1

Enterprise 2.0 Chapters 3 & 4

Presenters: William Caputo Ryan BarrMatthew Piatko

Presentation OverviewChapter 3 -Web 2.0 and the Emergence of Emergence

Web 2.0Enterprise 2.0

Chapter 4 The Concept of Tie StrengthEnterprise 2.0 Bull’s EyePoor Tools and New ToolsConverting Potential TiesInteractions between strangers

ConclusionQ & A

Chapter 3

Web 2.0Web 2.0 is not mere “hype.” The new tools of Web 2.0 are applicable to

VistaPrint, Serena, the U.S. intelligence community, and Google.

 New resources and communitiesWikipediaDelicious

Web 2.0Web 2.0 began with a conference brainstorming

session between O’Reilly and MediaLive International.

O’Reilly examined the following organizations:WikipediaFacebook and MySpaceDeliciousYou Tube and FlickrBlogger and TypepadGoogleCraigslist

Web 2.0Web 2.0 is the business revolution in this

computer industry caused by the move to the Internet as platform, and an attempt to understand the rules for success on that new platform. Chief among those rules is this: Build applications that harness network effects to get better the more people use them.

This definition highlights the network effect: the fact that some resources, like telephone networks and person-to-person auction Web Sites, become more valuable to each member as they attract more and more members.

Enterprise 2.0Enterprise 2.0 is the phenomenon that occurs

when organizations adopt the tools and approaches of Web 2.0.

Underlying trends of Enterprise 2.0Free and Easy Platforms for Communication

and InteractionA lack of Imposed StructureMechanisms to Let Structure Emerge

Free and Easy Platforms for Communication and Interaction

Popular collaboration technologies (Channels):E-mailMobile phone textingSome types of IM

Information sent via channels isn’t widely visible, consultable, or searchable.

Platforms, alternative to channels, are simply collections of digital content where contributions are globally visible and persistent

A lack of Imposed StructureThe goal was to avoid structure. Structure

means:Workflows – The steps needed to accomplish a

piece of work. Decision Rights – who has the authority,

permission, power, or ability to do various things?

Interdependencies - Who will work together and what will their relationships be.

Information – What data will be included, how it will be formatted and displayed, and how data elements will relate to one another…

A lack of Imposed StructureThe author used the Wikipedia example. At

first, Wikipedia was very structured. However, after 18 months and $250,000, there were only 12 articles. Wikipedia then loosened their control measures.

From January 15 to January 31, 617 articles were created. By the end of the year, there were over 19,000 articles.

The authors also noted the Delicious example. Delicious allowed users to develop their own taxonomies. (This was different than Yahoo.)

Mechanisms to Let Structure EmergeWeb 1.0 search engines used a process called Web-

crawling, which is a process of visiting as many websites as possible and analyzing their metadata.

This process had two major problems1. What do you do when there are two web sites on the same

topic2. This process relies on web sites having the correct metadata.

Google was developed by two Stanford students to overcome these problems.

Emergence is the appearance of global structure as the results of local interactions.

Folksonomy a categorization system developed over time by folks. It is an alternative to taxonomy.

Mechanisms to Let Structure EmergeTagging like linking fulfils the standard criteria

for emergenceIts conducting by many agents spread all over a

digital platform like the InternetThese agents are acting independently and with

great autonomy. Agents are also acting in their own self-interest.

Tagging has spread to popular Web 2.0 sites such as YouTube and Facebook.

Emergent social software platforms (ESSPs) ESSPs share SLATES attributes.

SLATES AttributesSearch – Users must be able to find what they

are looking for. Links – Links allow search engines like Google to

work. Authoring – Blogs and Wikipedia has

demonstrated that people want to author. Tags - FolksonomyExtensions – smart computers do some of the

categorizing for you. Signals – Technology allows users to know when

new content is available.

Enterprise 2.0This background allows a more precise

definition of Enterprise 2.0 – is the use of emergent social software platforms by organizations in pursuit of their goals.

It is also important for organizations to define the ground rules of the community so that members interact with one another in a positive way.

These ground rules fall into two groups: informal norms and formal policies and guidelines.

Chapter 4

The Concept of Tie StrengthESSPs purpose is to support ties that are

strong or aimed at ones weak or nonexistentHawthorne studies

Used as a template for future workHawthorne effect

Outputs, interactions, attitudes in assembly workers

Fiction has built on the aspect of small groups of colleagues and their activities and interations

The Concept of Tie Strength, cont.Mark Granovetter

“The Strength of Weak Ties,” referred to as SWT Acquaintances (weak ties) are less likely to be socially

involved with each other than close friends (strong ties)

These acquaintances provide bridges to other sets of close friends

Weak ties, not strong ties, provide a better bridge These bridges gather information and solve problems

Ideal situation for knowledge workers is to have core strong ties with many weak ties

The Concept of Tie Strength, cont.Ronald Burt, “Structural Holes”

Defined as: a separation between nonredundant contacts; or contacts that don’t “lead to the same people, and so provide the same information benefits”

These holes need people to fill them to support the flow of information

Unspanned structural holes are detrimental for enterprises

The Enterprise 2.0 Bull’s-Eye

StrongTies

The Enterprise 2.0 Bull’s-Eye, cont.Potential – Structural holes exist between a

knowledge worker and other employeesCauses redundancy, reinventing the wheel

Potential ties > weak ties > strong ties

Poor Tools for Important JobsTools aimed at the third bull’s-eye ring

Directories – organizational white pages Key information no supplied

Document repositories – common of knowledge workers, like lawyers, that create documents Those within the organization can search the repository Documents focus primarily on content, not potential ties

Automated tie suggesters – IT that monitors knowledge workers computer activities (e-mail) Links those with similar patterns to form a tie Privacy concerns, not widely adopted

New Tools for Strongly Tied ColleaguesWiki’s – supports strong ties

Solves the version control and simultaneous editing problems

Minimizes or eliminates hierarchical structure in knowledge management

Implemented in the engineering department at VistaPrint to facilitate knowledge management

New Tools for Weakly Tied ColleaguesFacebook used to build a stronger corporate culture

at SerenaFacebook allowed people to create a network to

know what people were doing and provide their own updates

Updates by people could be used as context for communication

Facebook provided a medium for the hiring processFacebook was chosen over other social networking

software (SNS) for its focus on the second ring of the bull’s-eye

Converting Potential TiesESSPs are used to convert potential ties to

actual tiesBlogs and wikisKnowledge in content and linksA mature community will change the nature of

intelligence foreverAdapt rapidly to environments

Converting Potential TiesThe nature of Intellipedia:

Work at the broadest possible audienceWork Topically, not organizationallyReplace Existing Processes

Converting Potential TiesEven when information is tacit, the IC can

give you contact information of an expertThis links people that would have never met

Interactions Between StrangersBuilding the prediction team at Google

Linked strangers in the company to one idea“Got the ball rolling” for a knowledge initiativeVery powerful for networking

People with no link can productively interact and generate valuable information

ConclusionESSPs are not the sameESSPs will act differently across

organizationsESSPs are useful in a variety of waysESSPs are useful at different levels of the

knowledge worker bulls-eye