Enterprise 2.0: Is it also Knowledge Management 2.0?

The Information Advisor recently published a useful article, Enterprise 2.0: Is it Knowledge Management by Another Name? Disclosure - they interviewed me as part of the article ☺ - and then used some of my comments. Specifically, they said that enterprise 2.0 as a term seems to be sticking, it is not web 2.0, there is a useful role for social activities at work, and enterprise 2.0 tools need to be developed to solve business problems. This last issue is critical in making tool selections. You need to be certain that the enterprise 2.0 tool provider is not simply bringing a web 2.0 tool into the enterprise. I also said that enterprise 2.0 is an opportunity for knowledge management professionals and corporate librarians to take a leadership role into making sure these tools are selected and used properly. BTW - I think the answer to the question in the title of this post is - yes - but enterprise 2.0 is also more than KM.

The article has a nice review of the Awareness platform that I have written about a number of times, including some of their enterprise 2.0 success stories. There is a good case study of one of their clients, Sg2, a US healthcare information intelligence organization. There is much more in the article. I have only hit a few highlights. Thanks to the Awareness people for posting it on their site.

Comments

[David Gurteen]

Hi Bill,

I for for one think it is :-) See:

http://www.gurteen.com/gurteen/gurteen.nsf/id/km-goes-social

David :-)

[Bill Ives]

David

Thanks for your comment and link. I agree that I do not like the term KM 2.0 or Social KM. There is no need to rename it. I think that enterprise 2.0 is enough labeling and KM can make use of it and fit within it. I do think that enterprise 2.0 is allowing us to achieve more of the original vision of KM and I am excited about what is happening in this space. (Note - I did not like KM and E 2.0 as terms either but they have stuck and you have to call them something so I do use these terms.)

Bill

[Kevin LaHaise]

Bill - this post is great. It's always good to see someone taking the emphasis off of names. Specifically nice to see that you call out E 2.0 as just a name for something that needs one. The bigger point is certainly the enterprise-level collaboration that you're discussing - and the name has little to do with the value that it delivers to any business. As an example, semantic web will run into the inevitable title of "Web 3.0" - which is obviously a pathetic description of the actual value that it brings to the table.

Perhaps we'll see better names at some point. But, then again, if a name said it all, we wouldn't have much to discuss!

Looking forward to your coverage of Serena!

[Bill Ives]

Kevin - Thanks. Perhaps the semantic web might keep its name since it has been used for so long. I often use the term participatory web for web 2.0 but it is too late for that to work and it is more complex to say. It could also be the social web. Someone with authority should have a contest to replace web 2.0. Bill

[סופר דסק]

I need to be certain that the business software company is not simply providing a web software into the business. I also need that business information administration experts and business librarians to take a authority factor into generating sure these methods are chosen and used effectively.