Recently in Web & Internet Category

The Enterprise 2.0 Conference was held last week, in Boston. Prior to the event, I made some predictions as to expected learnings and outcomes from the conference. Today, I will revisit those prognostications to determine their accuracy.

Here is the original list of things that I anticipated encountering at the E2.0 Conference this year. Each prediction is followed by an assessment of the statement's validity and some explanatory comments:

A few more case studies from end user organizations, but not enough to indicate that we've reached a tipping point in the E2.0 market: TRUE The number of case studies presented this year seemed to be roughly the same as last year. That is to say very few. The best one that I heard was a presentation by Lockheed Martin employees, which was an update to their case study presented last year at E2.0 Conference. It was great to hear the progress they had made and the issues with which they have dealt in the last year. However, I was genuinely disappointed by the absence of fresh case studies. Indeed, the lack of new case studies was the number one conference content complaint heard during the event wrap-up session (indeed, throughout the show.)

An acknowledgement that there are still not enough data and case studies to allow us to identify best practices in social software usage:
TRUE This turned out to be a huge understatement. There are not even enough publicly available data points and stories to allow us to form a sense of where the Enterprise 2.0 market is in terms of adoption, much less of best practices or common success factors. At this rate, it will be another 12-18 months before we can begin to understand which companies have deployed social software and at what scale, as well as what works and what doesn't when implementing an E2.0 project.

That entrenched organizational culture remains the single largest obstacle to businesses trying to deploy social software:
TRUE The "C" word popped up in every session I attended and usually was heard multiple times per session. The question debated at the conference was a chicken and egg one; must culture change to support adoption of E2.0 practices and tools, or is E2.0 a transformational force capable of reshaping an organization's culture and behaviors? That question remains unanswered, in part because of the lack of E2.0 case studies. However, historical data and observations on enterprise adoption of previous generations of collaboration technologies tell us that leadership must be willing to change the fundamental values, attitudes, and behaviors of the organization in order to improve collaboration. Grassroots evangelism for, and usage of, collaboration tools is not powerful enough to drive lasting cultural change in the face of resistance from leadership.

A nascent understanding that E2.0 projects must touch specific, cross-organizational business processes in order to drive transformation and provide benefit: TRUE I was very pleased to hear users, vendors, and analysts/consultants singing from the same page in this regard. Everyone I heard at E2.0 Conference understood that it would be difficult to realize and demonstrate benefits from E2.0 initiatives that did not address specific business processes spanning organizational boundaries. The E2.0 movement seems to have moved from speaking about benefits in general, soft terms to groping for how to demonstrate process-based ROI (more on this below.)

A growing realization that the E2.0 adoption will not accelerate meaningfully until more conservative organizations hear and see how other companies have achieved specific business results and return on investment: TRUE Conference attendees were confounded by two related issues; the lack of demonstrative case studies and the absence of a clear, currency-based business case for E2.0 initiatives. More conservative organizations won't move ahead with E2.0 initiatives until they can see at least one of those things and some will demand both. People from end user organizations attending the conference admitted as much both publicly and privately.

A new awareness that social software and its implementations must include user, process, and tool analytics if we are ever to build a ROI case that is stated in terms of currency, not anecdotes:
TRUE Interestingly, the E2.0 software vendors are leading this charge, not their customers. A surprising number of vendors were talking about analytics in meetings and briefings I had at the conference, and many were announcing the current or future addition of those capabilities to their offerings at the show. E2.0 software is increasingly enabling organizations to measure the kinds of metrics that will allow them to build a currency-based business case following a pilot implementation. Even better, some vendors are mining their products' new analytics capabilities to recommend relevant people and content to system users!

That more software vendors that have entered the E2.0 market, attracted by the size of the business opportunity around social software:
TRUE I haven't counted and compared the number of vendors in Gartner's E2.0 Magic Quadrant from last year and this year, but I can definitely tell you that the number of vendors in this market has increased. This could be the subject of another blog post, and I won't go into great detail here. There are a few new entrants that are offering E2.0 suites or platforms (most notably Open Text). Additionally, the entrenchment of SharePoint 2007 in the market has spawned many small startup vendors adding social capabilities on top of SharePoint. The proliferation of these vendors underscores the current state of dissatisfaction with SharePoint 2007 as an E2.0 platform. It also foreshadows a large market shakeout that will likely occur when Microsoft releases SharePoint 2010.

