Why Enterprises Can't Embrace 2.0
At Media Transparent, I discuss Barriers to Enterprise 2.0 in a slideshow.
As large organizations, enterprises have huge knowledge management challenges due to eroded communication channels among disparate groups. The social media facilitates the opening of those channels, but at the cost of making the communication across a massive web of channels public. Yet, the writing is on the wall. It's not worth spending big enterprise software dollars for a knowledge management system that, due to the pace of today's social media, could be obsolete within a few years, and then train employees (and outside partners) to use it. Eventually these systems just aren't used to the extent of broad-population applications like del.icio.us or Google Reader for bookmarking relevant news and data for knowledge management purposes. It's much easier for enterprises to get their employees onto an open system of applications including del.icio.us and Google Reader because these applications have become standards. The applications will evolve to broad market demands and remain relevant, and finally, they are free.
Yes, when it's necessary to keep corporate data behind a curtain, employees can use enterprise knowledge management apps, but it's inevitable that open systems add more value because everybody associated or networked with the enterprise can participate within these open systems. And that will make the enterprise more transparent.
I work for a small firm (less than 10 employees) and I prefer to use the free applications provided by large companies like Google. It keeps costs down, and when I need something new developed in my app, it seems like a company like Google has already thought about it.
I'm all for the open systems.
Reply to this
Pat
Perhaps we should revisit the Failed Promise of Real Estate 2.0
http://blog.homegain.com/failed-promise-Real-Estate-2-0
In that blog post I discussed the failures of the medium. I think however it is and will be a failure for enterprises, but for individuals a boon.
We see 2.0 companies now trying to expand their financial reach by creating ad networks.
I posted this over on Joel's Future of Real Estate Marketing blog:
Selling ads around realtor content (listings)is a losing proposition.
Since when are ads inspiring? Isn’t the public’s aversion to ads the reason for the rise of TIVO?
Given that a web site with “just” five million visitors can’t generate significant revenue, is it any surprise that we see the rush to form “ad networks”?
Newsflash - we already have doubleclick, valueclick,tribal fusion and counteless others much more developed ad networks. And don’t forget the ad networks of Google Yahoo and MSN.
Do we need more?
Reply to this
Hi Louis, finishing up my post-Blogworld activities. I agree ad networks really only work with top well trafficked sites and as would be expected in a fairly mature industry, I'm assuming 90% of the ads are displayed at top ad networks like DoubleClick, ValueClick, etc. It will be a slog for new ad networks to break in. And you're right, ads are commercials...
Reply to this