Case Study 2

W13649

SOGETI’S TEAMPARK — DESIGNING INTELLIGENT ORGANIZATIONS FOR THE FUTURE Veena Vohra, Manjari Srivastava and Sharon Pande wrote this case solely to provide material for class discussion. The authors do not intend to illustrate either effective or ineffective handling of a managerial situation. The authors may have disguised certain names and other identifying information to protect confidentiality. This publication may not be transmitted, photocopied, digitized or otherwise reproduced in any form or by any means without the permission of the copyright holder. Reproduction of this material is not covered under authorization by any reproduction rights organization. To order copies or request permission to reproduce materials, contact Ivey Publishing, Ivey Business School, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada, N6G 0N1; (t) 519.661.3208; (e) [email protected]; www.iveycases.com. Copyright © 2014, Richard Ivey School of Business Foundation Version: 2014-03-25

This is the dawn of a new beginning. We are building a future Sogeti in which collaboration and social networking are key for delivering client solutions faster, connecting the right people, wherever they are, and making Sogeti, as a group, a more attractive employer. Innovation and passion for technology will thrive and grow on TeamPark, a collaboration platform that has been developed to meet the needs of our people.

Michiel Boreel, chief technical officer, Sogeti Group

INTRODUCTION In December 2010, the management at Sogeti faced a dilemma in regard to their newly established TeamPark platform. TeamPark was developed to serve as an online, collaboration enabling tool for Sogeti’s global workforce. Founded by Serge Kampf in 1967, Sogeti - a wholly owned subsidiary of Capgemini S.A., with headquarters in Paris, France - was a global leader in providing professional technology services to its clients,1 especially in the areas of application management, infrastructure management, high-tech engineering and testing. Sogeti’s name was an acronym for “Société pour la gestion et le traitement de l’information,” which meant “business management and information processing company.” By the end of 2010, Sogeti employed approximately 20,000 people in 15 countries,2 in around 200 locations across Europe, the United States and India, with revenue of €1,649 million. As a result of working in a project based environment, the employees became increasingly disconnected from Sogeti’s culture. To overcome this trend, in 2009, Sogeti embraced a new social collaboration platform called TeamPark. The TeamPark platform challenged traditional work practices in favour of a culture of innovation and collaboration that connected the global workforce of Sogeti, enabling the free- flow of ideas. Sogeti consultants used the term Intelligent Organization to describe the living, organic

1 www.sogeti.com, accessed September 15, 2013. 2 These countries were Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, India, Ireland, Luxemburg, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the United States; www.sogeti.com, accessed September 15, 2013.

For the exclusive use of M. Corella Zelaya, 2024.

This document is authorized for use only by Mariana Corella Zelaya in MIS_520_Summer_6_Tomblin taught by Michael Tomblin, Westcliff University from Jul 2024 to Aug 2024.

Page 2 9B13C047 dimension they wanted to achieve as a supplement to the bureaucratic structure of the organization. This would allow employees to function together in a stigmergic environment.3 Such an environment would facilitate the self-perpetuating exchange of ideas enabling employees to work together, independently of each other and without direct communication. In such an environment direct control was unnecessary. The processes in a stigmergic environment discouraged direct, person-to-person, or station-to-station communication, thus most of the communication or collaboration occurred by means of a social platform (see Exhibits 1 and 2).These new work practices enabled Sogeti to better utilize the special talents and ideas of its employees. Towards the end of 2010, Sogeti’s management faced various dilemmas concerning TeamPark. They had to increasingly deal with issues of trust, access and data security. For Sogeti, being close to clients and providing them with the best technology was an important part of their vision (see Exhibit 3). This led them to wonder how they could open up TeamPark to include clients and external stakeholders. This move would enable the development of a collaborative ecosystem, but would also lead to significant data security concerns. On the other hand, the Super Mentors team was responsible for increasing the usage of TeamPark among employees. They wondered if their approach was right and if it in fact was a good way to build an Intelligent Organization. Transforming Sogeti into an Intelligent Organization was critical as it would enable the organization to meet future challenges. IDENTIFYING A NEED In 2008, Sogeti was poised to undergo an organization-wide business transformation.4 Luc-François Salvador, chairman and chief executive officer (CEO) of the Sogeti Group, had come to the conclusion that, in order to prepare Sogeti for the future, the organization would have to transform the way it functioned. Most of its employees worked on scheduled teams to complete projects, and Salvador knew that, in terms of their geographic location and job function, several of his employees felt they were operating in silos, a sentiment that was leading to a slow but sure disconnect from the Sogeti culture and organization. In order to counter this situation, Sogeti’s management launched a successful collaboration tool and platform called TeamPark, which energized the social side of Sogeti. Salvador knew that before 2008 Sogeti’s culture had been largely entrepreneurial, with the firm positioning itself as a local professional services company (see Exhibit 3). The company brand name and culture were extremely strong, and when it came to operations at the local levels, a lot of decentralization existed. This duality worked advantageously for Sogeti since this structure and culture spurred the growth of Sogeti offices worldwide as entrepreneurial entities, while also creating a multicultural environment. Transforming Sogeti for the future would require a total metamorphosis of the organization, one that focused on the company’s values and mission, and this metamorphosis would necessitate a change in the way the employees worked with each other and with clients. Salvador perceived a need to create a variety of information technology (IT) initiatives, which, amongst other things, would create a stronger connection between management and employees. There existed a strong need to cut across the various teams and enable collaboration on various fronts, and to that end, Sogeti sought to invest in a social collaboration platform that would connect its employees on a global basis. The objective was to achieve business transformation by leveraging social collaboration mechanisms. In this way, the management team at Sogeti expected to shape some new workplace