A poor opinion of, and potentially some backlash against, Microsoft SharePoint as the foundation of an E2.0 solution; this will be tempered, however, by a belief that SharePoint 2010 will be a game changer and upset the current dynamics of the social software market:
TRUE Yes, there are many SharePoint critics out there and they tend to be more vocal than those who are satisfied with their SharePoint deployment. The anti-SharePoint t-shirts given away by Box.net at the conference sum up the attitude very well. Yet most critics seem to realize that the next release of SharePoint will address many of their current complaints. I heard more than one E2.0 conference attendee speculate on the ability of the startup vendors in the SharePoint ecosystem to survive when Microsoft releases SharePoint 2010.

An absence of understanding that social interactions are content-centric and, therefore, that user generated content must be managed in much the same manner as more formal documents:
FALSE Happily, I was wrong on this one. There was much discussion about user generated content at the conference, as well as talk about potential compliance issues surrounding E2.0 software. It seems that awareness of the importance of content in social systems is quite high among vendors and early adopters. The next step will be to translate that awareness into content management features and processes. That work has begun and should accelerate, judging by what I heard and saw at the conference.

So there are the results. I batted .888! If you attended the conference, I'd appreciate your comments on my perceptions of the event. Did you hear and see the same things, or did the intense after hours drinking and major sleep deficit of last week cause me to hallucinate? I'd appreciate your comments even if you weren't able to be at E2.0 Conference, but have been following the market with some regularity.

I hope this post has given you a decent sense of the current state of the Enterprise 2.0 market. More importantly, I believe that this information can help us focus our efforts to drive the E2.0 movement forward in the coming year. We can and should work together to best these challenges and make the most of these opportunities.

I was at the Gilbane Conference in San Francisco last week, where I answered questions as a panelist, moderated another panel, heard many excellent presentations, and joined in many engaging discussions. On the plane ride home, I took some time to piece together the individual bits of information and opinion that I had absorbed during the two-day event. This reflection led to the following observations regarding the state of enterprise content management practices and technologies.

Up With People

Many content software vendors are now focusing on people first, content second. This is a huge shift in perspective, especially when voiced at a content management conference! Kumar Vora, Vice President & General Manager, Enterprise at Adobe was the first person to proclaim this philosophical change during his opening keynote presentation at Gilbane San Francisco. He reported that Adobe has shifted its business philosophy to focus on serving people and their needs, as opposed to thinking about content first. Many other vendor representatives and attendees from end user organizations echoed Kumar's emphasis on people during the event. It is too early to say definitively what this radical change in perspective means, but we should see more user friendly enterprise content management tools as a result.

Keyword Fail

Keyword search has largely failed end users and incremental improvements haven't been able to keep up with the explosion in newly created content. Jeff Fried, VP Product Management for Microsoft's FAST search engine actually proclaimed that "keyword search is dead!" The business world is at a point where alternatives, including machine-generated and social search techniques, must be explored. The latter method was on many attendees minds and lips, which should not surprise, given the shift to people-centric thinking identified above. Social search will be an increasingly hot topic in 2009 and 2010.

SharePoint Upheaval

Microsoft SharePoint 2010 has the potential to completely shake up the information management market. The next version of SharePoint will likely include a raft of (as of yet unconfirmed) Web Content Management features that have been missing or rudimentary. In her keynote address, Tricia Bush, Group Product Manager for SharePoint said that the promise of content management has not yet been realized and that her team is focusing diligently on the opportunity. This increased emphasis on content management is contrary to the first trend that I described above, and the negative perceptions many hold of SharePoint may increase unless Microsoft also better enables people in SharePoint 2010 (it is rumored that the product will also see substantial additions to its currently limited social collaboration functionality.) Those placing bets should do so knowing that Microsoft intends to, and probably will, be a major force in enterprise information management.

Simplicity Trumps Complexity

Enterprise applications and systems managed by IT departments continue to grow in complexity. As this happens, end users turn to simpler alternatives, including consumer oriented Web 2.0 applications, in order to get work done. The "problem" is that these consumer applications aren't approved or controlled by the IT function. The opportunity is a potentially large market for software vendors that can create enterprise ready versions of Web 2.0 applications by adding security, reliability, and other attributes demanded by CIOs. For those vendors to succeed, however, they must retain the simplicity (intuitiveness and ease of use) that are the hallmark of consumer Web 2.0 applications.

