In writing about Web 2.0, Clive Thompson coined the phrase ambient awareness.He said, “Each little update, each individual bit of social information is insignificant on its own, even supremely mundane. But taken together, over time, the little snippets coalesce into a surprisingly sophisticated portrait of people’s lives.”I have no quarrel with his assessment and even like the phase ambient awareness.
Lew Platt, former CEO of HP approached the same idea with a different thought: “If HP knew what HP knows, we would be three times more profitable.”As I’ve considered both men’s assessment on collaboration and knowledge management, I have begun to form my own definition that is a compilation of their thoughts and those of others.
In my experience, successful application in a business setting of Web 2.0 and all the technologies surrounding the space (a.k.a. – Enterprise 2.0), is really about using social computing platforms to make relevant information not simply more accessible.But to have it flow throughout the organization as a byproduct of organizational activity such that a shared view of the business is derived by all participants in the social computing environment.Just as we do not give conscious thought to breathing or maintaining our body temperature, the creation, dissemination, and maintenance of tribal knowledge can be made implicit in daily activities through application of social computing platforms.
If such an environment can in fact be fostered, what benefit is to be had?I anticipate the benefit will come in two forms:
·Capitalizing on the viral spread of innovative ideas in a rapid, iterative, entrepreneurial fashion.
·Better decision making by improved contextual awareness for each and every business decision.
The benefits I mention are of my own opinion. I welcome dissent and robust debate on this.
It looks like the Republicans will have a long, uphill climb. I received an email from one of my Republican Senators (he shall remain nameless for now) asking me to subscribe to his e-newsletter. I replied to his email with the following:
Email is so 2003. You might consider social networking for greater affect and engagement with voters. Most folks don't want more clutter in their inboxes. I'm happy to consult with your staff if interested.
I don’t expect an actual reply as the only way I could send this note is through the tightly controlled gauntlet laid down by the Senator’s contact form on his website. Whether he or any others will get it and begin legitimate dialog remains to be seen.
For those of us who use the tools of Web 2.0, this unenlightened approach of e-newsletters and contact forms seems as foreign to us as Web 2.0 must appear to Senators like these. But Robert Scoble just observed the same outcome with key business leaders in a presentation he delivered. And it will take time, but the Obama adminstration’s relative mastery of Web 2.0 should bring about change in business and government and their approaches to their customers and constituencies, respectively; lest they both risk losing them.
Here is a good blog post by Mark Nankman of Cap Gemini on sustaining communities. I share his thoughts on the commitment required to build communities. They require dedication and cultivation as you are instituting, to some extent, a culture change for the organization.
You have to help individuals see the benefit of participating in the social network and that it is superior to email, the water cooler, and hours spent in meetings reviewing what could have already been disseminated by a community of users committed to open, regular communication via a social networking platform.
