Comments on: John Hagel: The Web 2.0 vs SOA Chasm http://www.fastforwardblog.com/2007/12/19/john-hagel-the-web-20-vs-soa-chasm/ Fri, 28 Oct 2011 01:28:22 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Jon Husband http://www.fastforwardblog.com/2007/12/19/john-hagel-the-web-20-vs-soa-chasm/comment-page-1/#comment-132258 Jon Husband Sun, 30 Dec 2007 04:52:36 +0000 http://www.fastforwardblog.com/2007/12/19/john-hagel-the-web-20-vs-soa-chasm/#comment-132258 <i>My guess is that we are developing new tools for new ways of doing business that will be added to the toolbox; it’s not eiher or, it’s what works for the problem at hand.</i> I'd call it redefining knowledge work along the lines of more natural human cognitive processes (they of course existed, but were constrained and handicapped by structure, protocol, policies, reporting lones, exclusion from basic decision-making, and so on). These processes occur in the hands and with the heads of knowledge workers, and find more effectiveness in interaction and collaboration ... constructing purposeful knowledge out of relevant information. The heavy-duty databases have by and large been built, the social computing tools, services and platforms can be layered over those databases, and information and expertise are now beginning to find ways to find each other and get to work. My guess is that we are developing new tools for new ways of doing business that will be added to the toolbox; it’s not eiher or, it’s what works for the problem at hand.

I’d call it redefining knowledge work along the lines of more natural human cognitive processes (they of course existed, but were constrained and handicapped by structure, protocol, policies, reporting lones, exclusion from basic decision-making, and so on). These processes occur in the hands and with the heads of knowledge workers, and find more effectiveness in interaction and collaboration … constructing purposeful knowledge out of relevant information. The heavy-duty databases have by and large been built, the social computing tools, services and platforms can be layered over those databases, and information and expertise are now beginning to find ways to find each other and get to work.

]]> By: David Goldstein http://www.fastforwardblog.com/2007/12/19/john-hagel-the-web-20-vs-soa-chasm/comment-page-1/#comment-127646 David Goldstein Thu, 20 Dec 2007 02:43:11 +0000 http://www.fastforwardblog.com/2007/12/19/john-hagel-the-web-20-vs-soa-chasm/#comment-127646 Everyone would like to have the information they need/want at their fingertips when they need/want it. The fact is that different types of information are best mined with different tools/approaches. The structured-unstructured type dimension is commonly referenced when dialoguing about web 2.0 vs. enterprise 2.0 vs. SOA vs. traditional enterprise integration approaches. However, there are other dimensions that need to be considered, including global-specific, fluid-static, complex-simple, and idea-solution. Uncovering structured, specific, static, simple, solution type data for results-driven (specific, measurable, actionable, realistic, time-bound, etc.) needs has been what CIO's have been concerned with. This is a legacy of the industrial-revolution era linear mentality that continues to drive corporate thinking. We are moving (evolving?) to a non-linear, idea-driven, matrix-based value creation society that needs information storage, access/retrieval, processing strategies optimized for it. The corporate world is the nexus within which this evolution is taking place. And this is a place where experimentation is taking place. There is an incredibly complex interplay among the dimensions referenced above for which different approaches are suitable. My guess is that we are developing new tools for new ways of doing business that will be added to the toolbox; it's not eiher or, it's what works for the problem at hand. Everyone would like to have the information they need/want at their fingertips when they need/want it. The fact is that different types of information are best mined with different tools/approaches. The structured-unstructured type dimension is commonly referenced when dialoguing about web 2.0 vs. enterprise 2.0 vs. SOA vs. traditional enterprise integration approaches. However, there are other dimensions that need to be considered, including global-specific, fluid-static, complex-simple, and idea-solution. Uncovering structured, specific, static, simple, solution type data for results-driven (specific, measurable, actionable, realistic, time-bound, etc.) needs has been what CIO’s have been concerned with. This is a legacy of the industrial-revolution era linear mentality that continues to drive corporate thinking. We are moving (evolving?) to a non-linear, idea-driven, matrix-based value creation society that needs information storage, access/retrieval, processing strategies optimized for it. The corporate world is the nexus within which this evolution is taking place. And this is a place where experimentation is taking place. There is an incredibly complex interplay among the dimensions referenced above for which different approaches are suitable. My guess is that we are developing new tools for new ways of doing business that will be added to the toolbox; it’s not eiher or, it’s what works for the problem at hand.

]]>