Tuesday, 22 January 2008

And what about 3.0?

I think 2.0 makes a lot of sense.

The basic internet did bring a lot of change. The ability to search and communicate in real-time across the world felt like a momentous change, and I still think it was. So 'basic' is probably the wrong word.

But the new opportunities that web 2.0 provides to collaborate could be even more significant. It can change the way that people work, so enterprise 2.0, knowledge 2.0, HR 2.0 etc all make a lot of sense.

Continued at: http://blog.social-advantage.com/2008/01/and-what-about-30.html


  • Consulting  - Research - Speaking  -  Training -  Writing
  • Strategy   -  Team development  -  Web 2.0  -  Change
  • Contact  me to  create  more  value  for  your  business
  • jon [dot] ingham [at] social [dash] advantage [dot] com


More on 2.0

I also recommend:

For HR 2.0, see http://mcarthursrant.blogspot.com/.

And for an explanation of everything 2.0, there's a great video on enterprise collaboration software vendor, Jive Software's website (Sam Lawrence on Collaboration 2.0): http://www.jivesoftware.com/products/clearspace/features/videos.jsp

Monday, 21 January 2008

Knowledge 2.0

Sorry I've been a bit quiet here, there will be lots more soon.

Anyway, I've just picked up David Gurteen's Knowledge Newsletter for January and viewed David's latest Knowledge 2.0 presentation, IBM Knowledge Management goes Social presentation on slideshare. It's a great slideset, well, worth a look.

And I absolutely love Sibylle's comments on metrics in Knowledge 2.0:

"Most of us agree KM is about the SOCIAL so if we want a picture of what is happening in our SOCIAL environment we have to use SOCIAL tools, ie/ interviews, stories, theme analysis, anthropoligical observations - all tools researchers in the humanities like history and sociology have been using for years. Let's not take the easy way and give in to the bean counters in organisations with their need for meaningless number but rather educate them on how these techniques will give us understanding of what is really going on. Its only when we have an understanding of things like relationships, human networks, people' own perceptions of what knowledge they need/have etc, as well as the lack or flow of knowledge in their groups that we can create a path of action to improve that which we are trying to improve. Otherwise you'll just have one more KM metric presentation that bores the pants off everyone and contributes nothing to our intended path."

See my HCM blog for much more on this.