Web 2.0 vs. Enterprise 2.0

Up to now I have been using these terms interchangeably - however a posting on our intranet has helped me realise that the differences are significant (and extend beyond the obvious - namely that Enterprise 2.0 is use of Web 2.0 tools in the workplace).

"Both Web 2.0 and Enterprise 2.0 use the same tools, but the environments they are used in are very different.

In Web 2.0 there are millions of users based in a flat organisational structure where a culture of sharing predominates. In Enterprise 2.0 we have hundreds/thousands of users in a hierarchical structure where a culture of hording predominates. " [Gardner]

Consequently, while a lot can be achieved at a 'grass roots' level, moving blogging etc to the mainstream of internal workplace communications (and learning !) is unlikely to occur without significant top-down support.



So what are the implications for Learning & Development ?

I'm struck by the similiarity with the need for Senior Leader sponsorship to embed learning (as we know - even the best designed training will fail to change behaviours of the majority of delegates without it !)

... helping early adopters build such sponsorship is something that could be in our own interests (assuming we believe blogs etc drive reflection & informal learning)

...time to start building stakeholder maps, engagement strategies etc !?

Organizational Circulatory Systems

I recently read an interesting article from the related field of Organisational Development (so hopefully this is relevant to L&D Professionals - looking beyond training to influence learning processes).





Art Kleiner writing in the OD Practioner (Vol 39, No 3 2007) [paper copy - so sorry no link here] present a paper on 'Organizational Circulatory Systems.



While I cannot do justice to the whole article in a short blog posting - the comparison made between current management science and previous state of natural science understanding is thought-provoking.



This work citing Elliot Jaques state "Management is in the same state today that the natural sciences were in before the discovery of the circulation of the blood". In brief the argument is that OD practioners base interventions primarily on practical experience from trial & error - rather than there being suffient depth of theory to underpin action [OD practioners please don't shoot the messenger here !]

As we know from human physiology - the human body relies on a set of complementary communication channels (both electrical - via nerves, and chemical - via the bloodstream) to coordinate cells across large distances.

So the argument made, is that we should focus further on characterizing the communication channels of organizations. Then in OD interventions, we should use this knowledge to influence interventions (akin to how modern medicine influences the body's electrical & chemical pathways).

FOUR 'Organizational Circulatory Systems' are suggested:

• Hierarchy (flow of authority)
• Network (flow of knowledge)
• Market (flow of work)
• Clan (flow of allegiance)

Given the power of Web 2.0 tools in influencing all forms of communication flows (e.g. leader blogs [Hierarchy], project team wikis [Network], social bookmarking [Clan]) - maybe this points to the impact OD (& L&D) practioners can contribute if our profession invests the time to understand these tools.

Thinking of Banning Facebook - Time to Focus on Performance Management Training ?

The following link provides a great summary of the case against trying to ban Facebook (or any other tool that can be used to waste time at work)

interesting site (strong language) - http://flipchartfairytales.wordpress.com/2007/09/05/facebook-and-crap-managers/

For corporate L&D Professionals - maybe our take-away from this should be to reflect on how robust are the 'performance management' training and support tools provided to the workforce !