Mario Gastaldi's Library tagged enterprise → View Popular

The central problem? Assets that are intangible, such as knowledge, social capital, and situated technology — which Enterprise 2.0 is primarily focused on — rarely have direct impact to financial outcomes such as revenues and profits. Its their downstream effects that generate the most value to the business.
“software ROI is only as predictable as the activity for which it is used
5 more annotations...
- The problem with this is that it’s very hard to either measure or predict accurately, especially since IT solutions tend to have longer chains of cause and effect than other technologies.
- The net result of this lack of clarity is a hold up on the explicit use of Enterprise 2.0 for strategic benefit by businesses, even as the tools are proliferating, often virally, in many organizations.
- different — ways of running our businesses.
- Innovation often comes from where you least expect it and harnessing collective intelligence, the core principle of Web 2.0 as well as Enterprise 2.0, is the very art of eliciting value from emergent systems such as the Web and our intranets.
- My point is just that it’s difficult to determine where the returns (often the most important ones) will appear when the tools have so many downstream effects. That’s not to say either that Enterprise 2.0 ecosystems can’t be directed to some degree to achieve business objectives

11 Apr 09

Tonido - Privacy and Online Freedom from third-party servers | Personal Web Applications and Private P2P Network | Tonido

www.tonido.com/index.html - Preview

collaboration tools enterprise 2.0

27 Mar 09

4 Ways Companies Use Twitter for Business - ReadWriteWeb

www.readwriteweb.com/...s_use_twitter_for_business.php - Preview

twitter enterprise 2.0

"If organizations have not defined a public Web participation policy, they should do so as quickly as possible."
direct, indirect, internal, and signaling
5 more annotations...
- Twitter like this could actually hinder their image
- Employees twittering away with excitement about their work, developments in their industry, new products, or other interesting tidbits, even if unrelated to the company itself, can promote positive feelings for whichever business they (indirectly) represent.
- If this information is confidential in nature, employees either need to protect their updates or even better, not use Twitter at all.
- If, however, your company wants to use microblogging at the office, there are tools designed for businesses that let you do just this. Yammer and present.ly are two of the top options for a Twitter-like platform for the workplace.
- are Twitter "listeners."

20 Mar 09

Setting up an internal Facebook might just solve your company’s communications and engagement problems | Sharing at Work

www.sharingatwork.com/...s-and-engagement-problems.html - Preview

facebook enterprise 2.0 engagement

Chief Learning Officer magazine - Virtual Leadership for a Virtual Workforce

www.clomedia.com/...index.php - Preview

leadership virtual team enterprise 2.0

Achieving collaboration requires a disciplined approach early on
maximizing the information flow ensures the development of strong relationships between team members
1 more annotations...
- Leading a virtual team means managing the whole spectrum of communication strategies and project management techniques, as well as the human and social processes, in ways that support the team. With the increasing relevance of distributed communication systems, team leaders will need to integrate these virtual practices into their team-building strategies and learn how to continually improve the virtual group process.

