Bloomport U

I never envisioned myself as a so called “early adopter” but when I was first introduced to SharePoint (and Web 2.0) I was so frustrated with Lotus Notes and shared drives, that I would have adopted smoke signals as a collaborative tool if I could have found a way to version them.

Why should we think about Web 2.0?  1. Our consumers use it 2. It has business value and 3. It fosters innovation.  Drucker suggested that to make room for innovation, you have to let something else go, so can we let our reliance on e-mail conversation, face to face meetings, and shared drives (shudder) go and look to Web 2.0 as the innovative replacement?

Linked is a McKinsey article titled “Six Ways to make Web 2.0 work” that suggests Web 2.0 may have a larger organization impact than ERP did.  The article goes on to contrast Web 2.0 with ERP as it gives guidance on how to improve adoption of these tools.  I broke these concepts down into a quick summary and I invite you to skim through them and post up your thoughts.

How to make Web 2.0 work:

1. Adoption needs help from the Top: Not so much of a top-down “thou shalt do SAP” but more of an “I tried it; I liked it, and I use it.  You should too”.  Leaders participating in this space will go a long way to justifying the effort. 
2. Let the best stuff come from users, then scale:  This suggests that given enough options, users will flock to the best tools.  At that time, IT steps in to enable scale and leadership steps up to provide visibility (see number 1) and thus we have adoption.
3. What’s in the work flow gets used: Wow, is this ever true.  If people make it a part of their day to check the discussion group (update the blog, check the SharePoint, update the calendar) then adoption will happen.  If Web 2.0 continues to be a “one-off” it will not work.
4. Appeal to the ego and needs: Imagine a manger walking around the office with a big stick.  “Did you blog yet?!??  No!??? *whack*!  Did you blog yet???? NO!?!?! WHACK!!  That method will not be effective, but if leadership uses the carrot approach “thanks for value add in the Wiki, your contribution will have a lasting impact” that will drive adoption.  More so if posted via a web 2.0 tool (see number 1).
5. The right solution comes from the right participants.  This point is related to the Tremor concept.  Find the chatty thought leaders and get them participating/bought in to create a viral buzz.
6. Balance the top down and self management risk: in short, is this (wiki, blog, discussion group) going to add risk to our company?  I see how this can stop / stifle adoption, but I am not aware of this as a specific barrier to overcome in our case.

Net: love to hear your thoughts on how we can improve adoption or see your linked blogs on this topic.  Passion for the topic aside, I bet that the phrase “Web 2.0” makes the list of Top Ten Phrases to Ban for 2009.