Talk:Social profiles, expert localisation, who's who tools

From KM4Dev Wiki
Revision as of 20:10, 14 August 2010 by KM4DevWikiAdmin (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Peter Malling 2010/3/14

I would like to enquire about your experiences with yellow pages, internal phone books, expert localisation, competency mapping, or whatever term it goes under.

I am referring to the use of technology to improve the way in which people find other people in an organisation. When for instance manning a project team it would be useful to have a system, where you could find potential candidates with certain skills. Many organisations let users enter their skills in free text form, like for instance Sharepoint's skills field in MySite. If, however, competency search were integrated with the organisation's HR-system (human capital management system) for competency management, training management or talent management, and with HR-processes like yearly appraisals where competencies are typically discussed and maybe entered in such a system with marks for each competency, it would be much more consistent. My own experience is that if entry of skills is done by employees on their own will, it becomes much fragmented and incomplete. And then search results also become less useful. This again implies that people don't use searching for people using the system but rather use their social networks to find the right person, which again means that people don't see the need to enter their skills in the system.

I have some questions: 1) What is the proper name for this kind of technology/systems? I've seen the term "expert localisation" being used, but is that still the right term? 2) Do you know of systems that are superior in addressing this issue? 3) Do you know of organisations that use such systems in a way that could be considered best practise? 4) References to literature particularly about this subject?

Peter.

Giulio Quaggiotto, 2010/3/15

Hi Peter,

I collected a few articles on this topic that provide some insights into the 4 questions you asked. You can find them at:

http://delicious.com/gquaggiotto/expertise_locator

Hope this helps

Giulio

Giulio Quaggiotto Senior Programme Officer World Bank t: +1 202 458 0325

Johannes Schunter, 2010/3/15

Dear Peter,

In my view, the best approach to tap into a pool of competencies of people online is through social networking. The success of LinkedIn and similar business networking portals have made that case very effectively. Several elements need to come together for such an IT system to work:

  • There needs to be an environment in which a user has a personal interest to present his profile, expertise and past work adequately (without hiding important things, but also without bragging unrealistically). The data in the database doesn't have to be perfect to be helpful, but you are right, a certain standard of quality needs to be ensured. But unless you want to manage a roster with, lets say, 50,000 users manually, you need to provide the right incentives for users to do this themselves.
  • There need to be effective social networking mechanisms in place which encourage referrals and recommendations, connecting to contacts of contacts and gathering in groups of interest around topics or causes. A user profile referred to me by a colleague is worth a 1000 times more than a database entry I found based on a pure search for expertise.
  • There needs to be a large enough user base for the social networking to take off, otherwise the value from referrals and recommendations cannot be leveraged.

Within UNDP we regard the access to expertise and potential consultants as a crucial organizational asset. That is why we are currently prototyping our own organizational social networking platform in which each staff and consultant get an account by default (synchronized without HR records) and can then enhance their profiles by add-on information about their expertise, projects, etc. But the user profile information is only part of the picture. By interacting in the system over time within workspaces, online events and CoP discussions, you will also get a sense of the actual "work" of a staff or consultant within the contexts of online projects groups, thematic discussions, events, etc, and thereby get a more comprehensive picture of the professional profile of an expert. The users on their part have a strong incentive to neither undersell their expertise, nor exaggerate too much, as they become visible as who they are in the organization through their "social" work interactions in the system. The idea is that by mainstreaming the social networking approach in a large organization, every staff member will be able to tap into expertise and contacts within the actual work context of the organization, which should lead to more effective identification and referral of the right people at the right time.

We're still in the piloting phase, as our system "Teamworks" (based on the open source framework Drupal) will be rolled out officially in UNDP in September 2010, but I will be happy to report how it is going as we get there.

Best,

Johannes

Ian Thorpe, 2010/3/16

Dear Peter

In UNICEF we are at the early stages of using two quite different approaches to this issue. I'm sharing these as early experiences - although it's too soon to describe them as good practices.

Our HR Division has developed an online e-recruitment system where current staff, and also screened potential applicants from outside can fill out their HR profile online. This includes the usual CV information, but also information on competencies, interests etc. This becomes an official record which is used to match people against vacancies (rather than needing to send a new copy of your CV for each application), and I believe also for internal deployments such as in emergency response, and creating career pools for certain types of position. I'm not involved in the development of this so I don't know the full details - but given the content I believe it could potentially be used as a means to find internal expertise for projects, to respond to queries etc. but in the shorter term I think it is being only used for recruitment.

