The digital generation ages 18 – 35 have grown up using technology and expect it to exist in business as they know it in their non-business life. Access to the web, high-performance applications, a variety of applications to perform their job, social networking based applications, multiple platforms – desktop, laptops, Windows, Apples and smart-phones, multiple access points – at the office, at home, while traveling or more to the point – anywhere and at anytime. How does your IT plan and support system meet this challenge? Traditional IT can limit system user access to a narrowly defined set of applications and use. Trying to balance the needs of these new workers with the needs of traditional IT users is a challenge as well. It’s not just about new technology but a differing culture between the two age groups.

Number one is to provide the tools your workers need to be productive. Limiting these younger workers to just email as a communications tool and a mainframe based business application written twenty years ago and only accessible from their work station at work may keep these newer workers from performing to their utmost.

_Sponsors_________________________________________

Nova Media

Strategic Online Marketing

_________________________________________________

Advanced Systems

Corporate Computer and Network Specialists

MicroHoo – the term lots of bloggers are using to describe the merging of Microsoft and Yahoo is in the news again. I’ve avoided talking about this takeover bid right from the beginning because I wanted to see how it would roll out. In all of the jabbering there seems to be an element missing or at least not getting the coverage it deserves. What impact would this have on the customers of each company?

There has been lots of talk about such things as shareholder value – Yahoo’s would go up, Microsoft’s would go down according to some market analysts. Workplace cultures are different at each company so there would be clashes. The value to Microsoft would be a billion dollar online advertising platform. Microsoft would be buying themselves a seat (or lots of them) on the Web 2.0 bus. Yahoo would receive benefit of senior management direction and vision from Microsoft . . . and the list goes on. But nowhere (that I could find in any case and certainly not in the daily news) was there any mention of what value MicroHoo would deliver to their customers.

Businesses exist because of their customers. They thrive by giving customers what they want and whither and die by not delivering what their customers need in the way of goods and services. As a customer of both companies (I’ve been a Yahooligan for longer than I can remember!) I ask a simple question – what’s in it for me?

Maybe it’s a good thing they didn’t merge since they both seemed to be focused on things other than their customer base.

Dean

Thanks to IT World Canada for linking to this item from AIIM - the enterprise content management association … Enterprise 2.0 – What’s The Real Story! 

The headline from IT World Canada reads: Enterprise 2.0 report: IT managers take back seat. Read the article to get their take on the report from AIIM – but in a nutshell it talks about the fact that IT managers are most likely to be number 3 in leading their organization in web 2.0 or enterprise 2.0.

I’m not surprised! Why should they be the leaders in Enterprise 2.0? Other than the fact that it uses some technology to function, Web 2.0 and Enterprise 2.0 really have nothing to do with the IT department. The IT World Canada author (Shane Schick) did a good thing when he included the quote from OpenText’s Bill Forquer, executive vice-president of marketing,…..

“We’ve seen that with records management over the last number of years. Something like Enron happens and the awareness of records management and policies is suddenly a boardroom-level conversation,” he said. “Part of the business and IT groups that are focused on work-group effectiveness and collaboration could actually benefit from 2.0 technologies and capabilities.”

Records management has it’s own set of experts so why should IT management have anything to do with RM other than providing support for the technology. The same thing happened with web services.

Many years ago when the world wide web first appeared to average computer users, there was lots of denial by IT departments to support it. Eventually the web made it’s way into the enterprise and web services ended up in other departments or divisions such as marketing. There are stories galore of where IT managers did everything from ignoring it to aggressively stand in the way of web being adopted by the organization. Needless to say they were run over and in some cases may even appear to embrace it.

I see the history of web repeating itself with Web 2.0 and Enterprise 2.0. We are at the point where some get it, most don’t but eventually the enterprise will make it a part of their daily operation and we will grind to a halt when it stops working or they try to take it away from us.

Dean

Been busy with other things so I haven’t had the time to post much…besides, I’m getting tired of sounding like I’m whining all the time!

I found this on the Forester Marketing blog attributed to Christie Hefner, CEO of the Playboy empire (and yes the daughter of founder Hef’)…

“Go to another company”

The above title is Christie Hefner’s response to a question about what to do when you’re in a company filled with people who don’t want to change the way they did business in 1972.

She also has some interesting things to say about Information Technology . . .

Christie Hefner: How Playboy Protects Its Assets

Baseline,  February, 2006  by Elizabeth Bennett

Dean Owen

Recently a friend of mine announced that he has sold his business and is retiring. Good for him! We knew each other through a hobby we share and we never talked business. At least, hardly never. He knew what I did for a living but his investment in computing was minimal so we never talked about it much. As far as I knew he had two computers – one for the bookkeeper in the office and the other at home which he shared with his wife. Since he was winding down his involvement in his business for the last few years, he was unlikely to invest in technology. So why am I talking about him in my blog? His success in business and how these traits can be supported by technology.

