Sharepoint and Enterprise 2.0: The good, the bad, and the ugly | Enterprise Web 2.0 | ZDNet.com

28 Jul 09

Pierre Varinard

26 Jul 09

Ed Buclatin

Mmmmmmm, poor poor Sharepoint. So vilified, so loved, so "ish" at everything.

webdesign Website Sharepoint socialmedia

27 Jun 09

WeiLi Huang

Cost and complexity.
detailed explanation of exactly what the concepts of Enterprise 2.0 are here
3 more annotations...
- Cost and complexity.
- priced as an enterprise product
- priced as an enterprise product

28 May 09

Christophe Deschamps

Le point de vue de Dion Hinchcliffe sur l'utilisation de Sharepoint pour aller vers l'E2.0

ib enterprise 2.0 entreprise 2.0

24 May 09

adam cassel

28 Apr 09

Kai Nehm

16 Apr 09

Nancy White

sharepoint

06 Apr 09

Christoph Schmaltz

sharepoint enterprise2.0 enterprise 2.0 hinchcliffe

Mike Knutson

sharepoint web2.0 socialmedia

29 Mar 09

Jeremy Thake

sharepoint enterprise2.0

27 Mar 09

Joshua Salmons

Mmmmmmm, poor poor Sharepoint. So vilified, so loved, so "ish" at everything.

socialmedia enterprise2.0 article sharepoint

23 Mar 09

Bryan Labutta

An accurate blog post describing why SharePoint (MOSS) does not quite match up with other Enterprise 2.0 platforms, at least in its current state.

moss sharepoint enterprise2.0 social networking

22 Mar 09

Emanuele Quintarelli

sharepoint enterprise 2.0 zdnet.com dion hinchcliffe 2009 platforms vendors microsoft

Bill H

web2.0 social networking

Miguel Membrado

Deep analysis of what SharePoint Portal Server is able to do or to not do as an Enterprise 2.0 environment. By Dion Hinchcliffe.

enterprise2.0 microsoft sharepoint analysis hinchcliffe entreprise2.0

21 Mar 09

Anne Kathrine Petteroe

enterprise2.0 collaboration microsoft zdnet sharepoint hinchcliffe

JM Delahais

sharepoint enterprise2.0

These concerns about SharePoint’s ability to be an effective Enterprise 2.0 platform is one I hear echoed a lot with practitioners I talk to. In spite of this, I correspondingly hear that SharePoint is in fact what most organizations are planning on using when it comes to 2.0-style collaboration and knowledge management. Why the apparent disconnect between the perceived suitability (which we’ll dissect in a moment) and actual use? Part of it is SharePoint’s stunning penetration in the software business. T
In other words, SharePoint is already in most organizations today:
1 more annotations...
- In fact, this is a central lesson in Web 2.0 design, that complexity is the enemy of ease-of-use and adoption; most 2.0 products are almost brutally simple in their user experience.

T B

sharepoint enterprise2.0

Ellen Trude

sharepoint enterprise2.0 enterprise 2.0

Hutch Carpenter

These concerns about SharePoint’s ability to be an effective Enterprise 2.0 platform is one I hear echoed a lot with practitioners I talk to. In spite of this, I correspondingly hear that SharePoint is in fact what most organizations are planning on using when it comes to 2.0-style collaboration and knowledge management. Why the apparent disconnect between the perceived suitability (which we’ll dissect in a moment) and actual use? Part of it is SharePoint’s stunning penetration in the software business.

enterprise2.0 sharepoint hinchcliffe social software microsoft

20 Mar 09

Richard Fahey

sharepoint e2.0

Gerhard Kaefer

sharepoint tool enterprise2.0 socialcollaboration knowledge_networking

Users should be able to create sites within SharePoint, customize them over time to meet the local requirements, and let them evolve and improve through shared contributions. It is, however, by no means impossible to enable this kind of self-service with SharePoint but it does not encourage it nor is it a core design principle for the product.
In fact, this is a central lesson in Web 2.0 design, that complexity is the enemy of ease-of-use and adoption; most 2.0 products are almost brutally simple in their user experience.
1 more annotations...
- It also increasingly appears there is no such thing as Enterprise 2.0-in-a-box and that organizations need to find tools that best fit their culture and needs to get the best results.