3 Stigmergic Collaboration: The Evolution of Group Work, http://journal.media-culture.org.au/0605/03-elliott.php, accessed March 10, 2014. 4 www.sogeti.com, accessed September 15, 2013.

For the exclusive use of M. Corella Zelaya, 2024.

This document is authorized for use only by Mariana Corella Zelaya in MIS_520_Summer_6_Tomblin taught by Michael Tomblin, Westcliff University from Jul 2024 to Aug 2024.

Page 3 9B13C047 behaviours and move away from its comfort zones to adopt new approaches and concepts, all while maintaining efficiencies and productivity across a 20,000-employee-strong, multilocational organization. Sogeti chose to involve its employees in this fascinating journey and, as a first step, launched a brainstorming session called the Innovation Jam, which revealed a need among Sogeti employees to break the boundaries of their silos and work more collaboratively. THE INNOVATION JAM In April 2008, Sogeti reached out to employees across its offices throughout the world, inviting them to participate in a brainstorming process that was referred to as the “Innovation Jam.”5 Employees were asked to contribute by generating, discussing and evaluating ideas that focused on four key themes: 1. Sogeti’s People: how to collaborate more efficiently. 2. Sogeti’s Clients: how to build new and closer relationships. 3. Technology: how to use new technology and create new services and strong partnerships. 4. Corporate Social Responsibility: how to contribute to make the world a better place. The idea was to engage people throughout the length and breadth of the organization and leverage crowd sourcing. The Innovation Jam, an online brainstorming session, was hosted on IBM’s Web 2.0 platform, and it allowed employees across geographies and time zones to contribute and share ideas about Sogeti’s future over the next five years. Around 4,220 participants made use of a 72-hour window for “live” participation, generating 1,971 ideas, 3,478 comments, 12,045 ratings and 70,361 views. The ideas that poured in were carefully examined and subsequently categorized into four predominant themes. The Innovation Jam resulted in a number of important discoveries — one of which was that employees felt the need to share their business experiences and viewpoints with each other. They also thought it was important to be able to seek expertise within their globally extended family, in addition to engaging in debates on professional aspects. One of the dominant themes concerned the undertaking of initiatives to tap the existing expertise within the organization in a collaborative fashion for client projects, a process that would enable Sogeti to become more agile and responsive to changing market needs as well as competition. As a result of the Innovation Jam, it became very apparent that people wanted more communication across the various silos within the organization. They wanted more interaction not necessarily related only to their work. Senior employees with ownership of the Innovation Jam — called “Sponsors” — took these ideas under advisement and began to give a concrete shape to this broadly felt need. The Sponsors soon recognized that a platform for collaboration had to be developed along the principles of self-management, trust and openness. The key was to establish a people-centric collaboration platform that would induce innovation and create value for clients as well. Twelve-year Sogeti veteran Jean Marc Gaultier, senior vice-president and global IBM alliance leader at Sogeti USA, served as one of the Sponsors. In describing the Innovation Jam experience, Gaultier recollected that, at first, the explicit design of the platform was unclear, but the team was certain about one thing: Web 2.0 technology should be used to build this platform.

5 Ibid.

For the exclusive use of M. Corella Zelaya, 2024.

This document is authorized for use only by Mariana Corella Zelaya in MIS_520_Summer_6_Tomblin taught by Michael Tomblin, Westcliff University from Jul 2024 to Aug 2024.

