were seriously initiating a search for the ideal software solution for my organization, I wouldn’t use this as my only resource, but it helped provide a framework for the selection process.
Monday, July 20, 2009
successful social networking in business
In her article, Social Networking Connects Business, Karen Banna discusses the opportunities and challenges as social networking sites find a home in corporate settings. It is very important that businesses establish the use of social networking as a function in line with strategic business goals, such as engaging with customers, driving sales, or getting employees talking internally. John Kembel, CEO of HiveLive, Inc., a Boulder, Colorado-based developer of social networking software says, "some companies start with a focus on internal collaboration and efficiency, while others start with more of an external focus on customer engagement. We've seen the greatest success with those companies that start externally, bringing customers closer to their business though a community. This extroverted posture makes for the fastest cultural shift, driving innovation and competitive advantage."
Once the goal of networking has been established by the business, it is important to try a pilot program to ensure that the software works effectively for the business purpose. Some companies find better success if they have two different programs: one for external networking and another one for internal networking. Once the best software design(s) have been established, it is important to create acceptable-use policies that achieve the delicate balance of restricting improper use while still encouraging the freedom to communicate and collaborate in an effective manner.
The benefit to employees in utilizing social networking in business is to reduce information overload. Studies have shown that employees are more productive if they have many network contacts that create reliable source to help filter incoming information. 60% of all U.S. workers have used at least one networking site in the past year. Employees benefit from communicating with other employees to discuss problems, brainstorm potential solutions, and share different skill sets. Customers benefit by being able to interact with the business in a direct and collaborative manner, thereby increasing the quality and quantity of their feedback. The business benefits by increased productivity and innovation in its employees, and by increased customer satisfaction. When engineered properly, social networking is a win-win-win opportunity.
IDC provides the following five ways that businesses can succeed with social networking:
1) Assess your business needs before testing technologies so you can match needs with functionality.
2) Get at least one person from each business unit to test any potential technologies. Different business units have different needs, so what works for the IT department may be lacking for the marketing department.
3) To prevent abuses, create an "acceptable use" policy that provides employees with guidelines for using the company's social networking tools.
4) Determine how easily social networking tools can be integrated with your existing technology.
5) Install filtering an monitoring software. That way, you can monitor what's going in and out of the company and prevent or detect abuses.
source: www.smartenterprisemag.com
Once the goal of networking has been established by the business, it is important to try a pilot program to ensure that the software works effectively for the business purpose. Some companies find better success if they have two different programs: one for external networking and another one for internal networking. Once the best software design(s) have been established, it is important to create acceptable-use policies that achieve the delicate balance of restricting improper use while still encouraging the freedom to communicate and collaborate in an effective manner.
The benefit to employees in utilizing social networking in business is to reduce information overload. Studies have shown that employees are more productive if they have many network contacts that create reliable source to help filter incoming information. 60% of all U.S. workers have used at least one networking site in the past year. Employees benefit from communicating with other employees to discuss problems, brainstorm potential solutions, and share different skill sets. Customers benefit by being able to interact with the business in a direct and collaborative manner, thereby increasing the quality and quantity of their feedback. The business benefits by increased productivity and innovation in its employees, and by increased customer satisfaction. When engineered properly, social networking is a win-win-win opportunity.
IDC provides the following five ways that businesses can succeed with social networking:
1) Assess your business needs before testing technologies so you can match needs with functionality.
2) Get at least one person from each business unit to test any potential technologies. Different business units have different needs, so what works for the IT department may be lacking for the marketing department.
3) To prevent abuses, create an "acceptable use" policy that provides employees with guidelines for using the company's social networking tools.
4) Determine how easily social networking tools can be integrated with your existing technology.
5) Install filtering an monitoring software. That way, you can monitor what's going in and out of the company and prevent or detect abuses.
source: www.smartenterprisemag.com
twitter hacked!!
The recent press on the Twitter hack shows how our personal laziness can come back to haunt us. There are tons of on-line articles to read about this incident, and there seems to be lots of blame to go around on how this happened.
To me, this incident points out the potential vulnerability of web 2.0 systems and why we need to be really careful about the information we choose to put on shared drives and in clouds. This dovetails with the password security and packet sniffer discussion we had in my HRIS class last week. It's not that the security isn't there, exactly; it's that it is fairly easy to get around when users aren't vigilent in their use.
Apparently, the Twitter administrator's password was stolen by someone hacking his personal account which used the same password as his google account. All of Twitter's internal documents are stored as Google Docs, which resulted in the hacker getting access to highly sensitive documents through Google.
I have long been concerned about security issues related to Internet communications. I never put my social security number on any web form, ever. I resisted on-line payments for longer than most, but the ease and convenience won me over. At work, I've consistently been the nay-sayer to web application and payments from our membership without encrypted security. The liability for the organization, not to mention the potential damage to the customer is just too great. I cringe when our benefits broker requests the employee census electronically. I usually feel like I'm being too conservative and behind-the-times. Now I realize there is at least some justification for my concerns.