18 Mar 09

Nathan @ e-gineer: Building Enterprise 2.0 on Culture 1.0

www.e-gineer.com/...nterprise-20-on-culture-10.htm - Preview

enterprise 2.0 collaboration communication culture web2.0

Some information should be open, but isn’t. Some information needs to be closed and controlled. Some ideas should be discussed in the open, while other ideas need to be carefully communicated.
Success is defined by what we do, not what we have the opportunity to do. Implementing a Wiki isn’t success, building an organisation that will take collective ownership and collaboratively edit content is.
25 more annotations...
- Make contributions in an open space that are not policy or announcements.
  Edit work or information that is owned collectively.
- Successful Enterprise 2.0 style collaboration requires both technical and cultural maturity. While technology opens immediate potential, organisations must grow towards new patterns of usage and collaboration.
- Sharing knowledge adds more work (“I don’t have time to share”); and
  Sharing knowledge increases personal risk (“I don’t want to share”).
- more significantly, wording your thoughts takes time.
- Tools for collaboration must do everything possible to reduce the friction of contributing. It needs to be so easy to use, that you can literally laugh at anyone who tells you it is too hard (in a nice, let me show you, kind of way).
- The time taken to correctly phrase thoughts and distil ideas is unavoidable, but can be minimised by changing our expectation of shared content away from “finished product” towards “work in progress”.
- Publishing information early and often (rather than infrequently and completely) moves authorship away from essays and succinct conclusions towards sharing of insights and decisions. The ultimate method for
- sharing without increasing work is to move the work in progress into an open environment (share everything by default).
- Collaboration and knowledge sharing increase personal risk by creating a published, traceable flow of inputs (My mistakes are permanently recorded!) and making past information less valuable than new ideas (What if they don’t need me anymore?).
- In fact, most people are comfortable with publishing or sharing "finished product".
- Unfortunately, most knowledge work is a constant work in progress without a clear end-point and thus never reaches the point of being shared.
- The solution is to encourage content contributions that are finished enough to be low-risk publishable, but are not so big as to never reach completion.
- flow of information
- is far less risky than publishing final knowledge (I own the final decision)
- The system always contains the latest information, building trust and adoption.
  The process is easy to enforce and success is readily measured (by monitoring email announcements, the only alternative).
  Work and risk is minimised for contributors.
  Through search, archived flows become a rich and readily available stock.
- following values for building Enterprise 2.0 collaboration systems:
- Individuals and interactions over processes and tools.
  Ease of use over comprehensive training.
  Flexible tools over completeness.
  Responding to needs over creating demand.
- Always sacrifice features and power for ease of use
- In reality, people like to push and abuse tools that are comfortable, flexible and part of their every day work (e.g. email, Excel). Wiki's, blogs and search are great examples of simple tools that can be used for a myriad of purposes without needing a million customisations or extensions.
- meet an existing need. If you build it, they won't come. But, you can build it around where they already are.
- Overall, the aim is to build on the strengths of JCintra by adding ideas and project milestones to the flow of information that washes past people on the Intranet home page. With time this will build a powerful stock but, most importantly, it immediately provides ideas and stimulation to drive interactions between individuals.
- both technical and cultural maturity
- Janssen-Cilag has adopted an open Wiki with the potential for collective ownership, but usage remains dominated by individual contributions to a shared space
- To encourage an organisational shift along the enterprise collaboration maturity model, Enterprise 2.0 leaders should focus on capturing the flow of information. Over time, the flow builds not only a stock of searchable knowledge but also a reputation as the source of fresh ideas and trusted up-to-date content.
- echnology piece is about 5 to 10 percent of the effort, changing the way work is done is the 90 to 95 percent of the effort

15 Mar 09

Brain of James :: 10 Tips for a Successful Wiki

www.brainofjames.com/?p=62 - Preview

wiki enterprise 2.0

The Connectbeam Social Computing Blog: Economic Downturn: Putting a Dollar Figure on the Value of Enterprise 2.0 for Companies

blog.connectbeam.com/...what-social-sof.html - Preview

connectbeam enterprise 2.0

Employees who connect to a wider range of their colleagues generate higher revenue for their companies. In this case, an employee in the 84th percentile of network diversity delivers $83,000 more in revenue annually than average. Why?
Soliciting input from a greater array of co-workers brings new ideas, information and perspectives to an employee. This becomes a competitive differentiator, and a basis for better collaboration across the enterprise. The question, as always, is how to find and build relationships with others who can help beyond your normal internal contacts?