Communication Beats Publishing

Communication applications are increasingly being used by end users to collaborate, because enterprise content management applications have become too complex (see the trend immediately above). Additionally, communication tools are favored by end users because they can use them to simultaneously create and distribute content. This increased speed of content publication also accelerates general business process execution, allowing users of communication tools to be more productive than users of formal enterprise content systems. Communication tools will continue to become an important and growing back channel that employees use to share content when overly complex publishing tools impede or fail them.

Having one's ideas validated by a reputable peer is always rewarding. John Mancini, President of AIIM, published a blog post in the time between when I first formulated these thoughts on the flight home from San Francisco last week and when I published this post today. Reading John's post should encourage you to believe that the trends I (and he) have described are for real. The question for all of us now is how will we respond to these emerging realities.

So I have spent enough time on Twitter to conclude that it is useful, indeed very useful, for keeping up with news and trends in technology. Just like the blogosphere, Twitter has its "A list" folks like Guy Kawasaki and many hundreds of interesting people with smaller followings. But I have also found it to be the most useful means I have for following news feeds—from Scientific American (@sciam in Twitter) to Paid Content (@paidcontent) to New England Sports Network (@NESNcom).

Not surprisingly, CMS vendors are getting involved as well, and I welcome this. I put out a call ages ago for vendors to alert me to RSS feeds of their press releases, finding them much more useful than emailed press releases in long form. (Few did.) But now I want these things via Twitter. I love Twitter search, and I have begun using TweetDeck to filter and group things. I feel like I can keep much better track of things, read what I want to in long form, and share what I think is especially interesting.

What I would like to see next is an easy way to share groups of Twitter feeds, and even collaborate on them. I have been collecting a list of CMS vendors on Twitter, and offer the start of that list here. Anyone have thoughts about how we could create a useful master list? To start with, I would love to add categories to this—some are WCM vendors, others more niche, some are open source, and so on.

Thoughts?

Twitter User Name Twitter URL Company  
 
acquia http://twitter.com/acquia Acquia  
AlfrescoCMS http://twitter.com/AlfrescoCMS Alfresco CMS  
attivio http://twitter.com/attivio Attivio  
boxdotnet http://twitter.com/boxdotnet Box  
brightcove http://twitter.com/brightcove Brightcove  
coremedia_news http://twitter.com/coremedia_news Core Media  
CrownPeakCMS http://twitter.com/CrownPeakCMS CrownPeak  
daysoftware http://twitter.com/daysoftware Day Software  
Dirxion http://twitter.com/Dirxion Dirxion  
DotNetNuke http://twitter.com/dotnetnuke DotNetNuke  
Drupal http://twitter.com/Drupal Drupal Org  
elcomtechnology http://twitter.com/elcomtechnology elcom Technology  
ektrondave http://twitter.com/ektrondave Ektron  
emccorp http://twitter.com/emccorp EMC Corp.  
EMCsoftware http://twitter.com/EMCsoftware EMC Software  
episerver http://twitter.com/episerver EpiServer  
escenic http://twitter.com/escenic escenic  
EE http://twitter.com/EE ExpressionEngine  
gentics http://twitter.com/gentics Gentics  
google http://twitter.com/google Google  
hpnews http://twitter.com/hpnews HP News  
HP_IPG http://twitter.com/HP_IPG HP’s Imaging and Printers Group  
HylandSoftware http://twitter.com/HylandSoftware Hyland Software  
IBM_ECM http://twitter.com/IBM_ECM IBM ECM  
ibmevents http://twitter.com/ibmevents IBM Events  
Intelledox http://twitter.com/Intelledox Intelledox  
Interwoven_Inc http://twitter.com/Interwoven_Inc Interwoven/Autonomy  
ipublishcentral http://twitter.com/ipublishcentral IPublishCentral  
IronMountainInc http://twitter.com/IronMountainInc Iron Mountain  
Jadu http://twitter.com/jaducms Jadu  
Jahia http://twitter.com/Jahia Jahia  
joomla http://twitter.com/joomla Joomla Org  
Lionbridge http://twitter.com/Lionbridge Lionbridge  
Lotusphere http://twitter.com/Lotusphere Lotusphere  
magnolia_cms http://twitter.com/magnolia_cms Magnolia CMS  
SharePoint http://twitter.com/SharePoint Microsoft Sharepoint  
msoffice_us http://twitter.com/msoffice_us MS Office US  
MSDN_Office http://twitter.com/MSDN_Office MSDN Office News  
NsteinTech http://twitter.com/NsteinTech Nstein  
Omtool http://twitter.com/Omtool Omtool  
openedit http://twitter.com/openedit OpenEdit DAM  
OpenText http://twitter.com/OpenText OpenText  
Oracle http://twitter.com/Oracle Oracle  
papayaCMS http://twitter.com/papayaCMS papaya CMS  
plone http://twitter.com/plone Plone Org  
radiantcmsntcms https://twitter.com/radiantcms Radiant CMS  
ScriptoriumTech http://twitter.com/ScriptoriumTech Scriptorium  
sdltridion http://twitter.com/sdltridion SDL Tridion  
squizuk http://twitter.com/squizuk Squiz.NET  
streamserve http://twitter.com/streamserve StreamServe  
tizra http://twitter.com/tizra Tizra  
TYPO3_INFORMER http://twitter.com/TYPO3_INFORMER
Typo 3  
vignettecorp http://twitter.com/vignettecorp Vignette  
webworks_com http://twitter.com/webworks_com WebWorks  
wordpress http://twitter.com/wordpress WordPress  
XeroxCorp http://twitter.com/XeroxCorp Xerox  
XMPie http://twitter.com/XMPie XMPie  
       

