On TechRepublic: Five super-secret features in Windows 7
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet

Category: Design Patterns

November 24th, 2009

The cloud computing battleground takes shape. Will it be winner-take-all?

Posted by Dion Hinchcliffe @ 2:03 pm

Categories: Cloud computing, Cost-effective scalability, Enterprise Web 2.0, Global SOA, Governance, Lightweight Service Models, Products, Radical Decentralization, SaaS, Web 2.0 Platforms, Web as Platform

Tags: Cloud Computing Battleground, Cloud Computing, Virtualization, Hardware, Dion Hinchcliffe

You can bet that the industry will be playing for keeps yet businesses can increasingly reap real bottom line benefits. This year has been one of relatively grand alliances between emerging cloud computing vendors as they fill holes in their capabilities and try to create appealing one-stop enterprise cloud services.

We’ve seen major announcements so far from IBM and Juniper, Cisco/EMC/VMware, and most recently BMC and Salesforce. There are many other smaller initiatives that have formed as well and all of these efforts underscore several key points for those businesses trying to understand the real strategic benefits of the cloud including cost, agility, and scalability:

First, there is no single vendor that can today provide an end-to-end cloud computing solution for businesses, hence the reason for all the alliances. The cloud computing stack (facilities, bandwidth, compute power, storage, operations, management, etc.) is deep and comprises not only most of the elements that you would find in a corporate data center but a great deal more besides. This includes R&D, product development, support capabilities, developer networks, and capabilities such as compliance monitoring and additional layers of security and governance.

Second, it’s unclear how the cloud computing vendor landscape is going to shape up. Everyone is in early days yet with only Amazon with anything approaching operational maturity, with Google and Force.com vying for the lower end of the enterprise. Making long-term decisions isn’t a good idea in this environment, though using cloud computing tactically does make good sense at this point, especially if you’re experimenting with private cloud technology that will likely translate well to public clouds, such as Eucalyptus.

Standards and Public/Private Seamlessness Will Drive Cloud Computing Maturity

Third, and perhaps most importantly, standards for cloud computing are just emerging and only cover today an incomplete portion of the cloud computing stack. This means scenarios where you can seamlessly move your cloud computing workloads from your private cloud and public clouds of choice are fairly far off still, unless you are willing to commit to one of the alliances that will enable it with proprietary approaches. This is the core scenario that businesses are interested in as dabble with cloud technology internally today and then want to move outside to get cost and quality advantages as they get more confidence in the cloud. But it’s one that is currently rife with lock-in and those that remember the platform wars of the 90s are wise to recall.

Related: Cloud computing and the return of the platform wars

Let’s also not forget the economics of online services, which apply generally to any cloud computing service that is self-provisioning (meaning users can sign-up and begin using it immediately). Infoworld’s Zack Urlocker pointed out last week that Tim O’Reilly’s discussion of the tendency of the end-game scenario for a given online segment to be winner-takes-all almost certainly applies to cloud computing as well:

While the benefits of cloud computing are enormous in terms of reducing costs, increasing utilization, and providing scalability, there’s a significant risk of lock-in. Given the early state of cloud technology, there simply aren’t adequate standards to offset this.

My fellow ZDNet colleague Phil Wainewright recently pointed out what I like to call the

Read the rest of this entry »

November 12th, 2009

Enterprise 2.0: What do we know today about moving our organizations into the 21st century?

Posted by Dion Hinchcliffe @ 4:18 am

Categories: Architecture of Participation, Blogs, Business Process Management, Collaboration, Collective Intelligence, Community, Community Management, Customer Community, Design Patterns, Enterprise 2.0, Enterprise Web 2.0, Enterprise Wikis, Governance, Grassroots Community, Hype, Innovation marketplace, Social CRM, Social Computing, Social Economy, Social Media, Social Networking, Social Software, Social media, Social networks, Web 2.0, Web 2.0 Platforms, Wikis

Tags: Social Computing, Enterprise 2.0, Dion Hinchcliffe

We spend 60-80% of our time in the workplace on interaction and collaborative activity. This week in Frankfurt at the Enterprise 2.0 SUMMIT and last week at the inaugural Enterprise 2.0 Conference West in San Francisco has been an good microcosm of the state of the industry.

It does appear that we’re entering a new stage in the maturity of enterprise social computing. The good news: Most of the lessons learned are good ones, yet as we’ll see, some challenges remain.

Based on my conversations with practitioners and thought leaders here and the many discussions over the last two weeks, the practice of Enterprise 2.0 has effectively moved beyond the initial novelty of years past. There’s now a much more practical focus on how to create, manage, and govern social business communities, the specific ways to deliver measurable business value, and most of all, a desire to learn what works best (or not) in the realm of collaboration and social software.

The broad outlines of what it actually takes to apply new social business models have emerged lately along with the techniques to deliver on them successfully in the longer term. In particular, these include topics such as business case, tool selection, worker policies, community management, and the governance of social business environments.

Just as importantly, we are also starting to see customers implementing Enterprise 2.0 in scale. These typically include enterprise social networking, wikis, and social CRM. This is different than a year ago when there were only a handful of stories about Fortune 1000 and Global 2000 companies seriously exploring the potential benefits of social computing.

