This content has been marked as final. Show 14 replies
For me? As of today it means translating nebulous marketing talk into concrete plans and product, centered in the Content Management/WCM/Portal space but spreading to all other portions of the Oracle product line.
It means using tags, metatags, & metadata to take us beyond the 2 dimensional world of Microsoft Folders as a way of viewing the world and it's information.
It means chating, but in the contex of what I am working on, and dynamically changing my presence and who I'm open to chat with at a given moment based on what I'm interacting with.
It means Web Conferences not in Webex or Web Conference but maybe in Second Life or World or Warcraft, where we can meet at the bar/lounge after the presentation and discuss in small dynamic groups the topics presented. Webcams providing facial expressions to our avatars.
It means using tools like Piclens to surf for that Powerpoint Presentation I'm looking for or that image I want to add to my presentation.
It means content rating in more than one dimension. Where both quality and perspective can be interpreted quickly and visually.
Stay tuned! Don't touch that remote!
Well said, David.
The nebulousness you mention may be unavoidable given the breadth and variety of technologies and concepts under the Web 2.0/Enterprise 2.0 umbrella. If anything, those terms provide a convenient label, a tag, if you will, to attach to all that stuff.
That stuff, as your comment illustrates, adds up to a new approach that changes how people relate to technology. That evolving relationship has changed and will continue to change how people relate, individually and collectively, to information. And that, in turn, changes our very perception of information.
Web 2.0 -- and it's behind-the-firewall implementation -- represents a substantial leap forward in the usability of the technological tools we rely on to derive and increase the value of information. The evolution of that usability will continue to shift the focus from "Information Technology" to "Information."
I want to be contentious here, so I won't hold back, don't mean to offend, so apologise if offense is taken, but this is an important question to me, which I'm very passionate about.
First, although the question is okay, it shouldn't be: what does E2.0 mean to you? It should simply be what does E2.0 mean? It's our job to get this right, and I'm not going to have my personal E2.0 world, we (Oracle) is going to create an E2.0 product, WebCenter that is going to try to hit the nail on the head. The question is what should this look like exactly for the next while...
E2.0 should be about...
Removal of personal hard drives...in E2.0 no one should have any data stored on their laptop for personal use only. All intelligence/data/information should be organized in the corporate portal. This will help with employee turn over, bringing people up to speed quickly, etc... Based on their 'role' in the organization, they would have a predefined portal experience that is the same as other people in their role. That portal should be created by the people in that role to have the short cuts, groups, etc, that are relevant to that role. Not relevant to that person...this is crucial. Individuals don't matter anymore in the sense that they have info that others don't. All of their info should be dumped into the company portal.
People should be ranked by what they do. (this is the BEA Pathways product). When you write a white paper that others find useful, your rank should go up. Your annual appraisal will be based solely on your portal ranking.
All communication will be tracked and stored so it can be reused. When you talk on your IP phone the conversation will be recorded, automatically converted to searchable text with voice recognition and stored for full text searching, same with IM chats, email, etc... We need to surface all the information that happens in an organization, period, no more hiding of information.
Sensitive information will be encrypted, but by being encrypted we'll feel more comfortable with sharing it, because we'll use the IRM tool from Stellent, so we can revoke privileges from off-boarded employees.
The corporate firewall will come down to the degree that we need to have better communication with our customers, partners, etc... They will be happy when they can find us, instead of us hiding...isn't it annoying when a customer rep won't email you because of fear of legal discovery, because they are too afraid of being sued! People need to be held accountable and empowered to share information...the customers will love it and be loyal, otherwise they'll find a company that can do that. Plus the info you provide to the customer will all be stored inside the corporate repository anyway and be signed off for approval.
We will be able to contact anyone, anytime they are available. Click to call, that is when we see someone is online, all we have to do is click their name and we are talking/video chating with them instantly. We'll know when people are available with presence. That is like in instant messaging when you say you are available, busy, away etc...
These things are straightforward concept and available today. We don't need crazy visualization techniques like second life etc...that is video game crap. We don't need avatars...we need to be able to access information, period, that is it, that is all that is important, and we need to capture it for reuse...so when I tell you the answer on the phone, that question is answered for all time for everyone...it's just that simple.
All the appropriate technolgies deal with these two factors. Save the info, and give the creator of the info credit for it. Wiki's, blogs, im, are all aspects of this same thing. Simple search results are adequate for finding these items. Present them in a simple way. We just need to read some text to get the info. People tag good text, whoever wrote that good text gets elevated in his/her rankings, in the future stuff written by that person automatically is easier to find because they are a conscientious contributor.
This is massive...the technology is simple, but this means that individual smart people will get incented and everyone will benefit.
It really isn't that complicated, but the ramifications are completely profound. Don't wander off and imagine crazy visualization techniques...it's not that. Look at Google, it's the least gussied up search results engine out there...and that's the point...it's not all the dazzle and colors that matter, in fact they get in the way, it's the appropriate information. In web land Google simply used the number of references to a web page to see how appropriate or high on the search results it should get. This is the same simple principles...but how profound.
If the way I phrased the question got you to write this much, Fenton, then I'd say I got it exactly right. Thanks for your insightful response!
For my part, I'm kind of tired of the term "Web 2.0" because it's too limiting, and I think we've blown past whatever Web 2.0 was anyway. The Web itself is huge, nebulous, highly organic, and evolving at an ever-accelerating pace. Assigning version numbers as if it was some kind of software product is as pointless as scuba gear on a mountain climber. The bottom line with the Web is that there's only Today and Tomorrow.
So let's take the conversation in a slightly different direction. What are you doing today to get to tomorrow? What tools are you using? What challenges have you encountered?
