This is the first post in which I answer questions that were submitted but not answered during our webinar on Enterprise 2.0. (The recorded webinar and Market IQ report can be downloaded.)
We had over 500 register for the webinar, and were very encouraged by the mix of questions submitted, spread across business, culture and technology issues (like Enterprise 2.0 itself.)
I will continue to post questions and answers here, until all outstanding questions have been answered.
Q: As a Records manager, this strikes fear in my heart! Do ERM systems have the
necessary hooks to capture and classify this content?
A: Good - it should. As we discuss in the report, while there is great benefit associated with the ease of implementation and use that Enterprise 2.0 provides to increase collaboration, it should never be forgotten that the content created with these tools is business content. Thus, it should be subjected to the same scrutiny and governance as all other forms of business content. When Web 2.0 moves within the firewall to become Enterprise 2.0, you are creating corporate content - records. If organizations do not pay attention to this from the outset, they are potentially creating another e-mail fiasco, where ad hoc informal application of the tool/media leads to an uncontrolled corporate body of content that needs to be managed reactively, which is typically a costly lesson and approach. So to answer your question, ERM systems have hooks that would support the declaration of Enterprise 2.0 content as records (as applicable), but they are not self enacting. A conscious decision and effort must be made to leverage this capability.
Q: What's the difference between Enterprise 2.0 and an enterprises that uses
Web 2.0 technologies?
A: Basically nothing - strictly from a technology perspective. The technologies (e.g. wikis, blogs, RSS) thats are leveraged on the commercial Web to create a Web 2.0, are the same technologies that can be used within a corporate intranet environment to create Enterprise 2.0. So technically no difference, but practically a a very bug difference. When used internally a host of procedural, cultural and compliance issues arise, that need to be viewed as part and parcel to the system.
Q: Who within an enterprise is best suited to develop an enterprise 2.0
strategy?
A: Involve several people or roles in the development of an Enterprise 2.0 strategy. LOB managers should be involved to develop the business value statement or purpose. Risk/compliance officers should be involved (See question 1 above). Obviously the CTO or a direct report also needs to be involved to provide the leanest most highly leveraged technical support of the business portion of the strategy.