Potential Benefits of Enterprise 2.0

In the sense that the hard work has started, we are also seeing the end of the beginning for Enterprise 2.0. We’ve learned a lot along the way, particularly from early adopters, and it has been interesting to participate back-to-back in two of the largest enterprise social computing events of the season. This has helped get a sense of what’s taking place in Europe and North America with customers as well as the industry growing up around Enterprise 2.0 in terms of tools and services.

Related: Social applications are now well-entrenched in enterprise networks around the globe

Where is Enterprise 2.0 headed?

Here are my top takeaways from the discussions, research, and findings here in Frankfurt this week and San Francisco last week:

  • Businesses are actively seeking information about how best to implement Enterprise 2.0. While last year they were kicking the tires and evaluating what the benefits are (establishing why) there’s a lot more actual project activity this year and this is driving significant demand for knowledge about how. The rise of the 2.0 Adoption Council is one demonstration of this need to share information about what works. Further providing evidence that there’s a need for how: A recent survey showed that 36% of their members were currently managing multi-million dollar budgets this year for Enterprise 2.0. In other words, they’re in the “how” stage. Finally, the end-users I talked with in my workshops at both events demanded detailed, specific information about how to make Enterprise 2.0 work for their businesses.

    Enterprise 2.0 Project Budgets

  • There is still lots of debate about how to

Read the rest of this entry »

October 25th, 2009

Are the iPhone and social networks making the classic Web and intranet obsolete?

Posted by Dion Hinchcliffe @ 3:25 pm

Categories: Business Models, Cloud computing, Customer Self-Service, Enterprise Web 2.0, Mashups, Open APIs, Radical Decentralization, Rich Internet Applications (RIA), Right To Remix, SaaS, Social Computing, Social Media, Social Networking, The Social Graph, Web 2.0, Web 2.0 Platforms, Web as Platform

Tags: Apple iPhone, Network, Information Technology, Social Networking, Smart Phones, Online Communications, Marketing, Advertising & Promotion, Consumer Electronics, Personal Technology

Many as-yet-unforeseen new developments will create enormous societal, cultural, and business opportunities over the next decade, just as long as we don’t make irreversible decisions down the wrong path. There’s been an important and relatively sudden change taking place over the last couple of years in the way that we interact with the Web. While direct access or search activity has been (and still is) the most common way that we access the content and applications of the Web, new ways have been rapidly growing and competing with how we work online, both at home and at work.

Thus these new models, exemplified by social networking sites like Facebook or mobile apps on platforms like the iPhone, Palm’s new webOS, and Android, will ultimately herald a change in the way that we work with our IT systems in the enterprise.

The once relatively unified world of the Internet, with a few major top-level types of access directly connected to it (browser, e-mail, IRC client, newsreader, etc.) and a few key sub-apps such as search that virtually everyone online used have been extended — as well as fragmented — into popular new channels into which users are now rapidly moving en masse.

That’s not to say that direct usage of the Internet (loading up and using sites and apps via the traditional Web browser) is going away. It’s still far and away the most common way to interact with the Web today and will likely be that way for quite some time, if not forever.

But real shifts in both online platform alternatives and in the mobile market are beginning to usher in foundational new usage patterns by users. These new channels — of which the latest generation of mobile apps and social networking platforms, which are often tightly integrated with the Web but are not truly one with it, are just the two biggest examples — demonstrate what is probably a generational transformation of the vital border between us and the Internet.

And this is the crux of the point: Where the point of user attention and interaction resides and who controls it is one of the most important conversations between us and our “preferred intermediaries”, a fancy term for who we like to work with to interact with the Web. This in turn has significant implications for enterprise intranets, our often clunky yet essential local “Web” in our organizations.

Why are these changes happening? There are at least two major reasons:

The first is that user attention on the Web has been moving to social networks, best exhibited by Facebook, which has been the single largest gainer of online usage in the last 3 years, over all other applications. Even e-mail has been eclipsed in many markets and only search remains more dominant. Social networks, which are platforms in their own right — just like the Web, but also have touchpoints well outside of it — have come into their own as competing yet codependent platforms that sprawl across the Internet, telecommunications infrastructure, mobile devices, and desktop computers.

The second reason is

Read the rest of this entry »

October 5th, 2009

Twenty-two power laws of the emerging social economy

Posted by Dion Hinchcliffe @ 1:41 pm

Categories: Architecture of Participation, Business Models, Cloud computing, Collaboration, Collective Intelligence, Community, Community Management, Cost-effective scalability, Crowdsourcing, Customer Community, Customer Self-Service, Design Patterns, Enterprise 2.0, Enterprise Web 2.0, Grassroots Community, Innovation marketplace, Network effects, Social Computing, Social Economy, Social Media, Social Networking, Social Software, The Long Tail, Two-Way Web, User Generated Content, Web 2.0, Web 2.0 Platforms, Web as Platform

Tags: Web, Knowledge, Information Technology, Knowledge Economy, Amara, Strategy, Web 2.0, Management, Internet, Dion Hinchcliffe

Traditional measures of business success are becoming less and less important.There is a time for big picture thinking and there is a time for details in business and IT, the latter which make business and technical strategy a reality and the former which provides needed direction and focus.

Highlighting the big picture side last week we saw Steve Ballmer’s exploration of the efficiencies he believes are being driven by something he calls “the new normal”. In this view, he tries to frame up how a reset of economic expectations during the downturn has created an environment that is putting pressure on business to do more with less, affecting IT at least as much as the rest of the organization, if not more.

