Networks, Complexity, and Relatedness

Networks, Complexity, and Relatedness
Inquiry and learning into social networks, organizational network analysis, and the relationships among people and systems in complex organizations and networks.

Wednesday, December 19, 2007

Incredibly Dull is anything but

When I wrote Net Work, I had originally intended to include at least one chapter on technology, i.e. Web 2.0. The problem at the time (close on to 2 years since I started the project), however, was that terminology hadn't converged and social network applications that many now take for granted hadn't vaulted over the chasm. So while I have continued to try out and try on Facebook, Dopplr, Twitter, Del.icio.us, and their ilk I can not claim to be as expert as my colleagues Bill Ives and Ross Dawson. I do,however, know more than most people in the general population, and was pleased to be invited by AIIM to participate on the Advisory Board for the development of the AIIM Market IQ on Enterprise 2.0 as well as workshops.

In this capacity, I get to rub virtual shoulders really smart people, including Stowe Boyd and David Weinberger (whom I first met when we were 3 on a panel at KMWorld 2000). Other board members are Andrew McAfee and Eric Tsui. So what this really means is that my ears are really perking up on Web 2.0 and I'm noticing how things are starting to take shape and coming across interesting inquiries. And starting to articulate my own thoughts and views. (See yesterday's post.)

Following a short exchange on the sikmleaders group about policy (an incredibly important topic in Enterprise 2.0), Stan Garfield referenced a note to a post by Andrew Gent in his blog, Incredibly Dull, "Web 2.0 and the lack of process." Andrew and I worked in the same group at Digital many years ago over a longish span of time, and I have always valued and appreciated his insights. He starts this post with the observation that "people, process, technology" remain a key mantra in the development and guidance of knowledge management systems. He goes on to point out that Web 2.0 technologies have people and technology in abundance but lack a sense of process. (One might go so far as to say that Web 2.0 scorns process.) And yet, inside the firewall, where work is purposeful, some boundaries must be in place. For a client, I'm currently working on SOP (Standing Operating Procedures) for using SharePoint. There are many situations where you cannot just aim technology at people. People often crave guidance, which I may loosely translate to boundaries, in order to approach new tools and have satisfying results.

posted by Patti | permalink (click to comment)

Comments:

Patti - great to have you on the Advisory Panel for our Market IQ on Enterprise 2.0. Much appreciated already, and we'll definitely be looking for your keen eye for details as we move this on through Q1 and Q2 2008.

And in this post, was not aware of Andrew - so another resource to tap into. People, Process, Technology - yes it does frequently come back to that, although it can be so painful to keep going back to basics every time we move forward.

No silver bullets people! Enterprise 2.0 isn't useful just because it (might) have AJAX, rounded corners, and allow more participation/collaboration than usual... it's many things, and BTW, the "old" infrastructure doesn't crumble and go away. Not just yet at least!

This comment clearly NOT brought to you via the wonder of Twitter... :)

# posted by

Dan Keldsen : 1:56 PM