From what I could see he was successful in his business through the application of two basic principles: a high quality product and customer communication. Being the type of fellow that he was, I would suspect that he knew every customer by name. He never seemed to be too busy to chat with folks, either over the shop counter or at lunch or during many of his social interactions. He had his own social and business network which he used to communicate with people, many of whom were his customers or would be some day. Not only does he like to talk, but he’s a great listener. Now what does this have to do with technology? People like to talk with people and customer communication is key to a successful business. Technology can support this and make the experience richer and bear fruit – if used properly!

My friend comes from the generation where face to face conversation (face-mail?) is how they communicate… that is the medium they use for their social networking. On the other hand, many people, the younger generation, the digital natives, use technology to communicate. The business need for communication has not changed, but how we connect with each other has expanded to include everything from cell phones, text-ing, email, discussion groups, blogging, instant messaging, and all of those other Web 2.0 related technologies.

Does your enterprise or small business provide these opportunities to your staff and your customers to talk to each other? Or do you still rely on face-mail? Isn’t it time to move on these new technologies and use them as tools to support the basic human need to communicate?

Dean Owen

Why IT departments will survive Web 2.0 By: Shane Schick
Dr. David Jacobson, from PriceWaterhouseCooper talks about an ‘enterprise IT centre’ – more than just a data centre – it would support technologies that ‘allow customers, partners and employees to collaborate and communicate with each other’. According to Dr. Jacobson, this would allow the CIO and the IT department to get back into the game.

Well said Dr. Jacobson! According to this article, PwC is studying ’social networking’. With this heavy duty endorsement, does it mean Web 2.0/Enterprise 2.0 is starting to be seen as a legitimate business tool? I would think so. If you read the article you will notice that there are references to the IT department role changing for some, if not most enterprises. Dr. Jacobson is encouraging CIO involvement with business decision and planning. That’s the big leap for many folks out there. I doubt that most – enterprises and/or individuals – will be able to make it.

As to the title of this post – it comes from this article: “PwC uses the term ubiquitous participation to refer to bottom-up approaches to content generation and sharing.”  It sounds like the wikifiying of the enterprise to me!

Dean Owen

Check out this site: Vincent Flander’s Web Pages that Suck 2.0 and ask yourself this: Does your website suck?

At the risk of offending some folks (like multi-media developers who design and build web sites) I wanted to share this with you. Remember the IBM TV commercial from years ago where the web designer asks the business client if they wanted a flaming logo or rotating logo and the client replied they wanted to connect with customers? Somethings never change. I especially liked Mr. Flanders reference to ‘flashturbation’! Check out their picks for worst sites…very entertaining!

Dean Owen

Many web services departments report to marketing. This was a natural step in the evolution of web services within a company. Marketing the enterprise via the web is a very key strategy. But has the time come to move to the next point in the evolution?

Here I go putting my foot in my mouth – maybe even both feet! This thought came to me the other day…web services as it’s own department or even division reporting to the executive via a COW or Chief Officer of the Web! Maybe CWO, Chief Web Officer would be easier to handle!

Web services has many great offerings to the enterprise as a whole. Limiting them to Marketing prevents them from contributing to the strategic needs of all departments and business units.

The only way an enterprise can leverage the ultimate potential of the web, web 1.0 or web 2.0, is to have web services step out of Marketing and into the mainstream. By the way – not to IT Services, but on their own. IT Services would become another client of web services such as marketing, sales, production, finance, HR etc will be their clients and recipients of the benefits of web technology and strategies.

Hmmm….

Dean

Since the podcasting/videocasting production is starting to take on a life of it’s own seperate from my IT management company, I’ve decided to start a production company to better reflect the work I do in this area…Brass Media!

Why Brass? It’s a name from years ago for a band I played in. I’ve always liked the name and decided to resurect it for this venture.

Why Media? As a descriptor for what we do. At first I was reluctant to use the word media because folks might think we produce and deliver handbills… but I guess, in a way we do, but over the inter web. No wasted paper that way! We’re green!

I was also thinking of a web 2.0′ish name like BRAZZ, no – I’ll stick to Brass, it has sentimental value!

Talk to you later . . .

Dean

I’m working on a contest for the worst Canadian Corporate Website…and you get to be the nominators and the judges. I just need to work out the details – rules, voting, prize etc. and will post it here.

What prompted me to start this was an exercise in frustration in attempting to navigate the Telus website(s)…which is my nomination by the way. They say the future is friendly! I sure hope so…because the present sure isn’t!

At first thought, I’m not looking for the worst companies, but specifically bad websites. You know the kind – poorly designed user interface, frustrating customer experience, old content, broken or outdated links, questionable colour schemes…

Which reminds me…I need to take a hard look at this site…as it grows, is it becoming hard to navigate?

 Dean Owen