What is missing from Enterprise 2.0?
I am writing an article on what I perceive to be at least one 'gap' in Enterprise 2.0 (over and above Euan Semple’s excellent piece). With this in mind, I'd be interested to hear from others, especially if they also think there are any missing parts of the puzzle in this area?
N.B. Euan's piece is at http://theobvious.typepad.com/blog/2008/06/most-companies.html
Clarification added July 2, 2008:
I am writing an article on what I perceive to be at least one 'gap' in efforts to collaborate across an organisation, which in part encompasses efforts around Enterprise 2.0
Good Answers (2)
Ros C.
Enterprise 2.0 Consultant
Best Answers in: Organizational Development (1), Enterprise Software (1)
Enterprise 2.0 is about people organisations. Therefore I suggest culture has a significant influence on Enterprise 2.0 adoption.
Charles Handy in his book 'Understanding Organizations' identifies four types of culture: the power culture, the role culture, the task culture and the person culture. I believe the person culture is the culture that supports Enterprise 2.0.
Quoting Handy "The (person) culture is an unusual one. It will not be found pervading many organizations, yet many individuals will cling to some of its values. In this culture the individual is the central point."
Handy's book was written in 1999 but I think it is particularly applicable to understanding innovative knowledge sharing and collaboration.
So two things come to mind.
Most people are over-thinking Enterprise 2.0. I’ve seen a lot of thought leaders emerging in this market, but rarely have I seen true appliers or “doers” of this technology. People need to start working at all angles to make it successful. From the technical angle, do the integration necessary; from an adoption angle, involve the passionate ones; and finally from the top-down level, inform them of how it’s truly not letting go, but rather being able to oversee how it’s always been.
Make it fun. Make it truly fun. Talking with a lot of people about this, the one thing that is not brought up much is to make the idea of collaboration/networking FUN. Reaching critical mass should be the next objective after finalizing on technology, stability and a game plan. However, that approach is rarely taken and “Enterprise 2.0” is just another failed solution.
More Answers (7)
Alexandre A.
Reference librarian at Bibliothèque nationale de France
Best Answers in: Economics (1), Risk Management (1), Information Security (1)
Perhaps it is perceived as a waste of time. Enterprise 2.0 is maybe a too innovative field of knowledge managment to be applicated now.
In fact, things have to be imagined collectively.
Every process must be conceived faster and faster, and ontologies are probably a good way to think sciences of information.
It's a very interesting topic nevertheless.
A lot of scientific libraries like Bibliothèque nationale de France and Bibliothèque Numérique Européenne (BNUE) are holding congresses about the subject.
I hope you will have a lot of answers to your question.
Sincerly,
Alexandre
My guess would be Captain Kirk 2.0?
Sorry, couldn't resist...and have "too much time on my hands!"
8-)
Cesar B.
General Coordinator of Technology Innovation at Ministry of Planning, Budget and Management
Best Answers in: Change Management (1), Computers and Software (1)
What I believe most enterprises are "not getting" is the fact IT users no longer are solely Enterprise IT users. Inside "homeland" people are building social, networked relationships, using tools that unfortunately are banned or forbidden inside the workspace. Why not have a ning-like (www.ning.com) environment inside the enterprise, and let the human resources department, for instance, create their social space where they will have pictures from the latest company picnic and -- why not? -- employee manuals and procedures that can be commented or even edited together along with the employees?
Every department, with their own social environment, could build a series of internal, public news that could be fed into an employee's collaborative newsletter using RSS. In a company with several branches, a social environment like that would bring people even closer.
Maybe, instead of spending too much on a CRM system with too many boring forms, let the sales people fill in their blogs with stories about their customer visits. They may miss some information because this stuff is "too free-form". It doesn't matter. Joe or Joana will place a comment saying: "Hey Bob, you forgot to give us the X customer's phone and snail mail address...". Later, just use a search engine to find historical information about the contacts made with customer X.
Regards,
Cesar
Aaron G.
Vice President of Information Technology at Apex Digital Solutions, Inc.
Best Answers in: Computer Networking (5), Enterprise Software (2), Computers and Software (2), Information Security (2), Regulation and Compliance (1), Job Search (1), Advertising (1), Quality Management and Standards (1), Market Research and Definition (1), Energy and Development (1), Information Storage (1)
Common sense 1.0. Enterprise 2.0 sounds like a great idea, but most companies are still struggling with integrating the oldest and most basic SaaS tools (such as Salesforce.com) or even properly deploying 2nd or 3rd generation productivity products such as SharePoint or Exchange. The technology and ideas are moving so much faster than corporate IT departments can possibly test, prove out, evangelize, deploy, and adopt them. By the time a corporate IT department finishes a POC for a product, it's already had two or three point releases or has been purchased.
Most companies aren't bleeding edge (or even leading edge). 99% of companies don't get to be big and profitable buy hurtling carelessly from one unproven and untested technology to the next. It takes time to really evaluate host to best integrate and deploy any of these products into a legacy-laden enviroment and make sure that users can adopt it.
Basic issue with the implementation of Enterprise 2.0 is the lack of perception among the decision makers. Ideas and Technology moves at a much faster pace than they can comprehend. There are several exceptions, but most of the decision makers intend to run their business the old school way of "Why re-invent the wheel?". Most enterprises act hostile to new ideas and technologies unless it is accepted in the mainstream and every other enterprise is implementing them. Enterprise 2.0 brings a social aspect into the enterprise which is perhaps a critical part of Knowledge Management. A solution is simple. Having an open mind and a willingness to change, which sadly is hard to implement.
Considering that one accepts Enterprise 2.0 has value and will impact fundamentally on the way businesses operate in future and so is necessary to adopt in some way, or at the very least start to consider how it could or should be adopted, then I think management of change has to be a starting point. If you accept this, then I think one important factor is building a company wide vision and creating a sense of urgency, from the top down as well as from the bottom up. This for me is most often missing in the efforts I've been involved in.
Additional factors that influence this are down to how an organisation collectively sees things, in other words its culture. Organisations that get it (Enterprise 2.0) and are predisposed to change and innovation as a basis for competitive advantage will start doing things. Inevitably there will be failures as noted by Euan but ultimately there will be action.
Having reached this point, I don't think anything will be missing because the organisation will figure it all out for itself over time and its solution will be different to anyone else's.
Bruce L.
Process Manager
Best Answers in: International Law (1), Organizational Development (1), Quality Management and Standards (1), Energy and Development (1)
Business Acumen 2.0