Martin Lindner

Dion Hinchcliffe's verdict on SharePoint: if read between the lines it turns out MOSS is a failure (for E2.0) and probably not much help in the overly-complicated E1.0 environment either, except for, well, sharing MS objects. -- "the enterprise 2.0 story

enterprise2.0 sharepoint_star5 knowledgework deli

Driessen Samuel

enterprise2.0 sharepoint

It increasingly appears there is no such thing as Enterprise 2.0-in-a-box
There seem to be countless choices when it comes to communication and collaborating in today’s workplace.
17 more annotations...
- But when it comes to Enterprise 2.0 in particular — and you can read my most detailed explanation of exactly what the concepts of Enterprise 2.0 are here — the software solution that most organizations seem to reach for today in an almost knee-jerk reaction is Microsoft Sharepoint.
- 55% of organizations have implemented or are considering implementing SharePoint (Global Intranet Trends 2009 report - 227 participant organizations)
  
  46% of those companies using social media on the intranet are using
  
  SharePoint(Intranet 2.0 Global Survey – 430+ participant organizations)
  
  Only 47% of organizations have a defined governance model (Intranet 2.0 Global Survey)
  
  70% use at the department level; only 38% use it at the enterprise level (AIIM)
- Portal, search, content management, workflow, and business intelligence.
- SharePoint also has open architecture that ensures that almost anything that is perceived as missing can be supplemented by acquiring one of the many 3rd party addons or by custom development of what is needed.
- “free your intranet”
- I should also be clear that SharePoint can be used to do a lot more than what we usually ascribe to Enterprise 2.0, the latter for which the elevator pitch is freeform, emergent, social collaboration and less the physical document share methodologies (such sharing Word, Excel, PDF, etc. files) it was originally designed for.
- As a result of all this, and due the fact that the single most frequently asked question I get about Enterprise 2.0 is if SharePoint is a suitable platform for it (short answer: it definitely depends)
- innovation in social and collaborative systems is almost exclusively coming from the consumer Web
- SharePoint, at least out of the box, fails the SLATES test.
- To be fair, the SharePoint community has also been proactive on this topic, and the relatively new SharePoint Community Kit goes a good bit of the way towards resolving many of these issues.
- SharePoint is strong many of these points with excellent Active Directory integration and better support for enterprise technologies.
- but not best of breed and SharePoint has credible unified search capabilities (which is the “S” in SLATES) and works especially well if SharePoint is the only document management, portal, and knowledge management infrastructure in the organization.
- This makes opening up SharePoint environments to work with partners, customers, and even the general public, one of the more requested Enterprise 2.0 scenarios in my experience, to be more difficult than with other platforms which were designed to function in highly diverse environments.
- The lesson: The more cookie-cutter SharePoint installations are, the easier they are to manage but the more they unnaturally constrain their use and prevent desirable outcomes.
- One of the consistent messages I heard when speaking to SharePoint practitioners is the product’s complexity and high cost.
- Invariably, this means highly trained implementors, administrators, and technical support staff are required to deploy and run it, which all add to the total cost of ownership. And SharePoint’s inherent sophistication can also mean slow adoption and low engagement by users. In fact, this is a central lesson in Web 2.0 design, that complexity is the enemy of ease-of-use and adoption; most 2.0 products are almost brutally simple in their user experience. SharePoint is also priced as an enterprise product and can be very expensive (at least compared to most Enterprise 2.0 products) for a large installation.
- However, emphasizing the tool first, no matter how ready-at-hand, to create an enterprise-class information management solution is rarely the proper way to go — other than for solely financially expedient reasons — and rarely is that the only criteria.