Those who are critical of cloud computing are probably going to have a field day using this incident as an example of the problems inherent in shared resources. I'm not savvy enough to write a critique on the technological shortcomings that contributed to this situation. I do, however, recognize the inevitable operator error here. Humans are lazy. When faced with multiple accounts requiring passwords, the Twitter Admin did what many of us do regularly. He didn't use a unique password for his accounts. The hacker didn't have to be a rocket scientist to crack the code.
Here are a couple of interesting articles if you haven't reached over saturation on the topic. I have to go now..... I have a couple dozen passwords to change :)
How Microsoft and habit abetted Twitter Hack: http://tinyurl.com/n4hrvj
Twitter docs hack exploits stupidity : http://tinyurl.com/n6yngk
To me, this incident points out the potential vulnerability of web 2.0 systems and why we need to be really careful about the information we choose to put on shared drives and in clouds. This dovetails with the password security and packet sniffer discussion we had in my HRIS class last week. It's not that the security isn't there, exactly; it's that it is fairly easy to get around when users aren't vigilent in their use.
Apparently, the Twitter administrator's password was stolen by someone hacking his personal account which used the same password as his google account. All of Twitter's internal documents are stored as Google Docs, which resulted in the hacker getting access to highly sensitive documents through Google.
I have long been concerned about security issues related to Internet communications. I never put my social security number on any web form, ever. I resisted on-line payments for longer than most, but the ease and convenience won me over. At work, I've consistently been the nay-sayer to web application and payments from our membership without encrypted security. The liability for the organization, not to mention the potential damage to the customer is just too great. I cringe when our benefits broker requests the employee census electronically. I usually feel like I'm being too conservative and behind-the-times. Now I realize there is at least some justification for my concerns.
Those who are critical of cloud computing are probably going to have a field day using this incident as an example of the problems inherent in shared resources. I'm not savvy enough to write a critique on the technological shortcomings that contributed to this situation. I do, however, recognize the inevitable operator error here. Humans are lazy. When faced with multiple accounts requiring passwords, the Twitter Admin did what many of us do regularly. He didn't use a unique password for his accounts. The hacker didn't have to be a rocket scientist to crack the code.
Here are a couple of interesting articles if you haven't reached over saturation on the topic. I have to go now..... I have a couple dozen passwords to change :)
How Microsoft and habit abetted Twitter Hack: http://tinyurl.com/n4hrvj
Twitter docs hack exploits stupidity : http://tinyurl.com/n6yngk
Sunday, July 19, 2009
on-line recommendations
An unexpected consequence of expanding my virtual network presence (see previous blog entry) was a recommendation request from one of my contacts. Someone had previously mentioned to me how important recommendations were on Linkedin, but I didn't expect to get a request within a day of creating my profile.
The request raises a new dilemma about recommendations, which we've previously grappled outside of cyber-space. The dilemma, which faces everyone, is the liability associated with providing a reference. These days, it seems like more and more businesses err on the side of caution and only provide the most basic facts in reference checks (yes, s/he worked here; yes, the dates of employment and/or salary data are correct). How, then, will on-line recommendations fit within these parameters? A co-worker and I decided we should run the query by the boss before doing the Linkedin recommendation. We've yet to hear back.
As is often the case these days, I almost immediately received a twitter post with related content (how do other people know what I'm thinking about?) It was a link to a blog entitled "Requested Recommendations on Social Networks: Why I Won't Do It" http://bit.ly/zq4Pp
The author thought that the filters in the Linkedin recommendation process dilute their value. Specifically, he thought the fact that the reviewee can review the submitted recommendation and then accept or reject it meant that there would rarely be objective content in those recommendations that end up being posted. Plus, it seems that providing a bad recommendation about someone in a public forum doesn't reflect particularly well on the contributor either.
The blog raised some interesting points, but they didn't seem unique to on-line recommendation processes. Potential employers face the same challenges getting objective information in hard-copy letters of recommendation and/or telephone references. I am asked to do a lot of letters of recommendation. I wouldn't accept the assignment if I didn't think I could act as a positive reference. That's not to say that I'm not objective in the content of the letter, but I screen out those few requests from people who wouldn't be well served by the information I could provide. As a reference seeker, I would not ask someone unless I felt that, on balance, they could recommend me positively. These same tendencies are going to transfer to technological processes as well. If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all.
There are ways to improve the content of recommendations so they aren't such puff pieces, which is the overarching criticism in the blogpost. Recommendations that include specific examples of projects or outcomes will give a prospective employer better information than generalized statements like "s/he's a real people person." And, of course, people are trying to be creative in the way in which they obtain information. It seems like it's standard practice these days to Google job applicants to see what turns up. Sources with less filtering and more organic content generation, such as blogs and Twitter, may be the next wave. Untimately, we may end up being own own best (or worst) reference.