Page 4 9B13C047 TEAMPARK IS BORN

In January 2009, a regular weekly meeting of the innovation consultants from Sogeti and the Innovatie (Innovate) and Inspiratie (Inspire) team was held. The meeting centred on a discussion of a customer’s request for a session on Web 2.0 and its impact on existing organizations. During the course of their dialogue, the members of the innovation team suddenly realized that, in response to the needs that staff members had expressed during Innovation Jam, Web 2.0 offered an ideal platform on which to build a successful social software solution for Sogeti. This meeting was immediately succeeded by a couple of brainstorming sessions, mind maps and inspirations that enabled the team members to finalize their design and surprisingly conclude that, although the ingredients for building a social software solution for an enterprise were already available on the Net in some form or the other, no one had yet recognized the potential that could be gained from combining them. In the tradition of a large-scale systems change, this social software tool, known as “TeamPark,” was unveiled to the employees in phases. For Sogeti, TeamPark also became a methodology by which to create an explicit and addressable community from every group inside the company. The social platform would support global communication and collaboration, thus resulting in open innovation, solutions outside the current boundaries, and socializing. Several things were kept in mind while building TeamPark. One of these included mapping various activities of the employees to know what was happening inside Sogeti. After that it was important to identify various categories of employees within the organization and give them an identity. Also kept in mind were understanding relationships with peers, making note of the different types of groups or communities present in Sogeti’s environment, and making an assessment of their contributions. TeamPark was built by paying attention to whether people shared content, identifying people who communicated and understanding issues that people had with challenges or non-knowledge-related activities. Sogeti was one of the first companies in the world to use the updated version of the powerful collaboration platform from IBM, based upon IBM Connections and Microsoft Office Communicator + Intelligent Application Gateway, thus making the best use of both collaborations. In the future, this platform would also integrate Microsoft SharePoint.6 IBM Connections — essentially a social software for business — allowed dynamic networks of people such as co-workers, clients and partners to work together innovatively. Using features like communities, blogs and activities, relationships within and outside the organization could be set up in a trustworthy manner while also keeping business information safe.

Our people are our most valuable asset. As a multinational company with 20,000 employees dispersed from India to the United States, we needed a powerful tool to connect our people and provide them with a social platform to share information and collaborate. We chose IBM Connections because it is a powerful collaboration platform that goes way beyond simple sharing of documents and furthermore, it is people-centric rather than project or document-centric. We believe that this is the future of collaboration and we are pleased to be at the forefront of this new trend.7

The IBM and Sogeti development teams worked closely to develop a software program that had all the features Sogeti employees wanted and more. Flavien Boucher, the technical project manager for

6 Ibid. 7 Ibid.

For the exclusive use of M. Corella Zelaya, 2024.

This document is authorized for use only by Mariana Corella Zelaya in MIS_520_Summer_6_Tomblin taught by Michael Tomblin, Westcliff University from Jul 2024 to Aug 2024.

Page 5 9B13C047 TeamPark, focused on technological development and integration to ensure that all aspects of the platform would work. He engaged heavily with IBM reviews and remained in constant contact with offices in different countries, stating that, “Change management initiative was the objective. People depend on people, and although there were some cross-country issues, we finally resolved most of the technical issues.” THE TEAMPARK METHOD: A FOUR-PHASE APPROACH The Sogeti Innovation team envisioned a four-step process for the development and implementation of TeamPark: creating awareness, determining strategy, implementing the platform, and bringing the platform to life. An important part of the strategy involved the determination of the scale and the degree to which the organization had to establish a process to “socialize” itself. The four-phase approach (see Exhibit 4) was thus enacted to set up and introduce TeamPark to Sogeti employees. Phase I — Creating Awareness The Sogeti TeamPark team knew that, with respect to the TeamPark initiative, the fundamental inertia of large organizations could certainly arise in response to such large-scale changes, in turn inhibiting their success. To counter this phenomenon, the implementation team strove to create social awareness about TeamPark in the form of training sessions, workshops and inspiration sessions. This effort was complemented by an organization-wide public relations campaign that enhanced awareness of the different ways of working together and managing collaboration. Managers and executives were trained to adopt a new role within the living organization. Fitting into these new roles was important since management would no longer occur by means of direct instruction, modification of job profiles, processes and key performance indicators, but instead by adapting to the framework of the platform. In fact, an employee’s status in the organic sphere would be based purely on the value of his or her contributions to the TeamPark community. This phase was all about inspiring, informing, spreading, discussing and demonstrating. Some of the key tasks in the awareness-creating phase included getting inspired and forming a vision, assessing technological and cultural/political trends, creating broad support and willingness, and establishing commitment (see Exhibit 5). Phase II — Determining Strategy This phase focused on analyzing, planning, determining, estimating and creating. Some of the key tasks initiated in this phase included analyzing processes, analyzing the workforce, establishing goals and key performance indicators, planning and roadmapping, analyzing potential and assessing impact. A workforce analysis was carried out to ascertain the communication and collaboration practices of the employees and the extent to which they would adapt to the new concepts and media tools. Since performances on the social platform would be measured differently than those observed on the functional side of the organization, the TeamPark team established some new measurements and key performance indicators (KPIs) for the social sphere (see Exhibit 6).