We’ve seen also seen similar and broader variations on this theme this year, such as John Hagel’s capable attempt to define the “Big Shifts” in business taking place in this century. Just recently McKinsey published a similar reported titled The 10 Trends You Have to Watch: And What They Mean For IT in the Harvard Business Journal (summary is by Gartner).

The Emerging Knowledge Economy and Social Economy

If we factor out the commonalities in these views, it highlights a core set of strategic trends in IT and business in 2009, namely:

  • New resource constraints. Today’s new economic baselines (the downturn, green business, etc) are requiring that we find ways to accomplish our goals using fewer resources. This includes identifying the means to capture opportunity and transform “in process” business activities using newer, more efficient models. Business leaders will need to effectively link IT and business much more so than in the past to accomplish the movement to this new baseline. This also doesn’t mean everything is constrained. As we’ll see on the technology side, abundance is being produced that may address shortcomings in the business side.
  • Value shifting from transactions to relationships. This is the growing realization that the traditional rote business transaction as the core source of organizational value is diminishing and value is now coming from relationship dynamics. This has many implications including using new management methods (example: from top down command-and-control to community curator and facilitator), tapping into new reservoirs of innovation, adopting new ways of interacting with customers, or driving better tacit interactions. Web 2.0 and social computing will be key enablers of this for business units and IT organizations that want increased relevance.
  • Industries in flux with new ones emerging. Previously stable industries such as finance and media are feeling the pinch the strongest, but most others are as well. The recession is creating a bigger gap between healthy and unhealthy businesses while many industries are being unbundled or transformed into new ones (traditional software companies moving to SaaS and cloud computing for example or the rise of crowdsourcing competing with outsourcing at the low end.) Again, today’s dynamic Web-driven global knowledge flows and agile online models for computing and collaboration — as well as economic and intellectual production — are now a significant change agent.
  • Moving from change as the exception to change as the norm. Today we’re seeing faster consumer behavior shifts, quicker pricing changes, more rapid product cycles, and faster media feedback loops. While this can also lead to more extreme market conditions, it also enables opportunities to be turned into bottom-line impact for organizations that can adapt to market realities quickly enough. The network is the culprit (and solution) for much of this again: We now have pervasive social media instantly transmitting and shaping cultural phenomenon and faster financial cause-and-effect in the markets, real-time online markets, and so on. In the 21st century, following a plan is increasingly less important than responding actively and effectively to change.
  • A shift of control to the edge of organizations. This has been predicted at least as far back as the Cluetrain Manifesto, if not farther. It’s not even really a shift, it’s more like the addition of a new dimension to how we operate organizationally, something I’ve referred to previously as “social business.” This new addition changes the dynamics of where useful information comes from, how decisions are made, and how more autonomy and self-organization will be needed (and tolerated) in modern organizations to meet more dynamic and changing global marketplace.

As I explored recently in “How the Web OS has begun to reshape IT and business”, today’s Internet has become a central driver of how we do things today. It’s the richest marketplace that

Read the rest of this entry »

September 24th, 2009

Creating a unified model for enterprise mashups

Posted by Dion Hinchcliffe @ 2:43 pm

Categories: Design Patterns, Encouraging Unintended Uses, Enterprise Mashups, Enterprise Web 2.0, Global SOA, Lightweight Service Models, Mashups, Open APIs, REST, Right To Remix, SOA, SOAP, SaaS, Situational Software, Small Pieces, Loosely Joined, WS-*, Web 2.0, Web 2.0 Platforms, Web as Platform, Web services

Tags: Enterprise Mashup, Runtime, Mashup, JackBe, EMML, Collaboration, Dion Hinchcliffe

A unified mashup model can increase software quality, lower IT costs, and directly drive choice and innovation. I’ve written here over the years about software mashups; simple combinations of pieces of the Web that are rearranged into new useful forms. I’ve even called the approach a key to the future of software development. While mashups in the enterprise have been reasonably successful up until now — about a third of enterprises have them today — there have been challenges in enabling the same level of wide use and benefits that are currently evident on the open Web.

Fortunately, this may be about to change. Today marks the introduction of an effort by the new Open Mashup Alliance (OMA), a federation of interested parties in the mashup space that want to bring the benefits of standardization, consistency, interoperability, and a real marketplace to the world of enterprise mashups. The initial participants include a wide range of firms such as Adobe, CapGemini, HP, Intel, JackBe, Kapow, Programmable Web, Synteractive, and Xignite. Disclaimer: My company is also a founding member organization of the OMA. Note that anyone can become an OMA member, either as a company or a user and the principles of the organization are open and egalitarian.

Related: Joe McKendrick’s Enterprise mashup proponents start organizing.

What makes OMA especially interesting from my perspective is that it’s much more than a “high concept” strategic effort that will one day put forth specifications or technology that may or may not be useful to enterprises for creating mashups. Instead OMA sponsor JackBe, one of the world’s top enterprise mashups vendors, has generously contributed their existing and proven enterprise mashups model — known as the Enterprise Mashup Markup Language — along with a fully working reference implementation of an EMML runtime, as well as 50 working mashups.

Thus EMML exists fully today as one of the more mature enterprise mashup specifications available. It is robust, mature (it has been supporting production applications for several years), and now it is open for anyone to use via a Creative Commons license. And given JackBe’s technology roots in the Java community — their CTO is the respected John Crupi of Core J2EE patterns and Sun fame — it is free of proprietary technologies and formats. EMML also brings the leverage, speed, and power of domain-specific languages to the table as well.