The other quite different system we have, which our KM team been involved in developing, is a social networking system along similar lines mentioned by Johannes from UNDP. This includes a self completed "social profile" in which staff members can enter information about themselves such as skills, interests, experience. A few fields such as contact details come from the official phone book but most is self completed, it is more informal in style and nature, and it is optional, and the contents are not validated or considered official. This is integrated with our platform for internal communities of practice but many people have social profiles that are not members of communities. So far we have had over 1900 people sign up since we launched this in October of last year (from around 10,000 staff) although the level of completion of the profile varies widely.

I think each of these approaches has its advantages and I think we will have them side by side for some time at least. If I were to compare them - the HR system will ultimately get better completion, and be more accurate because you need to fill it out if you want to apply for a job - but it is less user friendly to complete and also less widely accessible to use (since for the moment on HR people can see the profiles for privacy reasons). The social profile is more user friendly to complete and you can quickly search for and find people, and it is more"fun". Adoption is growing and although people still feel uncomfortable sharing too much information about themselves this is changing. One practical use of the social profile is to be able to recognize people when you meet them for the first time and to make it easier to start that first conversation.

I hope this is helpful

Ian

Visit UNICEF’s Economic and Social Policy Website Ian Thorpe Senior Information and Knowledge Manager, Policy, Advocacy and Knowledge Management, Policy and Practice United Nations Children’s Fund

Brad Hinton, 2010/3/16

Ian,

I have worked with a "yellow pages" type of system previously at Deloitte in Sydney. Each staff member had a profile on the intranet that included CV, some personal (factual) info, and work-based information. It sounds similar to the second system you have described, albeit not linked to a CoP. However, the major problem we had (and I think this is common to many "yellow pages" and staff directories) is that the information was rarely kept up to date. Despite periodic marketing and exhortations, people were just "too busy" to update their profiles.

It would be interesting to find out from Ian's experience how the updating issue works with the second system he described since it sounds like there is a social element to it, something I will expand upon in a minute.

In my opinion, the way these "yellow pages" and staff directories are set up is the problem. Whenever there is a workplace duty outside your normal work pattern or normal work operations, this "other" work becomes a burden. We see initial bursts of enthusiasm to get the profile up in the first place, and often it's compulsory. However, if the employee then considers updating their profile is something to be left until there is "spare time", then usually no "spare time" is to be found. Afterall, it's just another impost on my busy schedule and not related to my "real" work. When I worked at Deloitte in Sydney one of my roles was to manage knowledge champions to encourage staff to upload information onto the global Knowledge Exchange (KX). Despite everyone telling us that KX was really useful in finding people and types of engagements, the same enthusiasm wasn't there to upload information in a timely manner! The upshot is that if I need something to do my job then it's important. If I have to do something "extraneous" to my job, it can be delayed.

My suggested solution for staff directories and "yellow pages" is a type of internal "Facebook". The idea is to appeal to the sociability of employees around a social network rather than the employer telling individuals that they have to have a profile in some "directory". IMHO, individuals will be more likely to use and maintain their personal organisational "Facebook" profile because now it's fun and there are less controls around it. This approach favours a genuine personal approach wherein maintaining your profile reflects more on you personally than your "organisational self". Moreover, many people these days already use social networking in their personal lives and are used to this kind of medium and use their networks regularly. Updating such information is considered "normal". The idea is essentially to try and introduce an existing "normal" behaviour into the organisation.

The command approach suffers from a lack of interest, time, and incentive to update. The personal approach can/may overcome this, but there will need to be permission to use the internal "Facebook" for both work and social applications.

In conclusion, I'd suggest that we need to look at the psychology and existing behaviours behind social networks to see how we can use that within our organisations.

Regards,

Brad <http://www.ausaid.gov.au/keyaid/mdg.cfm> Hinton

Manager | Thematic Knowledge Services |AusAID* Ph +612 6206 4678 | Fax +612 6206 4570 PO Box 887 Canberra ACT 2601 www.ausaid.gov.au

Read my personal blog at http://bradhinton.wordpress.com

Peter Bury, 2010/3/17

Dear Peter, Dear Ian

Though UNICEF's experiment seems quite useful, it reflects 'organization' thinking instead of 'networking' thinking. I'm aware that there is no single global portal for networking in the yellow pages sense of the word, but there are tools / platfroms around in various language areas that come very close.

