Comments on: How does social software get in an organization? http://www.crisscrossed.net/2008/02/25/how-does-social-software-get-in-an-organization/ Exploring the web for change. Connecting people and ideas. Sun, 29 Jan 2012 11:55:13 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3-aortic-dissection By: ckorakas http://www.crisscrossed.net/2008/02/25/how-does-social-software-get-in-an-organization/comment-page-1/#comment-303 ckorakas Fri, 04 Apr 2008 14:21:26 +0000 http://www.crisscrossed.net/2008/02/25/how-does-social-software-get-in-an-organization/#comment-303 Web 2.0 will always come through the "window" so to speak ... Entrenched organisations like mine (European Commission) not allowing users to chat over Lan or use skype and the rest, requiring you to provide password to go out on the Internet, are increasingly faced with a situation where users , a very rapidly part of which are already using web2.0 in their out-of-work daily lives, will join up web based communities (facebook and others) to keep in touch with other colleagues and friends. The commission network of facebook (requires a valid Commission mail to register) counts already over 3500 members ... Web2.0 is also used in many cases to facilitate their work. Lacking flexible and versatile tools, the most advanced users will use Google Docs for collaborative drafting of documents and yahoo groups to maintain online work groups ... The risk is of course very high in terms of confidentiality ... If the right tools are not provided inside ... they will be found outside... Web 2.0 will always come through the “window” so to speak …

Entrenched organisations like mine (European Commission) not allowing users to chat over Lan or use skype and the rest, requiring you to provide password to go out on the Internet, are increasingly faced with a situation where users , a very rapidly part of which are already using web2.0 in their out-of-work daily lives, will join up web based communities (facebook and others) to keep in touch with other colleagues and friends. The commission network of facebook (requires a valid Commission mail to register) counts already over 3500 members …
Web2.0 is also used in many cases to facilitate their work. Lacking flexible and versatile tools, the most advanced users will use Google Docs for collaborative drafting of documents and yahoo groups to maintain online work groups …
The risk is of course very high in terms of confidentiality …
If the right tools are not provided inside … they will be found outside…

]]> By: Peter-Anthony Glick http://www.crisscrossed.net/2008/02/25/how-does-social-software-get-in-an-organization/comment-page-1/#comment-241 Peter-Anthony Glick Sun, 02 Mar 2008 11:13:39 +0000 http://www.crisscrossed.net/2008/02/25/how-does-social-software-get-in-an-organization/#comment-241 Good post Christian. You mention culture as an important factor and that is absolutely correct. In organizations were knowledge-sharing is not the norm (and that is I'm afraid still the majority) the best way in for social software is bottom up. Well, it does'nt have to "go up" at first, an Web 2.0 should spread horizontally until it reaches a critical mass for the CTO/CIO to notice it. Then, what should happen is for the best Web 2.0 tools to get a diserved recognition, get an "Enterprise 2.0 tool" status and be deployed (top-down this time) in the organization. I wrote about it recently (http://leveragingknowledge.blogspot.com) Peter Good post Christian. You mention culture as an important factor and that is absolutely correct. In organizations were knowledge-sharing is not the norm (and that is I’m afraid still the majority) the best way in for social software is bottom up. Well, it does’nt have to “go up” at first, an Web 2.0 should spread horizontally until it reaches a critical mass for the CTO/CIO to notice it. Then, what should happen is for the best Web 2.0 tools to get a diserved recognition, get an “Enterprise 2.0 tool” status and be deployed (top-down this time) in the organization.
I wrote about it recently (http://leveragingknowledge.blogspot.com)
Peter

]]> By: ckreutz http://www.crisscrossed.net/2008/02/25/how-does-social-software-get-in-an-organization/comment-page-1/#comment-233 ckreutz Fri, 29 Feb 2008 07:48:49 +0000 http://www.crisscrossed.net/2008/02/25/how-does-social-software-get-in-an-organization/#comment-233 To my experience so far often IT personnel has comprehensive knowledge of the technology behind social software but very limited experience (and interest) in the communication and knowledge sharing. But that isn't there job anyway I guess. I also think it is best if employees introduce it themselves, however, I believe there is a lack of social media "experts". With web2.0 finally new demands of skills are needed. but rarely existing in many organizations. For example: Online community facilitation, wiki gardening etc. To my experience so far often IT personnel has comprehensive knowledge of the technology behind social software but very limited experience (and interest) in the communication and knowledge sharing. But that isn’t there job anyway I guess. I also think it is best if employees introduce it themselves, however, I believe there is a lack of social media “experts”. With web2.0 finally new demands of skills are needed. but rarely existing in many organizations. For example: Online community facilitation, wiki gardening etc.

]]> By: Joitske http://www.crisscrossed.net/2008/02/25/how-does-social-software-get-in-an-organization/comment-page-1/#comment-232 Joitske Fri, 29 Feb 2008 07:41:21 +0000 http://www.crisscrossed.net/2008/02/25/how-does-social-software-get-in-an-organization/#comment-232 I wonder whether besides top-down bottom-up it is not an important distinction whether employees or management are introducing it. And what about the role of the IT department or people with a special role in introducing technology? You could probably say a lot more about all kind of change processes. Seems nothing much is written about that? I wonder whether besides top-down bottom-up it is not an important distinction whether employees or management are introducing it. And what about the role of the IT department or people with a special role in introducing technology? You could probably say a lot more about all kind of change processes. Seems nothing much is written about that?

]]> By: ckreutz http://www.crisscrossed.net/2008/02/25/how-does-social-software-get-in-an-organization/comment-page-1/#comment-228 ckreutz Thu, 28 Feb 2008 19:38:40 +0000 http://www.crisscrossed.net/2008/02/25/how-does-social-software-get-in-an-organization/#comment-228 Thanks Kevin for your remark. Yes I agree ASPs play a significant role. Richard Dennison discuss this in his post a bit further: http://richarddennison.wordpress.com/2008/01/02/what-is-an-intranet-2/ Thanks Kevin for your remark. Yes I agree ASPs play a significant role. Richard Dennison discuss this in his post a bit further: http://richarddennison.wordpress.com/2008/01/02/what-is-an-intranet-2/

]]> By: Kevin http://www.crisscrossed.net/2008/02/25/how-does-social-software-get-in-an-organization/comment-page-1/#comment-227 Kevin Wed, 27 Feb 2008 23:34:48 +0000 http://www.crisscrossed.net/2008/02/25/how-does-social-software-get-in-an-organization/#comment-227 Let's not forget ASPs (application service providers) that were all the rage a while back. I think what we are seeing now is an entrenchment of company sensitive, mission critical stuff behind the corporate firewalls while less "sensitive" applications are outsourced to "ASPs" (an unfortunate acronym!). So, much of the web2.0 stuff that people might like to develop - which is by its nature collaborative, especialy with external organisations - does not, per se, fall into the same category as company sensitive, internal data. So it's not surprising that such applications do not have the same strictures applied and can therefore be outsourced (while still respecting privacy laws, of course). Let’s not forget ASPs (application service providers) that were all the rage a while back. I think what we are seeing now is an entrenchment of company sensitive, mission critical stuff behind the corporate firewalls while less “sensitive” applications are outsourced to “ASPs” (an unfortunate acronym!).

So, much of the web2.0 stuff that people might like to develop – which is by its nature collaborative, especialy with external organisations – does not, per se, fall into the same category as company sensitive, internal data. So it’s not surprising that such applications do not have the same strictures applied and can therefore be outsourced (while still respecting privacy laws, of course).

]]>