The request raises a new dilemma about recommendations, which we've previously grappled outside of cyber-space. The dilemma, which faces everyone, is the liability associated with providing a reference. These days, it seems like more and more businesses err on the side of caution and only provide the most basic facts in reference checks (yes, s/he worked here; yes, the dates of employment and/or salary data are correct). How, then, will on-line recommendations fit within these parameters? A co-worker and I decided we should run the query by the boss before doing the Linkedin recommendation. We've yet to hear back.
As is often the case these days, I almost immediately received a twitter post with related content (how do other people know what I'm thinking about?) It was a link to a blog entitled "Requested Recommendations on Social Networks: Why I Won't Do It" http://bit.ly/zq4Pp
The author thought that the filters in the Linkedin recommendation process dilute their value. Specifically, he thought the fact that the reviewee can review the submitted recommendation and then accept or reject it meant that there would rarely be objective content in those recommendations that end up being posted. Plus, it seems that providing a bad recommendation about someone in a public forum doesn't reflect particularly well on the contributor either.
The blog raised some interesting points, but they didn't seem unique to on-line recommendation processes. Potential employers face the same challenges getting objective information in hard-copy letters of recommendation and/or telephone references. I am asked to do a lot of letters of recommendation. I wouldn't accept the assignment if I didn't think I could act as a positive reference. That's not to say that I'm not objective in the content of the letter, but I screen out those few requests from people who wouldn't be well served by the information I could provide. As a reference seeker, I would not ask someone unless I felt that, on balance, they could recommend me positively. These same tendencies are going to transfer to technological processes as well. If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all.
There are ways to improve the content of recommendations so they aren't such puff pieces, which is the overarching criticism in the blogpost. Recommendations that include specific examples of projects or outcomes will give a prospective employer better information than generalized statements like "s/he's a real people person." And, of course, people are trying to be creative in the way in which they obtain information. It seems like it's standard practice these days to Google job applicants to see what turns up. Sources with less filtering and more organic content generation, such as blogs and Twitter, may be the next wave. Untimately, we may end up being own own best (or worst) reference.
Sunday, July 12, 2009
expanding my network
I have capitulated (or seen the light) and created a Linkedin profile for myself. I have sent out a handful of invitations for people to link up with me (no surprise that the first accept came from my socially connected friend from friday's blog!), but being selective may not be the best strategy. Who knows? I'm not sure exactly what I'm expecting to achieve with this, but I can't really figure out the benefits unless I give it a try.
I read an article in the paper this morning about using networking sites for job-hunting purposes, which said you really need to use both Linkedin and Facebook in order to maximize your connections. I still think of Facebook as a student-driven thing, although I certainly know professionals use it also. Maybe I'll join if my daughter is willing to "friend" me...
I am enjoying twitter to the extent that I like the information that other people post. I've started to follow some HR folks outside of our class to expand my tweeter feed. I find that following the posted links by everyone (classmates, too) lead to very interesting articles, blogs, and podcasts that I wouldn't take the time to search out on my own. I followed one link that Steve Boese posted on Twitter: 8 ways to avoid overwhelming your follower's twitter stream. The advice was geared towards tweeting in a manner that wouldn't irritate one's followers by over-tweeting. http://bit.ly/v5Ly2
I'm not worried about overwhelming anyone with my additions; I'm much more likely to underwhelm. I worry that I'm not going to easily make the jump to the next step of active participation in these collaborative networks. I tend to be a pretty reserved person and I don't voluntarily share that much information about myself. Instead, I enjoy learning about other people and their interests. I'm afraid that I'll end up being one of those folks that posts once-in-a-blue-moon, which I hear is bad form. Blogging a few times a week is helpful; knowing I have a required number of posts to do forces me to share (and my apologies to all of you!) The next challenge for me will be to see if I can step outside of my normal comfort zone and start sharing voluntarily...
I read an article in the paper this morning about using networking sites for job-hunting purposes, which said you really need to use both Linkedin and Facebook in order to maximize your connections. I still think of Facebook as a student-driven thing, although I certainly know professionals use it also. Maybe I'll join if my daughter is willing to "friend" me...
I am enjoying twitter to the extent that I like the information that other people post. I've started to follow some HR folks outside of our class to expand my tweeter feed. I find that following the posted links by everyone (classmates, too) lead to very interesting articles, blogs, and podcasts that I wouldn't take the time to search out on my own. I followed one link that Steve Boese posted on Twitter: 8 ways to avoid overwhelming your follower's twitter stream. The advice was geared towards tweeting in a manner that wouldn't irritate one's followers by over-tweeting. http://bit.ly/v5Ly2
I'm not worried about overwhelming anyone with my additions; I'm much more likely to underwhelm. I worry that I'm not going to easily make the jump to the next step of active participation in these collaborative networks. I tend to be a pretty reserved person and I don't voluntarily share that much information about myself. Instead, I enjoy learning about other people and their interests. I'm afraid that I'll end up being one of those folks that posts once-in-a-blue-moon, which I hear is bad form. Blogging a few times a week is helpful; knowing I have a required number of posts to do forces me to share (and my apologies to all of you!) The next challenge for me will be to see if I can step outside of my normal comfort zone and start sharing voluntarily...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