Why not using LinkedIn , Xing , or the French language one (sorry the name escapes me right now) in a more clever way? They are potentially the best really global yellow pages around.

Peter

Jaap Pels, 2010/3/17

Hi Peter,

Indeed good point; yellow (or blue or brown) pages start with people not with organisations. And when you work in the WASH development sector hook up with http://mywash.org please.

Jaap

Maarten Samson, 2010/3/17

Dear Jaap, I am suspicious when a general and fad word is used as last word, here "networking", as if it was the Grail. Could you explicit how networking optimize a skills localisation system ? Indeed, network seems to me interesting as it adds a recommendation dimension to yellow pages and it can also add a little motivation to contributors. Nevertheless, I don't think it helps much to find somebody who already dealt with a kind of problem or, better, knows already how to solve it. In comparison, hirers don't use it to find somebody but only to (and just sometimes) to know more about an identified person. Do I forget or minimize an important advantage of Networking to a skills or expertise localisation system ?

Regards, Maarten

Manuel Flury, 2010/3/17

Dear all,

I am about to jump into this discussion around yellow pages. Please apologize if I ignore previous considerations. Just the way SDC proceeded: Our yellow pages to not display the expertise of the collaborators but their abilities to point at knowledgeable colleagues, partner organisations, projects, etc. The collaborators communicate to colleagues in what fields they may assist in localising experience, expertise, a people-based localisation model.

best regards Manuel

Manuel Flury Knowledge and Learning Processes Division Federal Department of Foreign Affairs Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation SDC Freiburgstrasse 130 CH-3003 Bern / Switzerland Phone +41 31 325 02 56 E-Mail: manuel.flury@deza.admin.ch www.deza.admin.ch

Jaap Pels, 2010/3/17

Thanks Maarten,

To me you are pointing some crucial issues.

If you are looking for expertise you might want to check out the companies e-mail messages (use Homeland security like-software).

If that expertise is outside your organisation forms / records have to be filled-out, either by you or expertise-holders.

The latter - people keeping tract of their own track-record; social network like - are more effective and up-to-date just because 'the work' is done by expertise holders themselves the ones with the personal stake.

Take application for a job at USAid, WB, the UN and WHO; they all want you to fill out a different form; one gets nuts! If they would set-up an expertise system together I will label that as progress :-)

And by the way a social network - like the KM4Dev - is the best skills localisation system; just ask.

So, the Grail fad - like that! - depends on your optics and the amount of effort you will / can put in.

Best, Jaap

Johannes Schunter, 2010/3/17

Hi all,

very nice thread! To respond to Peter, I think while LinkedIn or Xing are good applications for your personal career network, these applications are not appropriate for an organization as a whole:

  1. To locate expertise in your organization, you need to have all your staff, and preferably also all your current and former consultants and interns in your system. For that, your platform needs to be connected with your HR records database.
  2. In order to leverage the added-value of the social networking effect, you need the users to meet in workspaces/groups and interact through posting comments, sharing links, uploading files, etc. All these contents are assets which belong to your organization and therefore need to be hosted internally. Giving an external provider control and ownership over your organization's internal knowledge assets is (at least in the case of UNDP) not an option. Just think of Facebook who claims to own the rights of any picture and text uploaded on their portal.

Marteen, regarding the buzz word "networking": When it comes to make hidden knowledge and expertise assets visible, I indeed think that social networking applications are (if not a holy grail, which I don't think we should search for anyway :), then at least) the most promising approach. It makes professional interactions between staff, consultants and partners visible and therefore help you to assess whether the self-claimed expertise of an person is actually backed up by the value of his/her contributions in real work environments (CoP discussions, online events, online working groups, etc). Expertise localization without networking is just a plain database, the validity of its entries I can't verify. Adding the networking component, context is added by making the past interactions of the "expert" transparent to the searcher.

Cheers,

Johannes

Maarten Samson, 2010/3/17

Thanks Jaap.

