Steve Dale online

(Photo by Daniel F. Pigatto)

I was in two minds on whether to get involved with this debate/discussion, but since we now seem to have accepted “Enterprise 2.0″ into the social computing lexicon I thought I should at least ensure I’ve got a clear understanding about what this means.

The authors over at Library Clips have identified seven ways that Enterprise 2.0 differs from Web 2.0. This article is in turn based on the blog by Bill Ives at Fast Forward blog. To summarise what is quite a lengthy diatribe, the seven differences between E2 and W2 come down to:

1. Enterprise 2.0 is more about project work whereas Web2.0 is more about purpose based sharing and learning.
2. Enterprise 2.0 means being accountable to someone other than yourself.
3. The choice of tools (applications) are mandated in Enterprise 2.0
4. Facilitation techniques are more appropriate to Enterprise 2.0 where people need to be encouraged and guided in knowledge sharing, whereas Web 2.0 has no agenda.
5. Enterprise 2.0 does not have the critical mass of the network effect (long tail).
6. Transparency - Enterprise 2.0 is not an egalitarian culture like the open web; it has managers and hierarchies.
7. Productivity is not measured in Web 2.0

My apologies to the authors if my synoptic presentation of the seven differences does not capture the entire context, but I’m trying to distil some fairly complex ideas into something most people can understand and relate to.

At this point I should make clear that I personally find this preoccupation with categorising and defining behaviours so that we can apply some suitable marketing labels to them (which sadly is what Web 2.0 and Enterprise 2.0 have become) a rather frivolous activity. However, I accept it is important to some people (and particularly product vendors), and as a professional in this area myself, I need to ensure I’m using these labels in the right context when I’m having conversations with my clients or peers.

From my own experience - drawn primarily from the development and support of Communities of Practice (CoPs) in the public sector, and deploying social networking and social media tools to facilitate connections and knowledge sharing - I have tended to think of Web 2.0 more as an enabling technology that can release the inherent creativity and desire to socialise that exists in most of the human species. If I tried to apply the Web 2.0/Enterprise 2.0 definitions to the public sector CoP platform, I wouldn’t be able to find any Community of Practice that could be neatly pigeon-holed. Some are working on projects, some are learning communities. Some have management inspired objectives, some maintain hierarchies. Some are facilitated and some are just self-organising groups (yes I know - not strictly a definition of a CoP). None of them are mandated to use the tools. So, whether I’ve created a Web 2.0 or an Enterprise 2.0 environment I really don’t know, and don’t really care because it doesn’t make an iota of difference to the fact that the environment enables people to find and share knowledge, to collaborate with experts and peers and encourages innovation.

So, whilst I’ll accept the definitions or differences between Web 2.0 and Enterprise 2.0 - all of which seem to be reasonably well thought through - the priority for me is encouraging, supporting and coaching the behaviours that will enable people to make the most of these technologies - regardless of what labels they are given!

Tags: Communities of Practice, Enterprise 2.0, Web2.0 // Add Comment »

I’ve posted a presentation to Slideshare that I gave last month as a keynote presentation for an audience primarily made up of local government staff. The presentation illustrates the growing velocity and volume of on-line connections being created in the wake of Web 2.0 and the prevalent demographics of those considered to be ‘connected’ and those who are not. I was trying to raise the awareness of the audience that being part of the on-line digital community (and in particular social networking) was becoming an increasing factor in how we evolve and survive as human beings, and that those who fail to grasp this will find themselves ever more isolated – cut off from the networks that are sharing, adapting and updating knowledge to create value.

However, It is recognised that not everyone is digitally disconnected or socially disengaged by choice, but interestingly, it’s not necessarily the socio-economically deprived that make up the majority of this group; age demographics play a big part, with Baby Boomers and Generation X (i.e. all those born between 1942 and 1965) being the least likely to engage in social networking. These demographic groups make up the majority of staff working in local authorities and this presents a challenge to local government employers in how to accomodate significantly varied working parctices and work-life expections between these groups and Generation Y (or the Net Generation).

The presentation concludes with a look at the issues around consultation with citizens and questions whether enough is being done to engage with the digitally excluded, particulary where vast sums of government (i.e. tax payer’s) money is being invested in on-line services and on-line consultation.  In other words, digital exclusion can also mean dis-empowerment and dis-engagement.  Is the technology (Web 2.0, Web 3.0) widening the divide?

As always, comments/views are welcome.

Tags: Digital divide, Presentations, Public Sector, Web2.0 // Add Comment »

According to analyst group Gartner, enterprises could make significant savings by paying staff to use their own laptops. The report suggested that a monthly payment of £47 per employee would be cost effective and attractive to staff. Gartner said that schemes that encourage staff to use their own laptops would reduce maintenance and support costs and improve productivity.

“The costs go down for the enterprise if the notebook is provided by the employee because the employee takes more responsibility fixing the computer I their own time”

the Gartner analyst is reported as saying.