Enterprise mashups and EMML

The result is an open enterprise mashup specification and runtime model using familiar standards and/or community technologies such as XML, XPath, XQuery, SQL, JavaScript, and JRuby. Using the EMML reference guide, anyone can now create an EMML-compliant mashup runtime. This also means any EMML-based mashup is able to run inside any EMML-compliant runtime. The resulting mashups — because they are built with an open, interoperable specification — can now be published, shared, reused, and if applicable sold in a larger, standardized market. This creates the possibilities of a real enterprise mashup ecosystem and marketplace that wouldn’t happen of its own accord. The potential is not inconsiderable given that so far the enterprise mashups industry, lacking a consistent model (outside the browser itself, see below for further details) has been fragmented into a story of multiple competing vendors and technologies. This included IBM (Mashup Center), Serena (Mashup Composer), JackBe (Presto), and many others.

I’ve personally examined EMML and can attest that it’s a clean powerful design that includes potent capabilities such as declarative data transformation, advanced procedural logic, parallelism, meta-data and much more. That’s not to say more can’t or won’t be done to extend and evolve EMML but it’s a credible start to create a consistent model and runtime artifacts for the design and operation of enterprise mashups across all the vendors that support it. At its core, however, EMML and its runtime is essentially an enterprise-class version of Yahoo Pipes.

While it’s also true that today’s announcement will certainly not hurt JackBe as the top provider of EMML tools today, I also know — based on my conversations with them lately and over the years — that 1) they are a startup company that is volunteering the output of their hard work and is unlikely to vault to market domination on this basis alone and 2) that they believe this effort is one of the best practical ways to help enterprise mashups gain critical mass and that 3) the benefit to them is by improving the conditions of the enterprise mashups industry as a whole. At least that’s my perspective.

Ultimately, the OMA creates a standardized approach to enterprise mashups that creates an open and vibrant market for competing runtimes, mashups, and an array of important aftermarket services such as development/testing tools, management and administration appliances, governance frameworks, education, professional services, and so on. Creating an ecosystem like this is only possible when the mashup industry is focused on heading in the same general direction instead of competing over individual technologies (notably, this is one of the reasons the Web works so well).

Enough of the mashup development and runtime process is left open with EMML that there is also plenty of room for differentiation. While EMML will indeed level the playing field, vendors also have plenty of room around the edges to offer additional capabilities for EMML-based environments including visual designer tools/IDEs, modeling systems, administration consoles, portfolio management systems, and so on.

In the larger view, there has always been the tantalizing possibility for

Read the rest of this entry »

September 6th, 2009

How the Web OS has begun to reshape IT and business

Posted by Dion Hinchcliffe @ 9:01 am

Categories: Architecture of Participation, Business Models, Cloud computing, Collective Intelligence, Community, Convergence, Cost-effective scalability, Crowdsourcing, Design Patterns, Encouraging Unintended Uses, Enterprise Web 2.0, Identity, Innovation marketplace, Network Effects, Open APIs, Radical Decentralization, Right To Remix, SOA, SaaS, Small Pieces, Loosely Joined, Social Computing, Social Software, Two-Way Web, User Generated Content, Web 2.0, Web 2.0 Platforms, Web as Platform, Web-Oriented Architecture (WOA), openid

Tags: Web, Information Technology, Crowdsourcing, Web OS, Channel Management, Marketing, Dion Hinchcliffe

These days in the halls of IT departments around the world there is a growing realization that the next wave of outsourcing, things like cloud computing and crowdsourcing, are going to require responses that will forever change the trajectory of their current relationship with the business, or finally cause them to be relegated as a primarily administrative, keep-the-lights-on function.

IT is going to either have to get more strategic to the business or get out of the way. Businesses too must grow a Web DNA. The proximal cause of this seems to be the growing domination of the global network that surrounds all businesses today: The Web. If you’ve read my writings here since 2006 you largely know what’s happening: Today’s highly evolved Web has grown far beyond its original roots in content distribution and communication. It has become a fully fledged platform for media (TV, movies, music, newspapers, gaming, etc. have been strongly disrupted by the Web and now largely reside there) as well as more strategic pursuits. Probably most significantly is computing in all its many forms. This ranges from low-level services such as raw compute power and storage to social computing, semantics, and collective intelligence.

But the advent of a Web OS is certainly not just an IT story. It’s also — and really mostly — a business story. Those who are trying to track the so-called “big shifts” in the 21st century, thinkers like John Hagel, are attempting to pin down the specific changes taking place in the world today. John recently noted that “we are moving from a relatively stable business environment to one characterized by rapid rates of change with ever more disruptions generating increasing uncertainty and unpredictability“. In this way, routinely transforming instability and rapid change from a threat (which it is to most businesses today) into opportunity is a core skill that organizations increasingly must be able to cultivate.

That much of the pace of change today is driven by the modern world’s pervasive and instant global flows of knowledge is largely due to influence of the Web and its billions of two-way touchpoints with nearly a third of the world’s population (including practically all of the developed world). In addition to ultra fast feedback loops that drive real-time action/response scenarios in the marketplace, the Web has also become an incredibly efficient, inexpensive, and easy-to-use delivery system for just about anything that an interface can be wrapped around.