09 Mar 09

Six ways to make Web 2.0 work - The McKinsey Quarterly - Six ways Web 2.0 work - Business Technology - Application Management

www.mckinseyquarterly.com/..._ways_to_make_Web_20_work_2294 - Preview

collaboration web 2.0 enterprise 2.0

Many of the dissenters cite impediments such as organizational structure, the inability of managers to understand the new levers of change, and a lack of understanding about how value is created using Web 2.0 tools.
Many of the dissenters cite impediments such as organizational structure, the inability of managers to understand the new levers of change, and a lack of understanding about how value is created using Web 2.0 tools
31 more annotations...
- Executives who are suspicious or uncomfortable with perceived changes or risks often call off these efforts. Others fail because managers simply don’t know how to encourage the type of participation that will produce meaningful results.
- Others fail because managers simply don’t know how to encourage the type of participation that will produce meaningful results.
- The latest Web tools have a strong bottom-up element and engage a broad base of workers
- The most widely used are blogs, wikis, podcasts, information tagging, prediction markets, and social networks
- What distinguishes them from previous technologies is the high degree of participation they require to be effective.
- Web 2.0 technologies are interactive and require users to generate new information and content or to edit the work of other participants.
- But the new tools are different. While they are inherently disruptive and often challenge an organization and its culture, they are not technically complex to implement.
- do not necessarily require complex technology integration.
- calls the underused human potential at companies an immense “cognitive surplus” and one that could be tapped by participatory tools.
- Our most recent Web 2.0 survey demonstrates that despite early frustrations, a growing number of companies remain committed to capturing the collaborative benefits of Web 2.0.²
- The transformation to a bottom-up culture needs help from the top.
- These business leaders are correct in thinking that participatory technologies are founded upon bottom-up involvement from frontline staffers and that this pattern is fundamentally different from the rollout of ERP systems, for example, where compliance with rules is mandatory. Successful participation, however, requires not only grassroots activity but also a different leadership approach: senior executives often become role models and lead through informal channels.
- By contrast, our research shows the applications that drive the most value through participatory technologies often aren’t those that management expects.
- What’s in the workflow is what gets used. Perhaps because of the novelty of Web 2.0 initiatives, they’re often considered separate from mainstream work. Earlier generations of technologies, by contrast, often explicitly replaced the tools employees used to accomplish tasks. Thus, using Web 2.0 and participating in online work communities often becomes just another “to do” on an already crowded list of tasks.
- Participatory technologies have the highest chance of success when incorporated into a user’s daily workflow
- Traditional management incentives aren’t particularly useful for encouraging participation.⁵
- These methods tend to fall short when applied to unlocking participation.
- A more effective approach plays to the Web’s ethos and the participants’ desire for recognition: bolstering the reputation of participants in relevant communities, rewarding enthusiasm, or acknowledging the quality and usefulness of contributions
- With participatory technologies, it’s far from obvious which individuals will be the best participants.
- To select users who will help drive a self-sustaining effort (often enthusiastic early technology adopters who have rich personal networks and will thus share knowledge and exchange ideas), a thoughtful approach is required
- Balance the top-down and self-management of risk. A common reason for failed participation is discomfort with it, or even fear.
- In some cases, the lack of management control over the self-organizing nature and power of dissent is the issue.
- In others, it’s the potential repercussions of content—through blogs, social networks, and other venues—that is detrimental to the company.
- Companies often have difficulty maintaining the right balance of freedom and control.
- total laissez-faire policies, eschewing even basic controls that screen out inappropriate postings. In some cases, these organizations have been burned.
- Prudent managers should work with the legal, HR, and IT security functions to establish reasonable policies
- such as prohibiting anonymous posting. Fears are often overblown, however, and the social norms enforced by users in the participating communities can be very effective at policing user exchanges and thus mitigating risks.
- Participatory technologies should include auditing functions, similar to those for e-mail, that track all contributions and their authors. Ultimately, however, companies must recognize that successful participation means engaging in authentic conversations with participants.
- Acceptance of Web 2.0 technologies in business is growing
- Encouraging participation calls for new approaches that break with the methods used to deploy IT in the past
- Company leaders first need to survey their current practices. Once they feel comfortable with some level of controlled disruption, they can begin testing the new participatory tools.