What's in it for you?

An interesting discussion around the table on what do we want from all this 'Social Business' stuff?

If we engage with everyone through an online 'jamming' community system, rather than face-to-face (impossible with the hundreds or thousands of people involved), as one colleague says, it will 'amplify the negative'. I argue, however, that it will also amplify the positive, and it is only by amplifying all responses that we can hope to actually find out what people think.

It will, hopefully, also amplify honesty.

However, can we bring everyone together when they don't actually want to, as one half might see the other as completely against everything they stand for? Perhaps there's no need to have everyone engage with everyone, though it is my preference.

And if people do not engage with each other, what are the negatives?

Surely there is a potential lack of synergies...
There is a potential duplication of work...
There is a hole in potential knowledge sharing...

So can we force individuals to engage?

Can we go through HR and 'process' to use a nice big colourful stick to beat people into engaging with the wider community?

Surely we need to also change our processes so that individuals are not appraised on individual targets and performance if we want them to also think about doing things which are beneficial to the community?

If we need to drive them through personal performance targets, are they people we also want to engage with in the community? Should we have two-tiered communities within the organisation?