This touched a sensitive nerve for me, given my own experience as a consultant. More often than not I’m compelled to use the ‘corporately approved’ hardware and software build for PC and laptops when I’m working at a client’s site, which usually means - at best - IE6 with no plug-ins, 3 versions back of Flash player and an obscure version of PDF reader. The only plus point is that Vista is not yet widely deployed. The transition from my personal laptop configuration to these corporate versions is like stepping back to medieval times (though in reality it’s probably no more 5 - 10 years). No more one-click access via my Firefox plug-in to my del.icio.us account for tagging useful web pages; no more one-click social bookmarking to Digg or Stumble; no more one-click saves to Google Notebook.

I get the impression that any whiff of user productivity is sniffed out by these ICT departments and vigorously stamped out, as a recent experience would seem to reinforce. A short time ago I managed to install the Google toolbar on my corporate PC. All was well for a couple of weeks, and then I got one or two obscure messages from the virus checking software. I made the mistake of calling the IT support desk, who soon sussed that I had installed the toolbar (shock, horror), and wanted to arrange an appointment for a techy to visit my desk and remove it. Needless to say I haven’t returned these calls, and have so far managed to dodge the IT security police. In the meantime, I can save a few seconds each time I want to do a Google search by using the toolbar. But then again, a few seconds saved for each search mounts up to a few minutes each day and maybe even a few hours each month. Multiply this across several hundred employees and you begin to wonder if the inmates are running the asylum!

Perhaps one day (but unfortunately not in my life time), these ICT departments will begin to understand the business needs of the enterprise and provide the services that will contribute towards the business and user productivity. Devolving ownership and responsibility to users for their own PCs and laptops is probably a step too far for most enterprises, but I remain hopeful that it will happen one day. On that note I will hastily finish - I think I see an IT person approaching looking for a rogue laptop!

Tags: Press // 3 Comments »

Finally got to see Tom Watson in person, presenting at 2gether08 about the Government initiative to provide more open access to public, non-personal data sets. Tom talked about the launch of a competition for social innovators and entrepeneurs to develop more effective products and services using government pulished provide more effective use of published information. More information about this on the ‘Show us a better way‘ website. This is one of the initiatives coming out of the Power of Information Taskforce that was created earlier this year.

Apologies for the shaky video, but key messages are all there.

Tags: Event, Shared Services, Web2.0 // 4 Comments »

I worry that some people believe this sort of rubbish. According to the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) the average UK worker spends ninety minutes a week misusing corporate internet connections.

The CBI said that workers are spending roughly an hour and a half out of their week visiting web sites that have no relation to their work whatsoever. Cumulatively, it said, this costs UK businesses some £10.6bn in lost productivity over the course of a year.

The CBI polled some 503 businesses, who it said employed nearly one million workers between them. Two thirds of those who took part admitted that they think that their staff use work time – ie, not lunch, or formal breaks, to look at non-work sites. It identified social networking, web-based email and shopping and holiday sites as the biggest draws. Overall, they estimate the annual cost, per employee to be the region of £1000. According to the report, this costs UK businesses £10.6 billion (yes billion) a year in lost productivity.

Firstly of all, do they really expect us to believe that if there was a complete embargo on ‘non work related websites’ that we’d be saving the economy getting on for £11 billion? This assumes that these employees wouldn’t be doing other ‘wasteful’ things with their time if they weren’t surfing the web - like reading a newspaper or doing su-doku, or otherwise expanding their knowledge.

Secondly, they seem to have concluded that any serendipitous use of the internet is wasted time. What about all that information that has been both consciously and sub-consciously absorbed during this browsing experience? I wonder if they’ve quantified the times when some apparently useless nugget of information has been stored in the sub-concious and then used at some later date to contribute to the well being of the person (e.g. some health information), or maybe even applied to the workplace in a way that has improved productivity?

I’m saddened that a respected industry body such as the CBI should publish such report like this that draws some very debatable conclusions on a potentially flawed hypothesis that serendipitous use of the web is bad for business. Maybe they’d have us bring the workhouse back?

I just hope that managers will not use this report as further ammunition to restrict workers from using the web for anything other than browsing their own company’s web site. Let’s not apply 19th century working practices to 21st century workers!

Tags: Current Affairs, Press, Reports, Web2.0 // 5 Comments »

The Civil Service have published a set of guidelines for on-line participation by civil servants (blogging etc.). As Whitehall Webby Jeremy Gould notes, this is a much slimmed-down version of a weightier tome that has been in production behind the scenes, and which may appear as a set of more detailed operational guidelines for using social media/Web 2.0 tools.

The initiative is to be applauded, and I particularly like the succinctness of the guidelines, which is most un-civil service-like, but in keeping with the overall concept of agility and flexibility that one associates with the brave new world of Web 2.0.

The Power Of Information Task Force are seeking feedback on the guidelines. Have your say!

Tags: Central Government, Guidelines, Web2.0 // 3 Comments »

All of those organisations trudging zombie-like towards implementation of Sharepoint as a social media solution might do well to read about the result of a ‘face-off’ between IBM’s Lotus Connections and Microsoft’s Sharepoint (MOSS 2007) products, as reported by CIO Magazine.

