“Druckerian” and the Enterprise 2.0 Schism

A well-argued post suggesting that much of the Enterprise 2.0 debates curently circulating is perforce covering old ground.

.

Enterprise 2.0 Schism

I have to confess that I’ve enjoyed watching recent rounds of Enterprise 2.0 discussion and mud wrestling. The fact that so many people enjoy debating definitions, values, doctrinal principals – even the existence of Enterprise 2.0 – makes me think that E2.0 might best be framed as a religious debate. With that in mind, I’d like to introduce a new and exciting element: schism.

.

A schism between the Strict Technarian and the Strict Proletarian … read the whole post here.

The key point I took out of the post at the Traction Software blog is one that I’ve kept saying until it feels like my lips are bleeding.

People do purposeful work in small groups and they want to good work (natch, we all do), and social computing can help these small groups do better work AND connect to other small groups or individuals … with intelligent management and useful systems, the work of various small groups in an organization can be woven together to arrive at greater organizational responsiveness, capacity and capability.

.

I believe the value of Enterprise 2.0 techniques comes from small to mid size groups within an organization who intentionally (not emergently) improve their own ability to get work done, while opening the direct and indirect record of their work to others who then may become better aware of what their enterprise plans to do, is doing or has done – and who knows what.

I hereby declare myself an Enterprise 2.0 Strict Druckerian. I believe that “2.0” should be considered a modifier of Enterprise rather than an allusion to mere Web 2.0 technology – which is what an Enterprise 2.0 Strict Technarian would have you believe.