 

For those of you attending the AIIM Conference in Philadelphia next week, I will be giving the following presentation on Tuesday, March 31, at 2:30 p.m.  Hope to see you there.

Session: WCM10: How to Choose WCM Solutions and Estimate Total Cost of Ownership Over Five Years

Date: Tuesday, March 31
Time: 2:30 PM - 3:20 PM
Room: 113C

I always took footnotes for granted. You need them as you're writing, you insert an indicator at the right place and it points the reader to an amplification, a citation, an off-hand comment, or something -- but it's out of the way, a distraction to the point you're trying to make.

Some documents don't need them, but some require them (e.g., scholarly documents, legal documents). In those documents, the footnotes contain such important information that, as Barry Bealer suggests in When footnotes are the content, "the meat [is] in the footnotes."

The web doesn't make it easy to represent footnotes. Footnotes on the Web argues that HTML is barely up to the task of presenting footnotes in any effective form.

But if you were to recreate the whole thing from scratch, without static paper as a model, how would you model footnotes?

In a document, a footnote is composed of two pieces of related information. One is the point that you're trying to make, typically a new point. The other is some pre-existing reference material that presumably supports your point. If it is always the new material that points at the existing, supporting material, then we're building an information taxonomy bottom up -- with the unfortunate property that entering at higher levels will prevent us from seeing lower levels through explicitly-stated links.

To be fair, there are good reasons for connections to be bidirectional. Unidirectional links are forgivable for the paper model, with its inherently temporal life. But the WWW is more malleable, and bidirectional links don't have to be published at the same time as the first end of the link. In this sense, HTML's linking mechanism, the '<a href="over_there">' construct is fundamentally broken. Google's founders exploited just this characteristic of the web to build their company on a solution to a problem that needn't have been.

And people who have lived through the markup revolution from the days of SGML and HyTime know that it shouldn't have been.

But footnotes still only point bottom up. Fifteen to twenty years on, many of the deeper concepts of the markup revolution are still waiting to flower.

Mary Laplante will be moderating a webinar at noon eastern time today, Web Experience Management: Essentials for Engaging Customers and Winning Loyalty. The sponsor is Fatwire, and the speakers will be Yogesh Gupta, President and CEO of FatWire; Sovan Shatpathy, Manager of Web Infrastructure at Linksys; and Erik Kulvinskas, Web Coordinator for the Colorado Department of Transportation. We are seeing a lot of activity in Web Experience Management, and Mary offers the following definition:

Web experience management is a business practice that formalizes an organization's approach to relating to its audiences through web-based channels. WEM is based on the premise that engagement that delivers high value to all participants does not happen by accident, but rather, by design. Only when experience is deliberately managed does it become repeatable, predictable, and capable of being improved and optimized. WEM, as a business practice, is enabled by a range of technologies, including web content management, personalization, dynamic content delivery, analytics and optimization, and emerging tools for social computing. As such, WEM calls for integrated marketing and IT processes.

Registration for the webinar is still open.

The deadline for proposals for panel participation or presentations for:
Gilbane San Francisco 2008 at the Westin Market Hotel, San Francisco, June 17 - 19, 2008 is January 15.

Visit http://gilbanesf.com/ to see the topic areas we are focusing and then see how to submit a proposal.

If you've never been to one of our events and want see what we have been covering in our conference programs you can view the programs from Gilbane Boston 2007 and Gilbane San Francisco 2007.

If you have additional questions about speaking, send them to speaking@gilbane.com.