For the exclusive use of M. Corella Zelaya, 2024.

This document is authorized for use only by Mariana Corella Zelaya in MIS_520_Summer_6_Tomblin taught by Michael Tomblin, Westcliff University from Jul 2024 to Aug 2024.

Page 6 9B13C047 Phase III — Implementation In this phase, the platform was built, configured, installed and tested. All the infrastructural adjustments were performed, existing components were integrated, and everything was readied for the actual launch. Resembling a typical IT project, this phase looked at the redesign of processes and structures for successful adaptation in a different environment; the migration and preparation of content also took place at this point. Further, moderators, floor-walkers and future catalysts received their training during this phase. Sogeti first rolled out TeamPark in a pilot run to around 100 people in three countries. The users faced many difficulties in using the platform, and these issues were painstakingly resolved by the Sogeti IBM team. The initial challenges faced during the launch phase mostly involved errors and slow response time due to server issues. Although the problems in this phase could have become a larger threat to the implementation, and could have snowballed into a crisis, the team managed to resolve them in two to three weeks. As the technical project manager, Boucher faced numerous challenges in coordinating the roll-out of TeamPark to the various Sogeti offices worldwide. The first few weeks saw challenges related to numerous bugs and to system crashes that were caused by multiple simultaneous users, all of which lead Boucher to wonder whether the final version should have been directly launched across the entire family of Sogeti offices instead of launching the beta version, which posed numerous technical problems. Initially, employees were stimulated to use the platform for their personal interests. However, Sogeti viewed the platform as a business resource, and people were taught how to make commercial use of it through cases and scenarios. Initial measurements of usage and updating of the KPIs in this stage also provided useful data for the implementation team (see Exhibit 7). Phase IV — Bringing the Platform to Life The final and most vital phase was to bring the platform to life. This phase emphasized the practices of demonstration, cultivation, stimulation, moderation and measurement. The official roll-out of the TeamPark platform took place in October 2009, and, as the chairman of Sogeti, Salvador played a crucial role in communicating the significance of a social collaboration platform such as TeamPark to the future of the organization, its competitiveness and the way that its work practices would be transformed. This clarification helped to position TeamPark appropriately in the minds of the staff. Within three weeks of the launch, many out of the 20,000 Sogeti employees were on board with TeamPark. They had participated in the Innovation Jam, contributing ideas and discussing the future of their workplace, and they saw themselves as co-owners of TeamPark (see Exhibit 8). Sogeti employees quickly started connecting with each other and creating interest-based communities. TeamPark became integrated with Twitter and Facebook and saw regular postings by employees. The social networking aspect served the dual purpose of enabling knowledge transfer and creating a healthy environment for challenging of views and opinions. The key to the successful adoption of TeamPark by Sogeti employees stemmed from searching for early adopters — employees who were active users of LinkedIn and Twitter, and people who were interested in blogging. These early adopters primarily came from middle management and the field, and they actively sought to initiate others into the online experience. The early adopters acted as catalysts and became responsible for the success of the “Put it on TeamPark” movement.

For the exclusive use of M. Corella Zelaya, 2024.

This document is authorized for use only by Mariana Corella Zelaya in MIS_520_Summer_6_Tomblin taught by Michael Tomblin, Westcliff University from Jul 2024 to Aug 2024.

