management is not viewed as a prime
impact area for Web 2.0 technologies,
though this attitude might change
Table 11 shifts the focus to collaboration and communication, where, as
expected, the impact is significant.
Wikis are the runaway hit, followed
by blogs and external social networks.
However, we found a lower level of
deployment sophistication than the
ideal. For example, the “auditing”
of communications and collaboration streams (classic business intelligence) lags well behind other impact
areas. The power of many Web 2.0
technologies often involves the ability to perform primary and secondary
analyses of transactions, communications patterns, and customer service.
Our survey data appears to indicate
that we’re seeing a toe-in-the-water
effect, where companies experiment
with initial deployments but stop
short of full commitment through total exploitation of the technologies.
Table 12 confirms all this, with
wikis, internal blogs, and internal
social networks leading the way in
collaboration and communications.
While this trend is to be expected,
many other opportunities have yet to
be exploited. Table 12 also suggests
weakness in externally focused Web
2.0 technology deployment—surpris-
ing in light of the technology’s capa-
bilities. We can infer from this data
that external applications lag internal
ones and that over time significant
collaboration and communication
applications can be expected. Why
such optimism? Because Web 2.0
technology capabilities are essential-
ly built on ubiquitous collaboration
Table 14 outlines how Web 2.0
technologies contribute to innovation. Very surprising is the relative
unimportance survey respondents
ascribe to external crowdsourcing.
(Does anyone believe virtual worlds
are useful for anything?)
Training is the final area we assessed. Table 15 suggests that survey
respondents have not yet defined how
Web 2.0 technologies can contribute
to training. While wikis are natural-
Table 13. innovation impact data by ability.
in the area of innovation, have Web 2.0 technologies
contributed to your organization’s ability to…
not at all Very little
27.6% ( 21) 22.4% ( 17)
36.8% ( 28) 15.8% ( 12)
35.5% ( 27) 19.7% ( 15)
Improve r&d success
Increase the number of
39.5% ( 30)
35.5% ( 27)
31.6% ( 24)
A great deal Response Total
10.5% ( 8) 76
11.8% ( 9) 76
13.2% ( 10) 76
39.5% ( 30) 14.5% ( 11) 38.2% ( 29)
7.9% ( 6)
Table 14. Web 2.0 technologies and innovation.
in terms of improving innovation, which Web 2.0 technologies
have contributed the most? (Please select all that apply.)
We have not seen
figure 4. Segmentation of
Web 2.0 technologies.