The following constitutes an open letter to Professor Andrew McAfee, author of The Impact of Information Technology (IT) on Businesses and their Leaders.
Feel free to comment, even if you aren’t the Professor.
——–
Greetings Professor McAfee,
First off, let me start by stating that my colleague Jay and I are avid readers of your blog and like-minded E2 technologists. It has proven to be an excellent source of information and full of insightful comments.
Jay and I began our foray into Enterprise 2.0 in late 2006 by standing up a COTS enterprise wiki application on an old laptop in the basement of my home. After a year’s worth of trials and tribulations, an ornery IT department, and a forgiving group of 1000 pilot users, we are on the verge of going live to 17,000. I can say in all honesty that we are beginning to realize the critical mass necessary to transform to the transparent enterprise. While this pilot phase has been exciting, I believe the impending innovation possibilities will surprise even the most savvy technology consultants.
Additionally, the interest from our clients, both government and commercial, has increased exponentially. The market is still shaking itself out but at the very least, it can be said without doubt that change is afoot. In response to this, a small group of consultants who have steeped themselves in the Enterprise (Web) 2.0 market space, have banded together to develop specific “solutions” for prospective clients. Traditionally, these sorts of solutions would provide professional services around the software implementations, with the bread and butter of this business model being ERP, HR, and other enterprise software. In thinking of our experience implementing the wiki, and my understanding of professional services organizations, I wanted to ask your thoughts on the following question:
Do you think there is room for professional services in the implementation of Enterprise 2.0 software?
I ask this question due mostly in part to my perception of the nature of these technologies. Typically they are emergent, relatively easy to implement, virally adopted, and drive their own change management efforts. Thus traditional consultant type activities such as business requirements definition, process mapping, change management, etc are relatively moot. Not to sound like a money grubbing consultant, but do you see any possible affects on the traditional professional services business models as Enterprise 2.0 technologies become more widespread?
UPDATE
Looks like Professor McAfee responded…
4 responses so far ↓
1 Kevin // Jan 26, 2008 at 11:54 am
Great question! I eagerly await your responses.
2 Justin // Jan 29, 2008 at 12:09 pm
Is it the right question? Perhaps with this type of implementation, a new type of change and management consulting is in order.
Lets instead consult on transparency and viral adoption methodologies. Lets develop new areas of expertise in the implementation of “light” technologies, and in how to seed them to start the transition into this new world. Business process maps, and other traditional artifacts may not be appropriate in this context, rather a new set of artifacts, and methodologies to implement may be required.
Perhaps instead of artifact makers, we’ll need to become the experts in viral adoption, in transparent management, in explanation of the new collaborative paradigm, and focus on the training and implementation of such systems in other organizations.
Once they can walk on their own, there are likely more engagement on other new areas that we can offer help and assistance, which will grease our grubby little consultant palms without the need to revert to traditional artifacts?
Just a thought.
3 Jeremy Thomas // Feb 12, 2008 at 3:00 am
Awesome blog guys!
I was actually thinking about this the other day. Except I had the opposite thought. Is there room for software vendors in E2.0? What I mean is, since E2.0 is so much about cultural change, it makes sense that a management consulting firm step in to coach an organization through said change. E2.0 tools, then, become a tool that helps companies transition toward transparency and emergence (love that word, “emergence”).
Plus, who’s going to hook in all that rich, hard to integrate to legacy data? Shouldn’t knowledge workers get credit for information assets they created five years ago? Certainly. And to make this happen we need enterprise search and SOA. Management Consultants are good at both.
So, my question is, is there is an E2.0 market that can sustain companies that do no more than sell E2.0 software (like Jive) ?
4 Jay Hariani // Feb 17, 2008 at 5:14 pm
Thanks Jeremey. In my opinion, software vendors that can adapt to the model will prosper. But black box pricing, rejecting community support, and other “bad habits” traditionally associated with enterprise software vendors might need to go away. Becoming more intimate with one’s customers will be part of the future of successful software companies.
To answer your question, I think old-school big software companies can continue to thrive in a world of lightweight E2.0 tool vendors. But, there is an inevitable culling - as those that are willing to change and innovate pull ahead of those that seek to preserve existing revenues. IBM seems willing to adapt, Microsoft perhaps not.
Leave a Comment