Decent definition of “Enterprise 2.0”, or E2.0 to be even trendier.
Always start with Wikipedia first. It says that E2.0 is another term for the term “Enterprise social software”, which itself needs to be defined:
Enterprise social software , also known as Enterprise 2.0 , is a term describing social software used in “enterprise” (business) contexts. It includes social and networked modifications to company intranets and other classic software platforms used by large companies to organize their communication. In contrast to traditional enterprise software, which imposes structure prior to use, this generation of software tends to encourage use prior to providing structure.
As of 2006, Enterprise 2.0 is a catchier term sometimes used to describe social and networked changes to enterprise, which often includes social software (but is not limited to it, nor to either social collaboration or software); and Enterprise Web 2.0 sometimes describes the introduction and implementation of Web 2.0 technologies within the enterprise including those rich internet applications, providing software as a service, and using the web as a general platform.
So E2.0 is may be considered a superset of Enterprise Web 2.0 (EW2.0?) which is a subset of Web 2.0 (Haven’t seen that shortened to W2.0 as of yet).
More of an explanatory definition comes from the Enterprise 2.0 conference site. BTW, they also define Enterprise 1.0 and contrast it point by point with E2.0:
The way we work is changing rapidly, offering an enormous competitive advantage to those who embrace the new tools that enable contextual, agile and simplified information exchange and collaboration to distributed workforces and networks of partners and customers.
Enterprise 2.0 is the term for the technologies and business practices that liberate the workforce from the constraints of legacy communication and productivity tools like email. It provides business managers with access to the right information at the right time through a web of inter-connected applications, services and devices. Enterprise 2.0 makes accessible the collective intelligence of many, translating to a huge competitive advantage in the form of increased innovation, productivity and agility.
|Enterprise 1.0||Enterprise 2.O|
IT-driven technology / Lack of user control
Teams are in one building / one time zone
Silos and boundaries
Need to know
Information systems are structured and dictated
Closed/ proprietary standards
Long time-to-market cycles
Ease of Organization Flow
Teams are global
Fuzzy boundaries, open borders
Information systems are emergent
Short time-to-market cycles
IOW, E1.0: slow, rigid, boundaries, closed, hard, old. E2.0: flexible, hip, simple, new.
E2.0 is the new KM. a few differences between classical KM and E2.0. The tools are largely different, for one. Perhaps the most important difference is the emphasis on emergence of content structures in E2.0, rather than specifying them in advance, as early knowledge managers had to. But I’ve always felt that most information environments require some mixture of structure and emergence. Andy’s comment that E2.0 requires “gardeners” suggests that he agrees.
Arguments for and against introducting E2.0 into your business.
Pro: Andrew McAfee , an associate professor at Harvard Business School , is often associated with the phrase “enterprise 2.0,” and is bullish on the impact of wikis, blogs and other Web 2.0-era software within a business context.
Con: Tom Davenport , the president’s chair in information technology and management at Babson College in Wellesley, Massachusetts, has been skeptical of Web 2.0 software’s value on its own, and argues the functionality may not be all that new.
Enterprise 2.0 and Acupuncture (not actually a criticism of the E2.0 concept, but sounds painful nonetheless)