This has created a new form of leverage in terms of the ability to change and adapt by tapping rapidly and deeply into on-demand resources (be they computing, data, or even people and ideas) in virtually real-time. A recent article in the Wall Street Journal noted that because of modern technology, particularly the Web, business “initiatives that used to take months and megabucks to coordinate and launch can often be started in seconds for cents.” Clearly, this is a brave new world, even if it’s one that’s still happening more on the edge than in the core of businesses today.

Web OS 2009: A Self-Organizing, Organic Cloud Computing Platform Nears the Tipping Point
WOA = Web-Oriented Architecture
CC/SRR = Creative Commons/Some Rights Reserved
AOP = Architectures of Participation

It’s a world where scarcity practically doesn’t exist and access to abundance is virtually free. It’s also true that the business models of the Web OS are only emerging as well. While monetization is prevalent for those consuming or participating in the Web OS, there is also a real and ongoing concern that it’s also the modern version of sharecropping. That traditional management approaches often don’t understand the nuances of these issues and aren’t designed to take advantage of this modern economic landscape, much less compete with a growing number of businesses that do, is a whole side story I’ll explore when I’m able. But it’s one in which the Web OS is increasingly forcing a serious reevaluation of modern business practices as well as the very notion of how an opportunity is defined, identified, and targeted.

What is the Web OS?

While there are multiple ways of looking at the Web as an operating system, from cloud environments that mimic a desktop operating system to sets of services packaged together and bundled as an individual product to companies, the largest — and the most significant — is the idea of an overarching and emergent Internet operating system. The data, services, and even communities of the Web are now programmatic and can be incorporated and remixed into any other business or product at will. The concept of a Web OS isn’t new. But its arrival on the scene in compelling form with serious impact to the enterprise is.

Over the last few years, as open APIs, social networking platforms, cloud computing, open identity services, sensor-driven databases (such as with GPS and OpenStreetMap), or even people (example: Amazon’s Mechanical Turk) have created open ecosystems in which anyone can participate, including business, both to contribute and to consume. The Web has become the ultimate outsourcing platform and one that is incredibly agile too, combined with economies of scale that are very hard to match. There are challenges too: Unpredictabilities and risks exist that must be dealt with both routinely and successfully.

But to perform well in this changing business environment organizations have to

Read the rest of this entry »

September 2nd, 2009

Enterprise 2.0: Finding success on the frontiers of social business

Posted by Dion Hinchcliffe @ 12:48 pm

Categories: Blogs, Business Process Management, Collaboration, Community, Enterprise 2.0, Enterprise Mashups, Enterprise Web 2.0, Enterprise Wikis, Governance, Mashups, Network Effects, Network effects, Situational Software, Social Computing, Social Software, Social media, Social networks, Web 2.0, Web 2.0 Platforms, Wikis

Tags: Social Computing, Enterprise 2.0, Tool, Organization, Enterprise Social Computing, Dion Hinchcliffe

It’s entirely possible something may cause social tools to abruptly stop their broad movement into the workplace, but history tells us that it’s just not likely. Success is in the eye of the beholder and with it often spawns a growing body of followers, adherents, acolytes, as well as nay-sayers that won’t be convinced until it’s an inescapable conclusion. In this very manner, at least so far, seems to go Enterprise 2.0, a moniker for corporate social software that has been inspired by widely popular online Web 2.0 tools such as blogs, wikis, social networks, and other social software.

As we’ll see, this is an intriguing case of a nascent business, social, and technology movement that seems to — despite some claims to the contrary — actually have had a rather humble and unheralded ascent while making surprisingly deep inroads in business including some higher profile successes. Make no mistake however, despite the apparent numbers, this is a movement that’s in its early days yet and which has years — if not a decade or more — before it has its largest impact.

What exactly the impact of Enterprise 2.0 will be however, has been the subject of an active and lively debate online over the last couple of weeks.

Uptake moving faster than absorption

My recent exploration of the potential causes of Enterprise 2.0 failures here on ZDNet managed to spark quite a discussion in the blogosphere about enterprise social computing and its overall appropriateness, motivations, and benefits to business. In particular, well-known contrarian Dennis Howlett weighed in last week with fairly severe criticism of Enterprise 2.0 which ultimately resulted in a direct response from Andrew McAfee today (who described it originally). For those wanting to follow the rest of the conversation, Paula Thornton probably did the best round-up of the discussion. The range of responses shows a wide variety of opinion reflecting both the scope and timeliness of this subject.

For my part, I would observe that the points that Dennis makes, while resounding with business importance (and being a bit disingenuous since I believe Dennis knows better given the information available), almost completely ignores the discussion and experiences with Enterprise 2.0 up to this point. This includes both the extensive efforts taking place in companies around the world right now as well as the already widespread nature of these tools. Far from being a solution waiting for some kind of business problem, at present Enterprise 2.0 describes a new way of working together that is already being used by millions of workers every day.

The State of Enterprise 2.0 for 2009: Trends, Statistics, Case Studies, and Facts
Figure 1: Stats, Adopters, and Motivation

That not every Enterprise 2.0 effort will benefit the business is also certainly true, as it’s occasionally misapplied and overused, like any new business or technology idea. However, the many people finding value in these tools today or who are working hard to make them successful are poorly served by broad generalizations, that for some reason, Enterprise 2.0 “is a crock.” That it’s not a well-known term is certainly true; most people using social tools at work are just doing it and not giving it a name. This does not distract from the numerous stories of success that have emerged over the last few years.