Page 7 9B13C047 Sogeti USA’s Robert Leroy, senior vice-president — IBM Technology Services, was one such early adopter within the TeamPark story. Leroy was identified as an early adopter because he had participated in creating the technology blog at Sogeti. He had actively participated in the Innovation Jam, and he described the initial phases as a “painful” experience. Leroy remembers being part of the small group of people who were trying to roll out the platform. Initially, a lot of confusion existed around the issue of why employees should use TeamPark. The challenge was, as Leroy recollected “If a message is sent by e-mail, it may eventually die. But putting it on TeamPark helps it to live longer and enables immense collaboration resulting in numerous benefits.” Leroy related a story of how a salesman in Chicago was looking for particular software for a client and contacted Leroy for help. Leroy asked his team to post an inquiry about the product on TeamPark, and within a short time, the Sogeti staff discovered a vendor in Seattle who had listed this software on his TeamPark profile. The Sogeti team was quickly able to put the Chicago-based salesman in touch with the Seattle-based vendor. A schedule with detailed timelines and milestones was followed as a way to encourage the use of TeamPark across Sogeti, which was a widely geographically dispersed organization (see Exhibit 9). THE TRANSFORMATION OF SOGETI Wim Hofland, who was responsible for small and medium business enterprise (SME) apps, collaboration and user experience at Sogeti, said that, “An important need was to change the behaviours of the people and their social mindset. All our efforts were focused around creating awareness about the possibilities of the platform, and that is why the fourth phase was also the longest one.” Several norms had to be put into place and evolved so that the crowd behaviour could be optimized. People who started a community (called Community Owners) owned the community, thus doing away with the need for a regulator. Norms for Community Owners were set up to encourage the use of proper manners and the maintenance of good order on the platform. Erik Van Ommeren, director of innovation at Sogeti, pointed out that the platform had to be free and would have no moderation of content whatsoever. While this mandate would represent a challenge for even the most open of organizational cultures, this did not seem to be the case at Sogeti. For example, within the very first week of TeamPark’s launch, an employee’s post making a contentious accusation resulted in numerous posts by the author’s peer group, admonishing such content and asking members to be restrictive with controversial postings. The TeamPark administrative team never had to resort to an escalation procedure in order to tackle issues of postings that might be controversial in nature. Although Sogeti was a pioneer in adopting social collaboration platforms, Van Ommeren was quick to point out that “success comes with practice and technical expertise.” The TeamPark experience served to educate the company as a whole, with very few downsides to the overall experience. TeamPark enabled Sogeti employees to locate and connect with the right person within the global group, wherever their location, to discuss certain parameters, such as work experience, interests, professional position, etc.8 The platform presented quite a few social networking tools to share knowledge and collaborate virtually with respect to technology, services and also clients. It presented tools such as a personal profile, communities, blogs, wikis, discussion forums, file share, bookmarks and activities. It was designed to be a people-centric system with a high level of functionality and it gradually established its superiority to other document- or project-centric systems in the market.

8 Ibid.

For the exclusive use of M. Corella Zelaya, 2024.

This document is authorized for use only by Mariana Corella Zelaya in MIS_520_Summer_6_Tomblin taught by Michael Tomblin, Westcliff University from Jul 2024 to Aug 2024.

Page 8 9B13C047 Employees using TeamPark found that the system enhanced internal communication, and TeamPark soon became a source of quick and free innovative ideas. A post on TeamPark requesting help with an advertisement for a branded beverage product received 27 valuable replies in three days — considerably more/faster responses than the usual modes of communication and idea-generation. TeamPark became a discussion ground amongst experts and people interested in a given topic. It also became a tool to quickly reach out to people who would previously have been inaccessible, such as higher management personnel or experts in other locations. Thus, TeamPark became a valuable tool for accessing dispersed information or knowledge. Top management used TeamPark on an exclusive basis to make important announcements. Posts of an achievement by an employee immediately evoked appreciation and congratulatory messages across teams and management levels, thereby slowly establishing a move towards a collaboration-based, open culture that was unfettered by hierarchy or governance. Besides helping people to efficiently cut across their own projects or departments, TeamPark also helped them to connect with those having similar interests in other projects. Before TeamPark, employees working out of client sites had limited interaction with the home office. However after TeamPark came into existence, the engagement levels increased, effectively putting a halt to the dissatisfaction and possible attrition amongst such employee groups. KEEPING THE SOCIAL SIDE OF SOGETI VITALIZED — THE TEAM BEHIND IT ALL A team of Super Mentors was formed to create awareness about TeamPark and to encourage people to increase their use of the new platform. Sogeti’s Sweden-based community manager, Lucile Leclercq, was asked to head up this team in order to provide useful data and reports to all TeamPark users on a regular basis. From Leclercq, the Super Mentors received updates concerning all the country-wise norms of the platform’s new users, as well as percentage increases in usage and daily usage reports indicating increases/drops. The steering team that looked after the implementation of TeamPark included Leclercq in Sweden, Nitin Ghate in India, secretary general Olivier Lepick, chief financial officer Laurent Llavall, project manager Nadine Jacrot, group director of marketing and communication Therese Sinter, and Pierre-Edouard Serlooten, Sogeti’s global IT manager. Every country had a single point of contact. Leclercq was responsible for building communication material to increase awareness about TeamPark and to enable an increase in its adoption. She drove the evolution of TeamPark by using newsletters and presentations to reach out to people in a continuous effort to create communities out of local users. Leclercq actively promoted community management on TeamPark, and she increased community spirit by pushing people towards building and using the network, guiding them towards going online more frequently. By constantly standing on the platform, interacting with the users, providing them with functionalities and resource options, Leclercq slowly shaped new behaviours among the Sogeti users. She also worked with management to create appropriate responses to discussions that reflected tensions, unanswered questions or worries from groups of employees. Another important part of Leclercq’s role revolved the training of the Sogeti consultants and the various department managers (human resources, legal, finance, sales and marketing, communications) on how to be social leaders. Her job was to create an understanding of why there should not be official leaders on a social collaboration platform, and to that end, her training focused on sharing more knowledge on the platform and demonstrating how to answer questions concerning TeamPark, especially with respect to handling sensitive situations and the rules of openness and transparency online. Leclercq conducted several different types of workshops; for example, she conducted a workshop in Brussels for the legal