The theme for the opening keynote panel: Content Technologies - What's Current & What's Coming? at our Boston conference this week is: change - and what it means for content and information management strategies. Of course there is constant and rapid change in technology, but we are now entering an era of multiple tectonic shifts that will challenge IT and business strategists more than ever. And the changes are not all technological, even if largely caused or influenced by technology. For example, the computer-literate generation entering the workplace, consumer technology changing expectations in the workplace, and a sometimes desperate need to adjust or completely change business models.

Other fundamental changes affecting enterprise information management strategies include the speeding freight trains of mobile computing, cloud computing, enterprise software consolidation, and global e-commerce markets.

We'll also take a look at some specific technologies and ideas that are often over-hyped or not well-understood. Many of these have an important role to play in enterprise information strategies, and the panel's goal will be to help you think through what your expectations of them should be. Examples include technologies that go 'beyond search', social software networks, user-generated content, tagging, enterprise blogs and wikis, and e-books.

This is a lot to cover in an interactive 90 minutes, but our panel will certainly get you thinking, and provide some perspective for your discussions with other attendees, speakers, and exhibitors.

Joining me on the panel are:
Andrew P. McAfee, Associate Professor of Business Administration, Harvard Business School
David Mendels, Senior Vice President, Enterprise & Developer Solutions Business Unit, Adobe
Andy MacMillan,
Vice President, ECM Product Management, Oracle
David Boloker,
CTO Emerging Internet Technology, Distinguished Engineer, IBM Software Group

Web 2.0 BS Generator

user-pic
Vote 0 Votes  

If you are a speaker, exhibitor, or maybe just an attendee who wants to show off their Web 2.0 savvyness at Gilbane Boston in a couple of weeks, you can find some choice buzz-phrases to toss around here. A couple of my favorites:

"disintermediate A-list synergies"

"capture viral tagclouds"

"incentivize data-driven weblogs".

The scary thing is, you can easily imagine how to explain what these might mean, possibly even with a straight face.

Office 2.0

user-pic
Vote 0 Votes  

I spent two days last week at the Office 2.0 conference organized by Ismael Ghalimi. The first thing to say about it is that it is truly amazing what Ismael can put together in 6 weeks. As someone who has organized 60-70 conferences, my amazement and respect for what Ismael accomplished, while not unique, is probably more pronounced than others'.

What is "Office 2.0"? As far as I could tell the consensus in the opening panel "The Future of Work" (and in other sessions) was that it referred to any office-in-the-cloud tools, including but not limited to replications of Microsoft Office. I would say "Office 2.0" is differentiated from "Web 2.0" by having mainly a business focus, and is differentiated from "Enterprise 2.0", at least in terms of this event, by being more about the technology than the effects of its deployment on enterprise practices. There was some gentle push and pull between Microsoft and Google on the relative importance IT/workflow/regulations versus end-user/real-time-collaboration. When pushed on what they would be adding to future work environments, both Microsoft and SAP stressed the importance of business social networks.

Though not a business social network, in spite of a growing number of professionals using it that way, Facebook was discussed throughout the event. There was much hand-wringing and disagreement over whether people would combine their personal and professional activities, contacts, and information for the world to see. I find it hard to fathom, but it is clear that there are a number of people who are happy and eager to do this. However, just as we've said about enterprise blogging, it is important to separate the technology from the way it is used, and there is a big difference between using a tool with social computing-like functionality inside a firewall, and the way people use Facebook. I don't think there is any doubt that social-computing technology has a large and important role to play in enterprises. Note however that the Facebook generation does not necessarily agree!

Ismael gave an in-depth presentation on his exclusive use of "Office 2.0" tools for organizing and producing the conference. This was a fascinating case study. I have to say that after hearing about Ismael's experience I don't think we are quite ready to try this at home, mainly because of the integration issues. We will look at some of the individual tools though. In fact, as Ismael warns, integration is in general the main gotcha for enterprise use of Office 2.0 technology, both between the new tools and between Office 2.0 tools and existing enterprise applications. Ismael describes the event and its organization as an experiment, given what was learned, it was surely a successful experiment.

(See some the the announcements from Office 2.0 at:
http://gilbane.com/blog/mt-search.cgi?tag=Office%202.0&blog_id=12)

Gilbane San Francisco
Join us: http://gilbanesf.com
Follow: gilbanesf on Twitter
Gilbane San Francisco 2009 conference banner

Categories

OpenID accepted here Learn more about OpenID