As JP Rangaswami pointed out recently, social computing is increasingly moving beyond the perception of being “interesting, but of no commercial value” and into a place where it’s thought to provide a range of bottom-line business results for most that apply it.

In working with and examining the results of many early Enterprise 2.0 efforts, I’ve been forced to come to the conclusion through repeated example that there is something fundamentally unique and powerful about social computing. Though not all uses of social tools result in rapid adoption or instant results, those that establish an early network effect can and do push existing IT systems (often ECM, knowledge management, and communication tools) into rapid irrelevance or completely upend and replace older, less dynamic databases or information repositories in surprisingly short amounts of time. That this almost always happens with just minor disruption is fascinating to me. And as we’ll see below, despite Dennis’ skepticism, these emergent tools have a rich and wide set of use cases. In the end, senior managers that may not “give a damn” about the emergent nature of the enterprise do in fact care about better ways of running their businesses.

That there is such a wide range of positions about Enterprise 2.0 from highly experienced people inside the worlds of technology and business is intriguing but probably inevitable due to the early stages of these changes and their rapid onset. In large part, I believe this is because of the distributed and muted nature of the information about what’s happening with social computing inside the workplace (this is in contrast with B2C-style corporate social media, which is still getting the lion’s share of buzz and attention right now.) Many projects are also adopting early advice and aren’t heralding the massive change that these tools may bring, are flying under the radar, and setting expectations low in a business world that is fatigued with the failures of big-bang IT. That adoption is happening as fast as is apparent today is intriguing given the warning that McAfee himself makes about expecting too much change from all of this:

[C]ertain E2.0 enthusiasts adopt the language of revolutionaries. They rail against the old corporate order and proclaim that they’re working for its downfall. They portray hierarchy, standardization, and management as enemies of innovation, creativity, and value creation. And they maintain that E2.0 is an unstoppable force that will only gain power as Millennials enter the workforce and that resistance to it is, ultimately, futile.

McAfee does point out that he indeed believes that those organizations without these tools will eventually fall behind, but he notes it generally won’t happen that quickly.

So while revolution is almost invariably not taking place in organizations adopting social computing tools, the pace of uptake has actually been quite impressive given the rate at which enterprises typically adopt new technologies (translation: usually with glacial pace compared to the consumer world). The numbers and profiles tell the story as you can see in the State of Enterprise 2.0 visual above. While a “disruptive revolution” is not what’s happening, and Enterprise 2.0 is certainly not inevitable for most organizations (yet), the adoption of the tools has in fact been taking place at what some would call near-revolutionary velocity, including the number of companies reporting they are consciously engaging in it as some level.

Although I’ve been following Enterprise 2.0 closely since 2006 and I’m generally known as an advocate, I should be clear that I’ve also tried very hard to be impartial and balanced (hence, for example, my Enterprise 2.0 failures post). No one is served by unrestrained hype. As much as possible, I have gathered data and examined the trends to see if indeed 1) the tools of Web 2.0 have begun to move into the enterprise and 2) improve business results. The first is now virtually a foregone conclusion; we are clearly beyond the

Read the rest of this entry »

August 21st, 2009

14 Reasons Why Enterprise 2.0 Projects Fail

Posted by Dion Hinchcliffe @ 12:03 pm

Categories: Architecture of Participation, Blogs, Collaboration, Community, Enterprise 2.0, Enterprise Web 2.0, Enterprise Wikis, Governance, Grassroots Community, Network Effects, Social Computing, Social Software, Web 2.0, Web 2.0 Platforms, Wikis

Tags: Project, Enterprise 2.0, Failure, Tool, Organization, Dion Hinchcliffe

Creating and nurturing a community is not something at which traditional stakeholders in software projects are often skilled. I’ve been having some very interesting conversations lately about Enterprise 2.0 failures with ZDNet colleague Michael Krigsman. He is doing research for his work on project failures in this area and is trying to understand the reasons why some Enterprise 2.0 initiatives don’t succeed. In preparing for our talk together, I ended up doing quite a bit of my own research and the results, at least for me, surfaced some fascinating stories and insights that are worth examining examining here in detail.

It’s a classic adage that we usually learn more from our failures than from our successes. Success itself has a palliative effect that makes one less introspective and over-confident of one’s methods. It obscures the feedback loops needed to really understand what worked and what didn’t. When you succeed at something, clearly what you did was effective, but you can never quite be as sure what it was as when something doesn’t work out. I’ve find this line of reasoning with Enterprise 2.0 failures to be fascinating because of how very different it’s often turning out to be from traditional IT projects.

For one, IT doesn’t seem to be in the driver’s seat nearly as much with Enterprise 2.0. In fact, the initiative is frequently coming from the business side. Two, as the latest case studies emerge and are analyzed, it is grassroots efforts that often end up being the most successful, bubbling up and then across the organization, only then to be formally adopted later. And three, many so-called Enterprise 2.0 projects are local, unblessed, informal uses of social computing software which — by their very nature — are less compliant with enterprise technology standards, legal/HR guidelines, and corporate policy. So, at least on its face, this seems to mean Enterprise 2.0 projects are more likely to fail due to seeming larger than usual lack of alignment and organizational backing.

