The Future As Seen By Me In 2010

Well looky here, things one has scanned in eh. (ignore the photo, that's some guy that made some accounting software, not sure what became of him ;) MIKE RIVERSDALE is fuming. The expensive headphones he bought in Sydney three weeks ago have just died. His first reaction is not to randomly spill expletives into his coffee, but to use his iPhone to vent his frustration to his Twitter con- tacts, under the moniker Miramar Mike. "I will also put, 'What should I do?' It's a conversation. I'm reaching out to the people following me." The council predicts hand-held digital devices such as smartphones will rule the world in 2040. They already rule the life of Mr Riversdale, whose company WaveAdept helps businesses adapt - their computing sys- tems to allow staff to work from anywhere - and with anyone. In order of fre- equency, he uses his iPhone to tweet (1136 followers; 8363 tweets since joining), e-mail, make phone calls and use online services, such as checki

Enterprise 2.0 - factors to a successful implementation

A cracking post from Andrew McAfee, What's Most Important for Success with Enterprise 2.0?, that I think everyone looking to bring in "Enterprise 2.0" (definition) should consider before (BEFORE) starting on the track.

From my own experiences I would highlight the following as sticky points that I have stumbled across (and worked through but it's been hard work):

Tools are intuitive and easy to use
I have a view that web software (as it's always web based apps we're talking about) should never need a manual, FAQs, help or training sessions. If it's come via the consumer world (YouTube, Yahoo!, Twitter ...) then that's generally the case but, unfortunately, hardly ever the case for software designed for the work place.

MOSS (SharePoint 2007) is a case in point.
A while ago I had a discussion with Michael Sampson about what training should be made available for users with a MOSS implementation. I re-iterated my view that it should be so obvious that people don't need training in the "how" (the "why" is different and part of explaining the reason the organisation works the way it does which the tool, in this case MOSS, should merely support).

I am now of a different opinion with MOSS as it's just not good enough with it's basic usability. It's good, don't get me wrong, and a whole lot better than before but still not obvious. Case in point - compare these "settings" pages, can you tell me how to restrict access to content which is a very common and important part of any "content" system:

I think you'll see it's a lot harder with one than the other - it's making me think!

There are three others that I have fallen foul of:
  • Slack exists in the workweek
  • There are lots of young people
  • Goals are clear and well-explained
And I think they generally come under the label "we're too busy fighting the battle to stop and consider the weapons". In my experience, despite great words from upon high, if there's not the demand, the space and the experience (it's where young uns come in, they generally live this stuff) then it's a hard sell and an even harder implementation. Hard is OK, but be aware of it.

As to Andrew''s final point (there is pent-up demand for better information sharing) here in New Zealand we are lucky that the underlying 'culture' of people is to share. It might not seem like it during your day-to-day workings but take a moment to stop and think as to the reason why that person said no to your info request. Was it because fundamentally they didn't want to or was it just "too hard"? I'll contend that the majority of the cases it's the latter, it was "too hard" - the systems didn't allow it to happen with a click of the button.

Love to hear your thoughts - leave a comment ...


Popular articles

The Future As Seen By Me In 2010

Knowing good info from bad - how do we?

How To Facilitate A Barcamp/Unconference

The 3 C’s – Communication, Consultation and Collaboration

21 days of Wiki adoption (Wiki Patterns)