For the exclusive use of M. Corella Zelaya, 2024.

This document is authorized for use only by Mariana Corella Zelaya in MIS_520_Summer_6_Tomblin taught by Michael Tomblin, Westcliff University from Jul 2024 to Aug 2024.

Page 9 9B13C047 team to help them scan the tool in order to foresee and forestall any potential crises that might arise during TeamPark’s usage. The third major aspect of Leclercq’s role involved the strategic positioning of TeamPark. She was responsible for creating awareness about TeamPark at the international level and for driving an image of TeamPark as the centre of how work was done at Sogeti. She undertook initiatives to position TeamPark at the heart of communication and collaboration mechanisms, and these initiatives took the form of communication, such as presentations about adoption and implementation of TeamPark during client events, meetings or workshops. Leclercq’s role also required her to be active on social media in order to gain access to worldwide experts and insights on the latest innovations and adoption techniques in the field. Leclercq undertook this role at Sogeti at a time when there was no dedicated person working on the TeamPark project. The management initially took a “wait and see” approach, and one of Leclercq’s initial challenges involved bringing the management team on board with the change initiative. Leclercq also found that the change initiative faced political resistance from employees who were reluctant to adopt an IBM product due to their comfort level with Microsoft products. Additionally, the strong local culture prevented employees from realizing a corporate need to collaborate globally. Adoption of TeamPark also faced resistance due to the attitude, “If I share my knowledge, I will no longer be valuable.” This situation required a great push from the management team to show to the organization why Sogeti needed TeamPark. Leclercq observed that new users primarily relied on colleagues to start using TeamPark. She focused the bulk of her efforts on countries where the usage rates were quite low, adopting a personal, positive, and extremely encouraging (never patronizing) tone with the users. She also focused on providing them with options of resources and communities to improve their usage patterns and behaviours. CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES By December 2010, a full year after the launch of the TeamPark software platform, Sogeti’s global management team sat down to assess the tool’s effectiveness on a company-wide basis. The central post- implementation challenge for Sogeti was to increase engagement levels with all employees. The Sponsors wondered, “How do we open this platform up to clients,” in addition to “How do we increase the usage and utilization?” There was a lot of deliberation around the way the community should be created, mainly, should it be restricted or open? For Sogeti, the business angle of this dilemma was “How do we build a collaboration platform for our clients?” Underlying these concerns were the vision and values that Sogeti stood for — openness, transparency, and empowerment — values that had long been actively practiced at Sogeti but that now raised concerns regarding sharing of sensitive internal information with the outside world. As a user of TeamPark, Leroy found himself jumping from e-mail to Twitter to Facebook to blogs. Switching between these applications sometimes took away the focus from the context and supplied him with a lot of information he did not need. With many TeamPark users feeling the same way, Sogeti began to work with IBM for a single consolidated position/location creation. The social challenges delivered an added dimension of culture shock at Sogeti. While employees used TeamPark to speak their minds, in some cases, the managers were not very happy with this situation, since it sometimes reflected on their own performance.

For the exclusive use of M. Corella Zelaya, 2024.