Enterprise 2.0 Success Pattern: When Bottom-up Meets Top-Down

Intriguingly, that this is a bad thing is quite debatable in the case of Enterprise 2.0. In an ideal world, you’d like to see projects that aren’t successful fail quickly and not consume a huge investment of time and money before you discover that they aren’t going to produce value. The mantra here is “fail fast and often” and then look for the ones that don’t. Just as interesting, the projects that break the rules, can often break the right rules; the ones that were going to hold back the more structured and official efforts anyway. The point here is that many Enterprise 2.0 tools are often used widely in organizations without tacit approval.

Venture Model + Rogue IT = Enterprise 2.0 Success?

In other words, people are just grabbing tools off the Web and putting them to work, drawing their co-workers in as they begin to use them. As we saw this year, most organizations now have the tools of Enterprise 2.0: blogs, wikis, and social networks and the workers have access to them. The amount of rogue IT that actually takes place varies widely by organization, but seems to be on the rise particularly with social tools. Access to them is very easy via the Internet and I hear frequently now from organizations that this is happening.

Most of these smaller, on-the-ground, often under-funded Enterprise 2.0 efforts will fail to thrive for whatever reasons. These are useful experiments but they were missing

Read the rest of this entry »

August 18th, 2009

Using social software to reinvent the customer relationship

Posted by Dion Hinchcliffe @ 12:11 pm

Categories: Architecture of Participation, Business Models, Business Process Management, Collaboration, Collective Intelligence, Community, Convergence, Cost-effective scalability, Crowdsourcing, Customer Community, Customer Self-Service, Design Patterns, Encouraging Unintended Uses, Enterprise 2.0, Enterprise Web 2.0, Governance, Grassroots Community, Innovation marketplace, Network effects, Prediction markets, Social Computing, Social Media, Social Networking, Social Software, User Generated Content, Web 2.0, Web as Platform

Tags: Customer Service, Customer, Social Software, Tool, Organization, Web 2.0 Application, Productivity, Web 2.0, Product Marketing, Customer Relationship Management (CRM)

The elimination of decades of inadequate communication channels will suddenly unleash a tide of many opportunities, as well as challenges, for most organizations.As Web 2.0 applications move more deeply into the strategic operations of enterprises, a unique hybrid of social software has emerged to help businesses deal with the giant sea of customers that awaits them on the other side of the network. While Enterprise 2.0 tools, primarily aimed at collaboration, are certainly part of this story, they often don’t help companies enjoy the full range of possibilities when it comes customer-facing social computing.

Enter the rapidly emerging Social CRM space, an area that’s become significant enough that there’s now a dedicated blog on the subject here on ZDNet by the terrific Paul Greenberg.

This year’s rise of enterprise social computing is opening a new front line in many businesses where the old ways of engaging with customers is no longer sufficient or even competitive. Many organizations I talk to these days are now evaluating the way social software seems to be altering the CRM landscape. In particular, Social CRM has recently come into its own as a leading model for this transformation. For comparison’s sake, online customer communities were a very hot topic last year in this same space, but as I pointed out then, it was surprisingly hard to create them repeatably. My sense is that Social CRM will be a more predictable, reliable model for applying Web 2.0 to customer relationships using many of the strengths of the community model.

Read Michael Krigsman’s 3 Big Reasons CRM Initiatives Fail

This is not to say that many of the social media tools that companies have deployed already aren’t good examples of Social CRM. Many of them are and this highlights a major discussion in the blogosphere last week sparked by SocialText’s Ross Mayfield, who posited that with Social CRM, the people are the platform. The key point here is that where online tools let customers have a social relationship with a business — in other words, interaction that is visible to them and other customers whenever possible — then some Social CRM is taking place. Without a fundamentally community-based relationship, you’re just back to traditional, one-on-one push management of customers. This latter model, a closed and asocial mode of customer interaction, is the very antithesis of Social CRM.

Social CRM: It’s all about people

For its part, Social CRM paints a vision of creating a deeper and more engaging community-based relationship with your customers, instead of the traditional approach of managing them, in a very Cluetrain Manifesto way. Part online community, part crowdsourcing, part customer service, Social CRM can create an emergent, collaborative online partnership with customers that can result in an array of improvements to business performance.

Far from being just for the benefit of the business however, with Social CRM customers tend to 1) be much more in control, 2) are in sustained contact with the organizations they care about, and 3) can use self-service, mutually visible participation, collective history, and peer relationships to assist each other as much — and often much more — than the classic CRM model ever could.

The CRM Front Line: Social Customer Relationship Management (sCRM)

But like any composite, heterogeneous group of participants, Social CRM necessarily entails less deterministic control and outcomes. For example, these new Social CRM tools will let anyone ask a question publicly and anyone else in the community (customers or employees) answer it. Or provide a means to let new ideas flow in from the community in a very Dell IdeaStorm fashion. The question of who decides what the right “official” answer is, or which ideas will be selected and how non-employee submitters will be compensated are currently hard questions to answer for many organizations.