According to the article, whereas both vendors showed their products could integrate with existing e-mail systems (especially e-mail systems that they sell, such as Notes and Exchange), IBM’s Lotus Connections looked, at minimum, a year or more ahead of SharePoint in its social computing capabilities out of the box.

The guidelines for the face-off presentation were that the vendors present what a customer gets ‘out of the box’, i.e. without the third party plug-ins, or the extra products and professional services that (Sharepoint in particular) needs to make it a usable environment. The report states that as far as social computing goes, this wasn’t flattering for SharePoint.

The Sharepoint wiki was static and lacked robust version control and had sparse editing features. Microsoft’s MySites - social networking profiles for the enterprise - looked a little better but still left much to be desired in terms of design.

One example of the difference in presentation of the social computing tools was if someone wanted to examine their place within the hierarchy of an organization, it was presented textually like the inbox of an e-mail system. In IBM Connections, it was presented mostly with pictures of the people and big buttons in which to interact with them over e-mail, phone, or IM.

Clearly Microsoft realises it has to up its game if it is to be taken seriously in the social computing world, with partnerships with Atlassian and blueKiwi going some way to address the Sharepoint product limitations. Quite what this means in terms of providing the user with a fully integrated and seamless social computing environment I’m not sure. There is also the issue of cost, since presumably these partnerships will be licence-based and paid for by the customer on top of the Sharepoint licence. I just hope that the Finance Directors do the math before signing the contracts!

Personally, I’m doubtful that Sharepoint will ever be a pure social computing product. Its strengths are in task-based processes and information organisation, not community knowledge sharing and collaboration. However, and as always, I’m open to alternative views on this point!

Tags: Microsoft, Sharepoint, Social Computing, Web2.0 // Add Comment »

Euan Semple pretty much hits the nail on the end with his post on why companies (organisations) will fail with their approach to Enterprise 2.0. The fundamental reason is they still don’t get it, and not helped by the hype from the big vendors (no names) who push the technology and ignore the culture. Euan lists 8 reasons for failure:

1. They think it is about technology.

2. They aren’t prepared to deal with the friction that allowing their staff to connect generates.

3. They will assimilate it into business as usual.

4. They will try to do it in a way that “maximizes business effectiveness” without realizing that it calls for a radical shift in what is seen as effective.

5. They will grind down their early adopters until they give up.

6. They will get fleeced by the IT industry for over engineered, under delivering solutions, think that Enterprise 2.0 failed to live up to its promise and move on to the next fad.

7. Lack of patience

8. It is not companies who do Enterprise 2.0 it is individuals.

I would add a 9th and 10th to the list based on my dealings with Gov:

9. It has to cost a lot to be of any value

10. One size must fit all

Point 9 is a reflection on the fact that I’ve offered Gov departments access to and use of the local government social networking and social media platform at little or no cost, but ‘Gov’ is determined to forge ahead with their own multi-million pound solution, which will take years to implement. I guess you could argue this is covered in Euan’s point 6, but the point I’m making is that an Enterprise 2.0 solution that costs so little to implement and use is perceived to have no value, and consequently is not given serious consideration by decision-makers.

Point 10 is the conditioned behaviour of many large organisations to harmonise and standardise, developing monolithic solutions to complex business requirements. Web 2.0 offers flexible and agile solutions that can easily be knitted together and (more importantly) changed and adapted to meet the needs of individual workers. Enforcing a one-size-fits-all solution will only encourage more of what is happening now - staff going off and finding their own solutions.

What does anybody else think?

Tags: Enterprise 2.0, Web2.0 // 3 Comments »

I will be presenting at the Limehouse software user’s group today, 10th June, on the topic of Web 2.0 and the issues that local authorities face in bridging the digital. I will post my slides to Slideshare after the event.

Tags: Digital divide, Event, Web2.0 // 2 Comments »

Ingrid Koehler over at the Policy and Performance blog writes about how Web 2.0 is being used to support improvement initiatives in the local government sector, and in particular the positioning of (virtual) communities of practice for engaging with staff across the sector. This point is also emphasised by John Hayes, Director of Services at the IDeA.

A tangible example of the power of Web 2.0 for networking, collaboration and consultation will be evident in the forthcoming Customer Insight Online Conference, scheduled to run from 10th to 20th June 2008. What is an online conference? To quote:

An online conference, just like a ‘real life’ conference, is about getting people together to discuss a common interest and learn from each other. There are speakers, participants, panelists and discussions. It just takes place in an online platform and over a longer period of time, allowing people to dip in and out.

It’s greener – saving all that travel and paper, less expensive and many people find it more convenient and easier to engage with. The proceedings of this conference will be distilled into a learning report for practitioners and policy makers.

There will be a wealth of useful learning and an opportunity to chat with a range of colleagues through the medium of online discussion, video, photos and more. You do not have to be a technical wizard to join in. The conference platform is easy to use and throughout the two week period, we will send you regular round-ups to support your engagement and help you direct your own participation for maximum benefit.

If this is of interest to you, you’ll need to sign up for the event using the online registration form on the Communities of Practice website.

Tags: Event, Web2.0, collaboration // Add Comment »