This document is authorized for use only by Mariana Corella Zelaya in MIS_520_Summer_6_Tomblin taught by Michael Tomblin, Westcliff University from Jul 2024 to Aug 2024.

Page 10 9B13C047 With TeamPark platform becoming tied to the vision of Sogeti, employees developed a new way to carry out day-to-day business, manage knowledge and engage in these collaborative activities in a passionate manner; however, some managers feared the employees might be spending too much time on TeamPark. The pressure was also on IBM to continue to add features and make TeamPark robust, especially with the competition starting to catch up. LeRoy worked with Sogeti’s clients to help them understand the benefits of building a social collaboration platform in order to transform into an Intelligent Organization (see Exhibit 10). This work entailed developing the “Proof of Concept” for the clients to enable them to see how this technology could be beneficial for them. A pilot run was carried out with the clients by encouraging people to use this platform and generate content. When new users saw life on the platform, they became attracted to it, thus increasing the size of the community. Access and security issues continued to dominate the canvas for TeamPark. Leroy shared that, as an owner of a community whose size continued to grow, he felt a bit uncomfortable with complete strangers joining the community. Such Community Owners could experience pangs of anxiety when they refused membership to these people. The Sogeti TeamPark team continued to work out ways to address these areas of concern. Should they open up the platform to clients and external stakeholders? If so, how would the principles of self- moderation work with larger crowds and communities? Above all, how should the issues of security and trust and openness be resolved in an Intelligent Organization?

For the exclusive use of M. Corella Zelaya, 2024.

This document is authorized for use only by Mariana Corella Zelaya in MIS_520_Summer_6_Tomblin taught by Michael Tomblin, Westcliff University from Jul 2024 to Aug 2024.

Page 11 9B13C047

EXHIBIT 1: FROM WEB 2.0 TO SOCIAL NETWORKING

Source: P. Savalle, W. Hofland, A. Brugman, “TeamPark Platform and Method.” 2nd (Revised) edition, 2010. Used with permission.

EXHIBIT 2: SOCIAL PLATFORM

Source: P. Savalle, W. Hofland, A. Brugman, “TeamPark Platform and Method.” 2nd (Revised) edition, 2010. Used with permission.

For the exclusive use of M. Corella Zelaya, 2024.

This document is authorized for use only by Mariana Corella Zelaya in MIS_520_Summer_6_Tomblin taught by Michael Tomblin, Westcliff University from Jul 2024 to Aug 2024.

Page 12 9B13C047

EXHIBIT 3: SOGETI’S MISSION, VISION STATEMENT AND DNA

Our Mission and Vision For Sogeti, clients and employees come first! Our mission is to be a leading provider of professional technology services. Our vision is to be perceived as the best supplier on each local market. “Year after year Sogeti is delivering client satisfaction at a level that positions the company among the best of the best in our markets and our competitors. The success of Sogeti is the reflection of the trust that our clients are granting us and the result of the dedication of our employees. At Sogeti, we are passionate about two simple but wonderful things: clients and technology. You can be sure that Sogeti will continue to cherish these two pillars of our ‘raison d’être.’ Being close to our clients and providing them with the best of what technology can bring will continue to be at the very heart of Sogeti’s mission.”

Luc-François Salvador, Chairman and CEO of Sogeti Group Our DNA Our DNA, are as a supplier, a partner or an employer can be described in a few words: Technology Excellence Team Spirit Reliability Pride and Passion Result-driven Simplicity Proximity and Intimacy Fun Real comments, from real people: Technology Excellence “Technology has never been more exciting than today. IT and technology have really found their way into the core of the business. And all of this moves faster and faster.”

Andreas Sjöström, Sogeti Sweden Team Spirit “Sogeti is like a village. You’ll never walk alone.”

Geert Dreuning, Sogeti Netherlands Reliability “The great thing about Sogeti is that it has a whole network of specialists to fall back on. If things really get complicated, Sogeti always has an expert at its disposal — somewhere!”

Wim Vliegenthart. International Card Services, Netherlands

For the exclusive use of M. Corella Zelaya, 2024.

This document is authorized for use only by Mariana Corella Zelaya in MIS_520_Summer_6_Tomblin taught by Michael Tomblin, Westcliff University from Jul 2024 to Aug 2024.

Page 13 9B13C047

EXHIBIT 3 (CONTINUED)

Pride and Passion “Being engaged is very important to me. Whatever I am able to accomplish and succeed at is only due to the feedback I get. What is the value I bring to the relationship? If I am not bringing value I simply won’t do it. I am pretty blunt about that.”