Then there is the challenge that by its very nature Social CRM is

Read the rest of this entry »

August 11th, 2009

Pragmatic new models for enterprise architecture take shape

Posted by Dion Hinchcliffe @ 3:25 pm

Categories: Badges, Business Models, Business Process Management, Collaboration, Community, Convergence, Crowdsourcing, Customer Self-Service, Design Patterns, Encouraging Unintended Uses, Enterprise 2.0, Enterprise Mashups, Enterprise Web 2.0, Gadgets, Grassroots Community, Lightweight Service Models, Mashups, Open APIs, Orchestration, Radical Decentralization, Right To Remix, SOA, Small Pieces, Loosely Joined, Social Computing, Social Software, Web 2.0, Web 2.0 Platforms, Web-Oriented Architecture (WOA), Widgets

Tags: Software, Enterprise Architecture, Organization, Strategy, Management, Dion Hinchcliffe

The best outcomes result naturally from self-organizing thought leaders in an organization that seek each other out and collaborate on shared solutions to their problems.Hear the words “enterprise architecture” and many people will turn away automatically. It’s not that they aren’t aware that technology drives so much of the modern world, they just think it doesn’t apply to what they do. The famous IT/business divide is too often kept this way because of mutual incomprehension, not-invented-here thinking, and apparently incompatible mindsets. However, this is beginning to change.

High technology continues to relentlessly pervade practically every aspect of today’s business world, prescribing what is potentially possible and often conferring enormous leverage when harnessed fully. But it has been the advent of the Web 2.0 era and its inexorable movement (some might even say infiltration) into the workplace that is making traditional IT — and the master planning version of it, enterprise architecture — an entirely new beast by popularizing simple, egalitarian tools and approaches that can be understood and applied more easily and quickly by a broad audience across most organizations.

Increasingly, in some IT departments and business units around the world, a closer new relationship is forming in which technology is deeply interwoven into continuous joint business processes of creation, change, and adaptation. Like so many grassroots tech culture movements, this one doesn’t yet have a formal name, but increasingly some are calling it emergent architecture.

The first seeds of this change began to be felt with advent of agile development processes a few years ago along with the subsequent rise of software mashups, and the popularity of user-distributable widgets, badges, and gadgets. These technology approaches combined with emerging business trends such as tacit interactions and pull-based systems driven from with bottom-up within organizations, particularly when co-existing with social computing and Enterprise 2.0.

The result: A new environment for creating technology-driven business solutions using different, more open communication channels with richer information and ground truth as well as significantly more adaptive technology elements often strongly influenced by the Web 2.0 world.

Meeting in the middle: Emergent Architecture

In recent years enterprise architecture has been moving from a discipline that provides top-down, a priori technology blueprints to the business side to one that articulates key, strategic possibilities and only the most critical high-level constraints (such as security standards) and then operates as a conductor, promoter, problem solver, and evangelist across the organization through the vehicle of a cohesive community to co-develop needed solutions.

Emergent Architecture: Rethinking Enterprise Architecture for the 21st Century

When I wrote that most organizations were badly in need of a technology and software process “angioplasty” a few years ago, I highlighted the trends that will increasingly drive the agenda for new initiatives and projects when it comes to the strategic application of technology to business:

  • Individuals and interactions over processes and tools
  • Working software over comprehensive documentation
  • Customer collaboration (internal or external) over contract negotiation
  • Responding to change over following a plan

This is more true than it’s ever been and has been contributing to a growing discontinuity in the way that enterprise architecture will be conducted in the future. Going away are overly formal procedures, detailed technology prescriptions, complex software frameworks, and dreaded compliance checks. Replacing them are highly collaborative, adaptive processes, technology opportunism, simple (frequently Web-oriented) technologies, and dynamic — even spontaneous responses — to organizational and marketplace needs.

Enterprise architects of the near future will still dispense clear guidance that carries the requirements of the entire organization with it, but it will be appropriately broad and EAs will actively help tailor it to local needs across the organization. Self-service IT will become much more common as workers are comfortable using today’s extremely easy-to-use, adaptive, and flexible tools, many of them using Web 2.0 ideas such as simple, open architectures and malleable pieces and parts, especially open APIs, and even new, open business models such as crowdsourcing and community-based involvement.

While organizations such as Gartner are just beginning to map this trend, there’s increasingly little doubt that the infamous chasm that often disconnects IT and business is being crossed in many quarters by business users unafraid of today’s populist technologies combined with IT practitioners that strongly desire to solve immediate and important business problems. That today’s collaborative and communication technologies in the workplace are much more open, social and collaborative than they were even a couple of years ago are likely to be

Read the rest of this entry »

Dion HinchcliffeAn internationally recognized enterprise architect and business strategist, Dion Hinchcliffe has been working for two decades with leading-edge methods to accelerate project schedules and raise the bar for software quality. You can follow Dion on Twitter.

See his full profile and disclosure of his industry affiliations.

Email Dion Hinchcliffe

Subscribe to Enterprise Web 2.0 via Email alerts or RSS.

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

Recent Entries

Most Popular Posts

Premier Vendor Content Whitepapers, webcasts & resources from our Power Center Sponsors

Archives

ZDNet Blogs

White Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

Meet Doc

  • Here to help you with your Document Management Needs
  • Doc is an enigma. Born to a Russian ballerina and a German electrical engineer, he grew up in various locations in the United States. He’s seen the insides of more brands, versions, and generations of printer and printer-related hardware than almost anyone.
  • To learn more about this mysterious figure check out his blog on ZDNet and his Workspace on TechRepublic. You’ll be glad you did.
  • Produced by
    ZDNet and