Capping IT Off

Capping IT Off

There is no such thing as a phase two

Category : Web

When developing enterprise 2.0 solutions there is no such thing as a phase two in which you can do product enhancements that are left out in phase one. If you did not start with a proper enhanced product or service within your E2.0 environment that has value for your colleagues or employees, you will deliver a bunch of code that can be redirected to the scrapheap.

In E2.0 you have to create services that add value, in Web2.0 you cant ake the risk of not doing that. Why is E2.0 so strict? Simply: your target audience is way smaller and mistakes aren't tolerated in E2.0. In Web2.0 you create a poorly interface or service and people still will adopt it (Twitter is one of the best examples, it had structural outages, a poor interface and still the community was growing). Besides that E2.0 does not equal Web2.0. Just building your E2.0 solution is not enough, as Thomas Vander Wal said in his Tale of the two tunnels :

Many organizations initial believe that Web 2.0 tools will take off and have great adoption inside an organization. But, this is not a "build it and they will come" scenario, even for the younger workers who are believed to love these tools and services and will not stay in a company that does not have them. The reality is the tools need selling their use, value derived from them, the conceptual models around what they do, and easing fears. Adoption rates grow far beyond the teen percentages in organizations that take time guiding people about the use of the tools and services. Those organizations that take the opportunity to continually sell the value and use for these tools they have in place get much higher adoption and continued engagement with the tools than those who do nothing and see what happens

For example: I overheard a conversation concerning a portal that should be build within a company to help employees with their work live balance. This portal would contain, in phase one, only functionality to plan a trip from location A to B and would provide a comparison on different transportmodes (phase two would have more functionality). Imagine you being at home starting your day with planning how you could get from your home (location A) to a customer (location B) and you start planning with the tool provided on the internal portal: You first have to startup your company laptop, than connect via VPN to the company network, go to the portal and than plan your trip. Or what you also could have done was going to a public site that is offering exact the same service and plan your trip (without using VPN, without your company laptop, you can even use this public application via phone).

It might be clear that there will not be a phase two for this portal project. Simply because it does not add value and the adoption rate in phase one is too low (if any at all). If you are planning to build an E2.0 solution: add value, sell value, sell value, add value, sell value, sell value, sell value, add value (this process is should be repeated over and over again).

About the author

Rick Mans
5 Comments Leave a comment
So are you saying there should never be a Phase II, even if you started off with a great product to begin with? It would be foolish to say so as there are many examples of building on already good foundations in the E2.0 space.
It's about getting good products/services out there quickly, way before traditional IT ever could. It's then perfectly acceptable to build on the product/service in line with demand and trends.
Of course, dumb ideas and products should never see the light of day in the first place.
Hi Rick,
I am in complete agreement with you on the thoughts you have just put down above. And infact I can see a couple of examples in front of me already!
However I was keen to understand a couple of things:
1. could you shed some light on what you meant with "with web2.0, your target audience is way smaller"?
2. how would you see the enhancements we see in some of the popular websites such as LinkedIn which has added Company Profiles and very recently the Applications to their basic foundation service?
Just curious to understand your perspective! :-)
Thanks,
Nikhil
rimans's picture
@Scott
Good E2.0 foundations could (should?!) still have a phase two for further improvement. However in my opinion you should not start or plan a phase two for E2.0 solution when phase one does not already add any value to your enterprise. Especially when creating E2.0 solutions you should start with adding value and selling this value.
If you do not add value and / or do not sell its value you are just developing another bunch of bits and bytes which will be eventually covered in dust. Selling and adding value in a "phase two" will make it very hard to get your solution adopted, especially since your solution was already moved to a scrapheap in the mind of the first group of users in your enterprise.
rimans's picture
@Nikhil
1) I re-read my blog again, but what wrote is that E2.0 has a smaller audience (the audience of E2.0 is just and enterprise and the audience of Web2.0 is the world).
2) The developments at LinkedIn are good enhancements and they also proof that you can make mistakes in Web2.0 (there were quite some bugs in the applicationplatform). I think enhancement sare a good thing as long as they add value and LinkedIn is still a platform that lacks a proper extensibility (they made a good start however by introducing the app platform), however they add value by other functionalities.
Yes, of course phase I should add value. I completely agree with your response, but it makes me wonder if you should change the title of your post, as we both agree there can be second phases. That's all I was trying to get across.
Anyway, at least the headline grabbed my attention and encouraged me add a comment....

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *.