Enterprise 2.0: answering some of the tough questions

Euan Semple on the New Web from Dennis Howlett on Vimeo.Following on from my Enterprise 2.
Written by Dennis Howlett, Contributor

Euan Semple on the New Web from Dennis Howlett on Vimeo.

Following on from my Enterprise 2.0: what a crock post, I thought it might be useful to show Euan Semple's perspective on what this 'stuff' is all about.

Euan and I met earlier in the year and I wanted to explore some of the themes underpinning much of what we see surrounding the E2.0 meme. Key take aways from this 13 minute discussion:

  • Enterprise 2.0 has served to describe some of the tools but is not always a helpful notion
  • Community is not necessarily a good way to describe what is going on
  • Acknowledging that management is not necessarily equipped to understand the shifts that are being exposed through the use of social computing technology does not necessarily imply business change management projects
  • Understanding that the technology is an enabler for exposing the value which can emerge from broader cultural shifts should help business better grasp the values which can be unlocked
  • Assisting companies in coming to terms with change is hard work - arguably harder than earlier forms of process change
  • Broad adoption may easily take 50 years or two generations. This needs to be seen from the perspective of the web being only some 30 years old
  • One of the biggest risks to seeing these changes through is a lack of patience

I don't necessarily agree with everything that Euan says but I respect his experience and practical approach to the E2.0 issues. It contrasts markedly with much of the hand waving I see elsewhere and which does not jibe with my own experience in this arena. I am with Euan that some enthusiasts massively under estimate the effort needed to help organizations make discernible steps on the road to business transformation.

I will return separately to the many helpful blog posts that emerged from my earlier crack at this topc. They make excellent points but as always leave nagging questions.

Editorial standards