Talk:Enterprise social software
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of Business and Economics WikiProject. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale. | |
Previous discussion, and content for potential inclusion in this article can be found at Talk:Enterprise_2.0. Additional citations can be found within Wikipedia: Articles for deletion/Enterprise 2.0 (second nomination) Rossmay 20:15, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] More than Web
I'd suggest that Enterprise 2.0 isn't just a web toolkit. It includes live conversation tools for communication, coordination and collaboration. These may be built into web apps, browser or flash based rich apps, or rich desktop clients. They may also be blended into other Enterprise 2.0 services. Media modes: IRC, mobile SMS, text chat and instant messaging, VoIP, presence brokers, voice conferencing, video calls and video conferencing, screen sharing. When used in the workplace they are clearly enterprise social software. --Phil Wolff 04:02, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
Enterprise 2.0? What a load of rubbish - it doesn't mean anything, its just a buzz phrase - sheer hype by desperate men. NLB 12:03, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
I find it ironic that members of the emergent Wikipedia community, such as our friend immediately above, are sometimes most negative about terms that themselves are emergent. These terms, yes, neologisms, are helpful to the community because they let us name emergent phenomena. Naming, in turn, lets us focus shared attention on these phenomena, make sense of them, join them, extend them, even fight them, if that is what one wants to do.
Enterprise 2.0 was introduced by a faculty member at Harvard Business School to describe a phenomenon he wanted to call attention to--which is the consequences of loose, untyped, diy, interactive clusters and mashups and networks of web services being embraced by people who work together in enterprises. I see no reason not to embrace this new term. It calls attention on a set of interesting developments on the social and technical landscape.
Web 2.0, a term--astoundingly--that has been trademarked by O'Reilly--is also a valid and valuable name. By the way, my own sense of linguistic and cognitive history is that Web 2.0 itself started out meaning nothing more than an O'Reilly conference loosely pulling together new developments on the landscape. Only later did it become a term that took on real meaning. Terms take on meaning by being picked up by users, by communities of users. Terms are given meaning by communities. The process always starts small, loose, and--let me say it, emergent.
A couple of months ago my friend Joi Ito called my attention to an emergent movement among Wikipedia insiders to delist "emergent democracy." Too much of a neologism, was the objection. This movement was only overturned when someone pointed out that there is a real published book on emergent democracy available on Amazon.com.
Geez, folks. How is it that the most emergent community on earth is developing policies to block the emergence of new topics and new names--and ulitmately, new insights?Woodspoet 19:25, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Isn't this an horrible oxymoron? Enterprises are by their nature segmented and siloed to create efficiencies around tasks and leverage scale. Many enterprises use competition between silos to drive reward structures. Asking something inherently hierarchical to leverage social tools and structures is asking the impossible. The contributors will never be rewarded for contributing to the community ahead of contributing to "their job." Furthermore, if advancement in the hierarchy is a goal, it requires abandoning ones current social circles to move on. Differentiating oneself isn't a social behavior, it is a competitive and hierarchical (enterprise) behavior. I'm not convinced this will ever work.
Please, Do not merge or delete this article. The term, invented by Andrew McAfee from Harvard ca. one year ago, has become well-understood and wide-spread in the meantime. On the German Wikipedia it is impossible to find any information about the term. I'm glad that I found this article here. "Enterprise 2.0" is a concept of growing importance, being discussed in business, consulting and scientific environments. It's not about computing only. It's about the change of work and work organization. It describes the change of collaboration within enterprises being enabled by the use of social software. Some case studies on DrKW, IBM, Nokia etc. already exist. There's more to come, it's an emergent topic. --Pit Hansing 11:35, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
