<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: InformationWeek: Enterprise 2.0 May Require &#8216;Nudge 2.0&#8242;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.fastforwardblog.com/2007/03/01/informationweek-enterprise-20-may-require-nudge-20/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.fastforwardblog.com/2007/03/01/informationweek-enterprise-20-may-require-nudge-20/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2010 01:23:59 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Jenny Ambrozek</title>
		<link>http://www.fastforwardblog.com/2007/03/01/informationweek-enterprise-20-may-require-nudge-20/comment-page-1/#comment-2324</link>
		<dc:creator>Jenny Ambrozek</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Mar 2007 23:06:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fastforwardblog.com/2007/03/01/informationweek-enterprise-20-may-require-nudge-20/#comment-2324</guid>
		<description>Interesting observation Bill. What concerns me in discussions about Enterprise 2.0 (and as Tom points to above), is that it focuses just on the technology. The reality as we know is that people use technology and more important for adoption is having new organizational structures (supportive management, rewards system, integration of the technologies with the way people really work in an organization etc) to ensure adoption.  I rather wish Andrew McAfee had added SOS (supportive organizational structures) to his SLATES in describing Enterprise 2.0.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting observation Bill. What concerns me in discussions about Enterprise 2.0 (and as Tom points to above), is that it focuses just on the technology. The reality as we know is that people use technology and more important for adoption is having new organizational structures (supportive management, rewards system, integration of the technologies with the way people really work in an organization etc) to ensure adoption.  I rather wish Andrew McAfee had added SOS (supportive organizational structures) to his SLATES in describing Enterprise 2.0.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bill Ives</title>
		<link>http://www.fastforwardblog.com/2007/03/01/informationweek-enterprise-20-may-require-nudge-20/comment-page-1/#comment-2308</link>
		<dc:creator>Bill Ives</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Mar 2007 16:53:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fastforwardblog.com/2007/03/01/informationweek-enterprise-20-may-require-nudge-20/#comment-2308</guid>
		<description>Interesting report. Getting Information Week to do a special report is a milestone. Now we need to be in the business press. One of the turning pionts for business blogs was making the cover of Business Week in May 05. When will Enterprise 2.0 get there?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting report. Getting Information Week to do a special report is a milestone. Now we need to be in the business press. One of the turning pionts for business blogs was making the cover of Business Week in May 05. When will Enterprise 2.0 get there?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tom Mandel</title>
		<link>http://www.fastforwardblog.com/2007/03/01/informationweek-enterprise-20-may-require-nudge-20/comment-page-1/#comment-1993</link>
		<dc:creator>Tom Mandel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Mar 2007 14:34:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fastforwardblog.com/2007/03/01/informationweek-enterprise-20-may-require-nudge-20/#comment-1993</guid>
		<description>As I have written elsewhere*, both skepticism and adoption make perfect sense. Skepticism, for one thing, is never a bad attitude, as long as it is accompanied by open investigation.

But, keep in mind that the identical skepticism - about integration, need, ROI, the whole gamut - greeted the personal computer, Internet email, and many other obvious essentials when they first knocked on the doors and then knocked down the walls of the enterprise.

Essentially, what we are seeing is an early market. Within one year, initial skepticism will be overrun by stories of initial adoption.

Correct, however, is the observation that E2.0 can&#039;t be about &#039;a wiki here, a blog there&#039;. The *core* 2.0 technology is social bookmarking/tagging, although this point is not yet clear. Tagging is a completely generalizable gesture that has power in literally every context. It will change IT from top to bottom.

Do I seem to speak too boldly? Revisit what I&#039;m saying in a year or so, and we&#039;ll see whether I was being bold or just pointing out (what turned out to be) the obvious.

* &quot;elsewhere&quot; = http://tommandel.com/blog/2007_02_01_archive.shtml#7678204531311251887</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As I have written elsewhere*, both skepticism and adoption make perfect sense. Skepticism, for one thing, is never a bad attitude, as long as it is accompanied by open investigation.</p>
<p>But, keep in mind that the identical skepticism &#8211; about integration, need, ROI, the whole gamut &#8211; greeted the personal computer, Internet email, and many other obvious essentials when they first knocked on the doors and then knocked down the walls of the enterprise.</p>
<p>Essentially, what we are seeing is an early market. Within one year, initial skepticism will be overrun by stories of initial adoption.</p>
<p>Correct, however, is the observation that E2.0 can&#8217;t be about &#8216;a wiki here, a blog there&#8217;. The *core* 2.0 technology is social bookmarking/tagging, although this point is not yet clear. Tagging is a completely generalizable gesture that has power in literally every context. It will change IT from top to bottom.</p>
<p>Do I seem to speak too boldly? Revisit what I&#8217;m saying in a year or so, and we&#8217;ll see whether I was being bold or just pointing out (what turned out to be) the obvious.</p>
<p>* &#8220;elsewhere&#8221; = <a href="http://tommandel.com/blog/2007_02_01_archive.shtml#7678204531311251887" rel="nofollow">http://tommandel.com/blog/2007_02_01_archive.shtml#7678204531311251887</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
