Week 3: Enterprise 2.0 in Action

Hi guys, another week another blog.

This week I’ve decided look at businesses who have already implemented web 2.0 concepts as part of their IT investment. First of all, let me give you guys a a quick run down of how I choose my businesses. Web 2.0 concepts aren’t exactly new now. All big businesses have spent a significant amount of time thinking of how they can harvest relevant information from the internet. However, there is a LOT of information out there and not all of it is relevant. So now there’s a concept of Information literacy.
If Wiki is a bit boring for you watch this:

So why am I introducing this concept to you? Well, this week’s topic is about web 2.0 technologies and how they help add value to a business and help achieve company objectives. I work of IBM, and in my time there I can tell you that Sharing information, tagging, links and pretty much the entire idea of SLATES is done on a day to day basis. It is encouraged for us to actively create, source and share relevant content with other colleagues through an intranet system that is supposed to deliver better (and more specific) results that one simply can not find through a simple Google Search.

Now I can not go into to much detail about the system or the information it holds but after scanning through a few other class blogs I found that no one talked about internal wiki’s and other similar systems. Systems designed to find / organize and retrieve relevant data done from environmental scanning.

But what about businesses that use web 2.0 concepts as their entire business model? (Think FaceBook, Twitter, YouTube).  SHARING or Harnessing the collective intelligence (for anyone else who did the Web 2.0 class) is a cornerstone of these businesses.

Grooveshark (and it’s mobile application) as a few web 2.0 technologies:

  • Designed from the start to share data across devices, servers, and networks
  • Location aware
  • Extend Web 2.0 to devices
  • Enable data location independence

Grooveshark can play on any major smartphone platform (iOS, Andriod, Blackberry OS) through either a mobile website or a downloadable application. It uses the smartphones location to deliver targeted advertisement which the user can opt out of for a subscription of 9$ US a month. Grooveshark embraces web 2.0 and allows for easy music sharing. The service also relies on users to upload music. The service also minimizes input from customers if they have a Grooveshark account (by making the user choose what playlist he wants) and allowing the server to do the rest. The account also stores any changes to playlist regardless of which device the user was operating on and can play from the last song any device was playing.

Although Grooveshark is trying to compete with services such as SpotifyPandora and iTunes (and as a platform I tend to use a mixture of each of these services) I believe that Grooveshark is a better example of a “Wikinomics Business”. Why? Well the platform and business is built entirely on;

  • Being Open (signing in is not a requirement to use the service)
  • Sharing (without people uploading music there would be no service to offer)
  • Acting Global (the only reason it is unable to take off as much as say iTunes is the local laws centred around sharing music, no one wants to be known as Napster 2.0)


3 comments on “Week 3: Enterprise 2.0 in Action
  1. yannick says:

    Thanks for introducing the concept of information literacy/fluency. I think companies can benefit from educating their employees in skills like these, in addition to encouraging them to use social technologies.
    For another example of a company using a corporate wiki and social platform (British Telecom), check out my article at wp.me/p3Ming-x

  2. Hi, nice blog!

    I agree with your ruling as to which music platform best exemplified the Wikinomics Business model. Do you think that current services like iTunes Store would benefit from adopting that same business model? Or are they modelled or built to distant from the ideals it promotes?

    • colhili says:

      I honestly believe that the popularity of mobile Apple Products is the only reason iTunes is more successful then others. Why? Because it guarantees that Apple, Producer and Artist all get a cut of the profits. Does it use web 2.0 concepts? Partly, but Apple’s attempt that building a music facebook has failed in the past (can’t remember the name) so I honestly think that Pandora, Spotify and Grooveshark are all better “Wikinomic” music platforms.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: