Church of the Customer Blog
« The value of napsterizing your knowledge | Main | More on the marketing world is flat »
August 04, 2005
The value of napsterizing your knowledge
Want a big-company example about the value of napsterizing (meaning, widely sharing) one's knowledge? A really big company example?
Walmart, number one on the Fortune 500.
Although the reference from Computerworld magazine is from 2002, it's just as valuable today.
Early on, Wal-Mart saw the value of sharing that data with suppliers, and it eventually moved that information online on its Retail Link Web site. Opening its sales and inventory databases to suppliers is what made Wal-Mart the powerhouse it is today, says Rena Granofsky, a senior partner at J.C. Williams Group Ltd., a Toronto-based retail consulting firm.
While its competition guarded sales information, Wal-Mart approached its suppliers as if they were partners, not adversaries, says Granofsky. By implementing a collaborative planning, forecasting and replenishment (CPFR) program, Wal-Mart began a just-in-time inventory program that reduced carrying costs for both the retailer and its suppliers.
Considering Walmart's well-known ruthlessness on cutting prices to the absolute minimum, some might contend with the description of Walmart treating its suppliers as partners rather than adversaries.
However, I vividly recall the admiration, even joy, of a colleague who had just downloaded a fat spreadsheet of data from Walmart's extranet that allowed her to modify her company's supply-chain contribution to Walmart in about 30 minutes. Other retail outlets took days or weeks to provide her with data, which often arrived in barely legible faxes or in reams of paper reports.
It was eye-opening efficiency.
Sharing copious levels of data, knowledge or business processes with channel partners, suppliers or customers -- quickly -- can be value-building, not value-destructive.
Other blogs that reference The value of napsterizing your knowledge:
While some find value in sharing knowledge, others are extremely petrified, especially after seeing what's happened to some of their colleagues.
Earlier this year Information Week pondered exactly where do blogs fit when it comes to sharing information. Yes, they have several advantages, such as becoming known in your industry. However, some have taken it too far, like the case featured in that month's cover page story of the employee who posted various company confidential presentations in their blog. Shortly thereafter, though, another example was about a company president for a major auto manufacturer having his own blog, as if to combat the notion that people past a certain age aren't tech savvy.
The article then asked, just how okay is it for employees to have their own blogs? And must corporate policies be written? And what about a blog the individual writes on his own time on his own, especially an individual strongly associated with a given company?
Others are very scared that anything they said can and will be used against them, especially to deny them an opportunity. There have been cases of some who were fired because of a personal opinion on their blog which unfortunately got taken out of context. Or maybe they wrote an opinion in 1995 that is archived, yet they've changed it in 2005. Will a potential employer see these transitions, or will they prematurely discard somebody and not give them a chance to explain?
In an age where intellectual property is king and communication has become that much easier, some have purposely decided to not share anything at all, so they can continue to grow, paradoxically speaking.