I better understand what Peter B. and you mean by "network thinking". Your examples show it's not only about "social network tools/platforms". They also point out that skills localisation overtake curiculum vitae and other forms filled media, against our habits. Considering your KM4dev example, it seems that social networks (have to) modify HR role in some kinds of recruitment. Also, in this network, we see that background and CV are not necessary the gathering place between people who don't know one each other. Which is maybe not so bad considering the rarity of success stories in KM ;)

Nonetheless, considering yellow pages issue, expertise-holders have do be supported by the organisation (including with forms) in their knowledge, skills and experience expression. Because

most often experts themselves aren’t able to express the important knowledge and skills they use in their actions. By the way, I would not oppose "organization thinking" and "network thinking".

Regards Maarten

Maarten Samson, 2010/3/17

Thank you Johannes. I totaly agree about the buzz word. With some clumsiness, I just wanted to underline that the word "networking" can't stand by itself for an answer or a proof, although it may hide implicit knowledge and arguments... The following threads illustrate your analysis. Cheers, Maarten - with two "a" :-) http://connaissancekm.blogspot.fr

Ian Thorpe, 2010/3/17

Dear Peters

I had understood the original question to be about organizational yellow pages so that's the experience I shared. Many UNICEF staff maintain their own profiles on various platforms such as LinkedIn, Plaxo etc. as well as thematic based networks (such as KM4Dev!). A few sectors (such as our evaluation team) are developing external networking platforms or are participating in networks set up by others.

We don't have an organizational policy or even practice of encouraging people to use more generic external tools such as LinkedIn as the basis of our yellow pages. I think that while the use of such platforms for professional networking, and as a potential source to find expertise has great (underutilized) potential, I think there are probably some good reasons why organizations would want to set up their own systems rather than going open for this including:

  1. Privacy - both from an individual and organizational level there are probably things in my profile that can be shared inside an organization or within a close trusted group that one wouldn't want to share on open systems.
  2. Spam/solicitations - I have to say that participating in external networking sites has resulted in me receiving an inordinate amount of both outright spam - but also people wanting to show me their software tool, wanting to meet me about (non-existent) job opportunities I might be able to offer them, invite me to their (highly priced) training seminars or people seeking free but sometimes time-consuming advice. I also make a lot of useful connections too - but there is a trade -off and not everyone is willing to receive 10 e-mails a week from Socialtext, Melcrum or whatever.
  3. Take-up: there are challenges getting people to complete social profiles that are on our Intranet. I think the challenge of getting people to feel comfortable signing up to an external system or to put much information of value in there are even higher (I think KM professionals are relatively open to doing this - but we need to remember that many of our non-KM colleagues are much more reticent).
  4. Relevance: the profiles and information in external systems are not as tailored to the needs of the organization, or necessarily the needs of the individuals working in it.

One additional comment on externally thematic networks. These are indispensable to facilitate identification of expertise across organizations within a particular domain (KM4Dev has been a great place to post KM vacancies or get referrals), but they are not so good at promoting exchange between disciplines within an organization and this is a critical need in many large development organizations, certainly ours. Organization based social networks are much more useful for this purpose, and while based on the organization's profile and needs I'd argue they are very people centric.

Ian

Peter Malling 2010/3/17

Johannes

Much of what you would like to be able to do, can be done on the platforms mentioned. Whether UNDP is an innovative organization or not is another matter ;-) I wonder why increasing numbers of profit making companies are going into the clouds and use web 2.0 and web-based applications for internal purposes?

Peter

Peter Malling 2010/3/17

Maarten, it seems you are not following the rapid developments. Read for instance recent specials in The Economist. Try google The Economist AND LinkedIN.

Peter

Jaap Pels, 2010/3/17

Control babe, control :-)

Peter Malling 2010/3/17

I would be interested to hear from Manuel if the SDC yellos pages are public grounds!

Gruezi, Peter

Maarten Samson, 2010/3/17

Thank you Peter,

Reading the article you advised, I presume the "rapid development" you mean is about a new way of recruiting senior managers : in fact, I learned that some head hunters also use Linked-in to "hunt" senior managers. I have also to concede that myself I have already been hired through viadeo (the key word was "ontology"). Great ! But the question was about the advantages of this kind of network in an organisation context for skill localisation: How can it live in an organization ?Does it help to find somebody able to solve an identified problem or situation? So, taking Jaap's example, is KM4dev transposable system to an organization context? How many users for how many threads ? How much time spent ? Who found a skill he didn't have got before ? What about more communities of this kind? For who? How to follow? Mailbox overload? And what about the other classic yellow pages pitfalls? Etc.