Touche! I guess you did get the question right! ;)
First we need the reference architecture and tools involved. I'm trying to get this information, but unfortunately, can't get it quick enough.
Quick intro, I was a stellent consultant for 8 years, and this was entirely by accident. I had no intentions of devoting years of my life to content management, in fact when I first started, I had just done some cutting edge work with JSP's, back in 1999, so to arrive and see the presentation layer was a proprietary scripting language, has plagued me for all those 8 years. I just couldn't work up any enthusiasm for something that I couldn't set a proper breakpoint in and inspect the state of the code. Regardless, I'm completely thrilled now that we have some more standards based UI layers, read ALUI. Completely thrilled that Oracle's motto contains the word OPEN. And I have always been passionate about the meaning of the web...which is people power enabled by technology. So I'm tickled pink to be evangelising in this area. Finally, my job is to build delivery capability around ECM/E2.0 in APAC. So, although I love theory, I need to be practical and get this stuff done! ;)
So back to your question...
Reference architecture, platform, VM, etc... should be checked into Fusion Factory so anyone could download it. Just emailed Billy Cripe and he said he is working on getting it into Fusion Factory.
Then the next step is learning the technologies.
Then we clarify what are the selling features, needs, etc... so that we don't sell technology but solve problems customers have.
Really, I don't feel like I have much more that I can contribute, beyond ideas at this point until I get my hands dirty with the technology... I'll report back when I get some traction there.
" We don't need crazy visualization techniques like second life etc...that is video game ****. We don't need avatars..."
Ahh! we are behind the times Fenton!
Scientific and medical conferences are already popping up on Second Life. And publications such as The Economist are reporting on it and it's advantages...
Well I chuckled when I saw who DBJ was! ;)
You are right when you say I'm behind the times. I wonder if we will see anything like this... I love to eat my own words...because some of those avatars...thinking Jessica Rabbit... make working behind the computer a lot more fun! ;) I wonder tho, if that isn't E3.0 stuff ?
Glad you and Billy, keep pushing the envelope...we need more visionaries! ;)
Here are my 5 cents to this discussion.
What does Web 2.0 mean to me? First of all I think it stands for the evolution of the web in general. To me it's just an alias for the web as it is today. It covers various aspects: technological aspects like pervasive access, software technology, frameworks, standards etc. and user aspects. The way we use the internet now is totally different from how we've used it 10 years ago. The information flood is rising day by day and along with it new organizational paradigms evolve from a management perspective. Today we'll find more and more contributive users telling us about their knowledge, interests, personal ideas - regardless of wanted or not. Now we see communities evolving sharing the same knowledge, interests, ideas, and so on. They create their own way of communicating through their platforms (Wikis, Blogs, Discussions etc.). The information landscape is not mainly centrally managed anymore (as it was a few years ago). Once we had traditional editor roles for publishing information for the rest of the world. Now we have more and more end users publishing and managing their own content.
We can state that by connecting end users and evolving communities we can see now a so called collective intelligence being accessible for others. This is a new web paradigm which has been developed throughout the past (and will go on)! What would a developer do today w/o having access to blogs and forums?
Okay, optimists call it 'collective intelligence', pessimists will call it 'collective mediocrity' or 'simplemindedness' if you look at Youtube & Co. It's up to you which side your on. I call it a great chance and it's got a label. WEB 2.0.
Very interesting thread. Fenton as usual has a way with words. (I happen to like Jessica Rabit). Anyway...
While the avitars and so forth are cool, I agree with Fenton in that simple is better. Why are these organizations DBJ mentions using the fancy collaboration sites? Because they already exist, they are cool, and likely, they are inexpensive and hosted by someone else.
It was also mentioned above, that we are looking inside the firewall. I disagree there. Yes E2.0 is all about the enterprise, but having just come off of an engagement at a major US University, I can tell you that the enterprise there is the staff, faculty, students and registered parents. Where do you put the firewall in that one?
Leave out the firewall part. E or W, it all boils down to the same thing. It is no longer enough to have web pages, static or dynamic. Consumers want to know what others think, whether it is a resturant review or a white paper. They want to comment on Fenton's rant. They want to rate Bob's question. The technophile wants cool. The practical wants information. I vote practical to begin with.xxxc
What we have to do, as Fenton points out, is to state what the parts are, and how they go together in the most effective manner; inside the firewall, outside the firewall, AND both.
Bob Rhubart wrote:OK. We now have solid experience in what happens [ when Web 2.0 meets the enterprise.|http://lmgtfy.com/?q=My+Oracle+Support+%2Bproblems]
When Web 2.0 meets the enterprise, is it a convergence? A confluence? A collision? A leap forward in collaboration or an invitation to chaos? I have yet to talk to anyone in IT who doesn't have an opinion on this issue. Here's the soapbox. Step right up.
theparallaxview wrote:As is apparent from the time stamps, this discussion has been slow to develop. But now is as good a time as any to throw business issues into the mix.
Interesting discussion. It's very tech heavy though and not much discussion of the business side or E 2.0 as a collaboration tool and business transformation agent. Is this because this discussion is just between IT people, at least until now?....
On that note, Andy Mulholland frequently addresses the business side of E2.0 in his CTO blog on the Capgemini site: http://www.capgemini.com/ctoblog/ .
And just last week James McGovern had a great post on the subject: http://duckdown.blogspot.com/2010/04/enterprise-architecture-and-social-crm.html.
With a few exceptions, the vast majority of enterprise architects I know spend an awful lot of time focused on internal issues whether it is rationalization, the cloud, storage governance, data center consolidation, creation of reference architectures, portfolio management and other considerations that aren’t even visible to customers. One should ask whether IT can be truly successful if we are busy listening to the business but otherwise are blissfully ignorant towards the customers they serve.