by Hylton Jolliffe
January 11, 2008 at 3:40 pm
· Filed under Enterprise 2.0, Enterprise Social Computing, FASTforward08, Webinars
Attached is the audio recording of today’s debate between Andrew McAfee and Tom Davenport, moderated by our own Jim McGee. As you’ll hear, we missed the first 30 seconds of the intro and it’s a little hard to hear the participants at one point but it still makes for good listening and clocks in at about 54 minutes.
Listen to it in place or download for listening later and feel free to weigh in on this blogpost with follow-up comments or reactions. (And for those interested in hearing more from Andy and Tom, as well as many other great thinkers in the field, find out more about and join us at FASTforward ‘08.)
Davenport McAfee E2.0 debate:
Play Now |
Play in Popup |
Download
Permalink
Andy & Tom: The Great “Debate”:
Andy certainly buffed the already glistening shine on the reputation of Harvard. He was reasoned, patient, civil, persuasive, and open, and objective. If I were listening to two doctors discuss a possible terminal disease I might have, I would certainly take Andy’s advice.
One of the things that creating a lable such as Enterprise 2.0 does is bring attention to the collective flexibility of tools now available that provide greater access to shared information. Probably 99% of the business world’s poplulation are not even familar with the term. It is probably at the first of the four levels of understanding for most (the first being I’ve heard about it, the second, I can describe it, the third I can do it or use it, and the fourth is that I can mix and match and integrate the processes).
Besides, it is a specific contextual term that relates to how organizations can optimize technology for the good of the enterprise. It is NOT a formulae for Standard Operation Procedures. In the discussion Tom took (throughout) exception to the term. Reminded me of Shakespear’s comment, “Methinks the lady doth protest too much.”
So Andy correctly or incorrectly has given nomenclature to an emerging phenomena. At least he has provided a platform or a conceptual syntheses for all of us to take notice of and explore further. In this world of emerging usnits of innovation we chould stop occassional and give those usnits a collective meaning so that we, one, take notice, and, two, acknowledge the plateau we are on and look ahead where we might go next. Arguing about what we call the trip is similar to the whining child in the rear seat saying, “Are we there yet?!”
How Andy was able to take the high road, keep on a track of reasoned discussion, and avoid the bated slings and arrows deserves applause.
Bill,
Well said. The poise and grace with which Andy’s stuck to his points without veering into either a defensive or aggrandizing posture was laudable. I’m looking forward to hearing what he has to say in his keynote in Orlando. Yes, it’s time we “acknowledge the plateau we are on and look ahead where we go next.” It’s time to acknowledge that the changes that may take place in organizations are no longer impeded by, rather are catalyzed by, technology. But it all starts with the individual, the user, wanting change.
-Zia
» Subscribe to the RSS feed for these comments
HTML-Tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Additional comments powered by BackType