I am convinced networking brings usefull solutions to organization and I am trying to convince people about this in my consultant job. As well, enterprise 2.0 and "networking" are not magic solutions : we have to go past the "up-to-date" argument or a majority evidence. It is not about if it can but how and when it can help an organization. I have seen enough KM cimeteries based on dogmatic approachs. That's why I think KM4dev is a great opportunity to professionlize our KM practices.

Cheers Maarten http://connaissanceskm.blogspot.com

Manuel Flury, 2010/3/17

Dear Peter, dear all,

no, the yellow pages are placed in a closed intraweb space for SDC personnel (the SDC community) only. One of the main objective was and still is to stimulate "neighbour's assistance" across organisational boundaries. The Yellow Pages include all staff, the professional staff with high-profile cv and experience profiles, the managers and the assistants. Getting high individual profile is less the issue than finding your neighbours abilities to point at other's expertise. This seems to me something that is particular to a organisational sphere.

Regards Manuel

Jaap Pels, 2010/3/17

Maarten,

Great to see you blogging in French at http://connaissanceskm.blogspot.com. I have always felt Francophone KM has an un-translatable language. Just think of 'partager des connaissance' (lit: devide of knowledge); it is so physical, much more then 'knowledge sharing'. I would be interested to know about jargon in French (and Spanish etc for that matter); is it as in English? I have a hunch there are a lot of differences. To me - romantic - jargon is typical English, American even. Do tell us. But back to the topic internal expertise location. I think 'systems' - protocols with forms and time frames - will generate results. But a rigid - more administrative - approach leaves ample space for emergence as 'web'/(social) network based offer. So if you take your mail-server as network with nodes and messages you could locate conversations on topics and expertise to look for. These senders might be a very good entry point for further investigations pinpointing expertise - which happens to be in people :-) Assembling teams to me is very important to organisations to stay flexible.

Best, Jaap

Arthur Shelley, 2010/3/18

Ian,

Many years ago I had a colleague who had a "Yellow Pages" type service internally which was very successful. As they talked about its success at external forums, they were told that the term "Yellow Pages" was a registered brand and not a generic concept to be used by other organisations. They changed their service name to Konnect prevent being challenged legally.

Leading brands and trade names often (incorrectly) get used as generic terms, but it makes the people using them somewhat vulnerable, especially if outside the organisation. Just check before you invest heavily that you are able to use the name in your context. In some industries, it is accepted in not in others. In New Zealand almost any hot chocolate is referred to as a Milo (Nestle brand) and in England they "Hoover" rather than vacuum the floor.

Regards, Arthur Shelley Founder: Intelligent Answers & Organizational Zoo Ambassadors Network Author: The Organizational Zoo & Being a Successful Knowledge Leader Twitter: Metaphorage Blog: http//organizationalzoo.blogspot.com

Ph +61 413 047 408 Skype: Arthur.Shelley

Free Zoo Behavioural Profiles: www.organizationalzoo.com

Ian Thorpe, 2010/3/18

Dear Peters

I had understood the original question to be about organizational yellow pages so that's the experience I shared. Many UNICEF staff maintain their own profiles on various platforms such as LinkedIn, Plaxo etc. as well as thematic based networks (such as KM4Dev!). A few sectors (such as our evaluation team) are developing external networking platforms or are participating in networks set up by others.

We don't have an organizational policy or even practice of encouraging people to use more generic external tools such as LinkedIn as the basis of our yellow pages. I think that while the use of such platforms for professional networking, and as a potential source to find expertise has great (underutilized) potential, I think there are probably some good reasons why organizations would want to set up their own systems rather than going open for this including:

1. Privacy - both from an individual and organizational level there are probably things in my profile that can be shared inside an organization or within a close trusted group that one wouldn't want to share on open systems. 2. Spam/solicitations - I have to say that participating in external networking sites has resulted in me receiving an inordinate amount of both outright spam - but also people wanting to show me their software tool, wanting to meet me about (non-existent) job opportunities I might be able to offer them, invite me to their (highly priced) training seminars or people seeking free but sometimes time-consuming advice. I also make a lot of useful connections too - but there is a trade -off and not everyone is willing to receive 10 e-mails a week from Socialtext, Melcrum or whatever. 3. Take-up: there are challenges getting people to complete social profiles that are on our Intranet. I think the challenge of getting people to feel comfortable signing up to an external system or to put much information of value in there are even higher (I think KM professionals are relatively open to doing this - but we need to remember that many of our non-KM colleagues are much more reticent). 4. Relevance: the profiles and information in external systems are not as tailored to the needs of the organization, or necessarily the needs of the individuals working in it.