Rick Meador, Sogeti USA

Result-driven “Sogeti has a similar awareness of the need for quality and service which in turn has a stimulating effect on us. We do not have to convince each other that clients are our core business.”

Wim Vliegenthart. International Card Services, Netherlands Simplicity “But the key aspect was that we were pragmatic; we looked at the challenges and adapted where necessary. The result was that it became one of the group’s success stories.”

Edwin D’Hondt, Umicore, Belgium Proximity and Intimacy “We really feel we can talk to people at Sogeti and that we’ll end up finding the solution we’re looking for — together. That has been the case from day one onwards, and our relationship has only become closer.”

Wim Vliegenthart. International Card Services, Netherlands Fun “For me, in my professional life at Sogeti, my career is not the typical ladder, but instead it’s more like a chessboard or a labyrinth, where the next move is not necessarily moving upwards, but striving towards fulfilling a passion. That is where the fun begins.”

Andreas Sjöström, Sogeti Sweden

Source: Company files.

EXHIBIT 4: THE FOUR PHASES OF TEAMPARK

Source: Company files.

For the exclusive use of M. Corella Zelaya, 2024.

This document is authorized for use only by Mariana Corella Zelaya in MIS_520_Summer_6_Tomblin taught by Michael Tomblin, Westcliff University from Jul 2024 to Aug 2024.

Page 14 9B13C047

EXHIBIT 5: PHASE 1 — CREATING AWARENESS

Source: P. Savalle, W. Hofland, A. Brugman, “TeamPark Platform and Method.” 2nd (Revised) edition, 2010. Used with permission.

EXHIBIT 6: PHASE 2-— DETERMINING STRATEGY

Source: P. Savalle, W. Hofland, A. Brugman, “TeamPark Platform and Method.” 2nd (Revised) edition, 2010. Used with permission.

For the exclusive use of M. Corella Zelaya, 2024.

This document is authorized for use only by Mariana Corella Zelaya in MIS_520_Summer_6_Tomblin taught by Michael Tomblin, Westcliff University from Jul 2024 to Aug 2024.

Page 15 9B13C047

EXHIBIT 7: PHASE 3 — IMPLEMENTATION

Source: P. Savalle, W. Hofland, A. Brugman, “TeamPark Platform and Method.” 2nd (Revised) edition, 2010. Used with permission.

EXHIBIT 8: PHASE 4 — BRINGING THE PLATFORM TO LIFE

Source: P. Savalle, W. Hofland, A. Brugman, “TeamPark Platform and Method.” 2nd (Revised) edition, 2010. Used with permission.

For the exclusive use of M. Corella Zelaya, 2024.

This document is authorized for use only by Mariana Corella Zelaya in MIS_520_Summer_6_Tomblin taught by Michael Tomblin, Westcliff University from Jul 2024 to Aug 2024.

Page 16 9B13C047

EXHIBIT 9: TIMELINESS AND MILESTONES

Timeline and Milestones

Source: Company files.

04/08

09/08 12/08 10 01/09 01/09

04/09 06 09

10 11/09

Go Live

12/09

Board decision For Social platform

Environment Ready

Innovation JAM

Innovation Factory

Proof of concept

Implement platform

IAG Test, OCS, Integration

Prepare roll -out

Catalyst Phase 1

Catalyst Phase 2

Graphic Guidelines Definition Identity foundations Development of the platform Catalyst Recruitment Catalyst Mission and objectives

Profiles & Blogs Communities and Wiki Activities Widgets

For the exclusive use of M. Corella Zelaya, 2024.

This document is authorized for use only by Mariana Corella Zelaya in MIS_520_Summer_6_Tomblin taught by Michael Tomblin, Westcliff University from Jul 2024 to Aug 2024.

Page 17 9B13C047

EXHIBIT 10: HOW TO BUILD INTELLIGENT ORGANIZATIONS

Source: Company files.

germ

wishes, talents, habits, duties, (im)possibilities

Building block, concepts, technology, (im)impossibilities

Misplaced underperforming and modern social processes, social hubs

1. Make inventory of the wishes, talents, social communication on collaboration habits and (im)possibilities of your employees. 2. Identify the misplaced, underperforming and hidden social processes and the social hubs in your current functional organization. 3. Select or construct social concepts and means which fill your people and procession and bring them alive.

For the exclusive use of M. Corella Zelaya, 2024.

This document is authorized for use only by Mariana Corella Zelaya in MIS_520_Summer_6_Tomblin taught by Michael Tomblin, Westcliff University from Jul 2024 to Aug 2024.