One additional comment on externally thematic networks. These are indispensable to facilitate identification of expertise across organizations within a particular domain (KM4Dev has been a great place to post KM vacancies or get referrals), but they are not so good at promoting exchange between disciplines within an organization and this is a critical need in many large development organizations, certainly ours. Organization based social networks are much more useful for this purpose, and while based on the organization's profile and needs I'd argue they are very people centric.

Ian

Jaap Pels, 2010/3/18

Hi All, On the expertise location, a commercial by slide share :-) Jaap Resumes are Old School, Use SlideShare & Twitter to Get Hired

Laura Gainor wasn't always the PR & Social Media Strategist at Comet Branding and this is the story of how that came to be.

When Laura found out she and her husband were moving from Charlotte to Milwaukee, she reached out to companies in the area, including Comet Branding who tweeted about a job opening.

Laura set out to get herself hired by launching a #LauraGainorToMilwaukee campaign that mixed in Twitter, FourSquare and SlideShare.

Laura and her husband had already planned a trip to Milwaukee. She made a poster out of the Comet Brand logo and posted pictures of the poster in various venues at Milwaukee with a Foursquare check-in and a tweet. The campaign was fun, spontaneous and creative and showcased Laura's personality and creativity.

But Laura also wanted to showcase her experience as well as creative and strategic talents. So she uploaded a presentation to SlideShare and periodically tweeted links to that presentation.

"SlideShare allowed me the opportunity to publicly explain what I did and how I did it, to get the attention of Comet Branding," said Laura.

Laura pulled together photos to create a virtual resume as well as screenshots of her Foursquare check-ins from Milwaukee.

"My goal for my SlideShare presentation was to create a story about who I was, my professional experience, showcase my talents that would make me a good fit for Comet Branding, as well as pull together my #LauraGainorToMilwaukee story into one place," Laura explained.

The very day Laura's presentation<http://newsletter.slideshare.com/link.php?M=35801247&N=466&L=481&F=H>was uploaded, it made it to SlideShare's 'Most Popular' and was passed around on SlideShare and the Twittersphere. She got tweets and direct messages from all over.

There were even teachers downloading the presentation to show their classes and example of presenting yourself as a brand to possible employers.

Comet Branding also noticed Laura. They contacted her to setup a first interview. On March 1st she went in for a second interview and was immediately offered the position!

Laura says, "I feel very honored to have had my first day in my new desk at Comet Branding on Wednesday, March 3rd."

If you are looking for a job, take a lesson from Laura's book - showcase yourself through a presentation and use Twitter or Facebook to get the attention of the company you want to work at. (PS: Harish Shankaran<http://newsletter.slideshare.com/link.php?M=35801247&N=466&L=479&F=H>who recently joined SlideShare caught our attention through his great presentations on SlideShare. We loved the way he thinks and reached out - now he is part of the SlideShare team!)

Ian Thorpe, 2010/3/18

Arthur

Just to say that we don't call our system "Yellow Pages" we call it "Social Profiles" which is pretty generic. Our Supply team also have something called "Supply Faces".

We did discover one drawback of the name we chose though. Some people have asked whether this is for social interaction, and if so why are we promoting it at work! To counter this we've been careful to explain what it is for and how you can use it to help you in your work.

Ian

Denise Senmartin, 2010/3/18

Hi Jaap,

Nice commercial! I guess the idea of using web2.0 for getting hired can work if you do not mind your current employer (and family perhaps?) be aware of your career moves aspirations. This and the yellow pages bring a new level to career moves- talking, exchanging, sharing about it. It would be interesting to learn of experiences with using web2.0 for this in less ideal cases? (moving is a good buffer).

In the meanwhile, take a look at the below, the other extreme?

Cheers,

Denise