distinction we noted between the
internal and external deployment of
Web 2.0 technologies during our interviews (see Figure 2).
Table 2 outlines some expectations
data. What did senior managers think
about the contributions Web 2.0 technologies could make to corporate productivity and management?
The survey data suggests expectations were generally positive, even
though most respondents (55%) expect “medium” impact, and 23% expect it to be “high.” This combined
78% response suggests the majority
of respondents expect the impact of
Web 2.0 technologies to be significant. There is a lot of optimism out
Table 3 suggests that most respondents expect Web 2.0 technologies to
affect knowledge management, collaboration, and communications;
many also expected them to positively
affect customer relationship management, innovation, and training. Rapid
application development was expected to lag relative to the other areas.
Table 4 outlines what happened
vs. what respondents thought would
happen. For example, knowledge
management was expected to be
more important than it turned out
to be. Collaboration and communications were slightly exaggerated in
the expectations survey data, though
collaboration and communications
were still highly affected by Web 2.0
technologies. Expectations lagged for
innovation, training, customer relationship management, and rapid application development. What could
explain the optimism that yielded to
reality? Cynics might point to pundit
hype and vendor exaggeration of technology capabilities, something many
vendors do routinely. Others might
point to naiveté about early vs. man-aged-technology adoption processes.
Regardless of the reason, we found a
gap between what was expected and
what actually occurred.
Table 5 shifts to a lower level of
analysis, assessing the impact of
knowledge management. The four
metrics—sharing, retrieving, orga-
nizing, and leveraging knowledge—
indicate that Web 2.0 technologies
contributed significantly to sharing,
retrieving, and organizing knowledge
but less to leveraging knowledge for
problem solving. This makes Web 2.0
technologies (for knowledge manage-
ment) more descriptive than prescrip-
tive, more operational than strategic.
Table 9. Customer relationship management impact data by ability.
in the area of customer relationship management, have Web 2.0 technologies
contributed to your organization’s ability to…
not at all Very little
42.1% ( 32) 30.3% ( 23)
mine customer data
“Touch” more customers
Solicit customer insights
21.1% ( 16)
A great deal Response Total
6.6% ( 5) 76
34.2% ( 26) 28.9% ( 22) 22.4% ( 17) 14.5% ( 11)
36.8% ( 28) 25.0% ( 19) 26.3% ( 20) 11.8% ( 9)
32.9% ( 25) 21.1% ( 16) 39.5% ( 30)
6.6% ( 5)
Table 10. Web 2.0 technologies and customer relationship management.
in terms of improving customer relationship management,
which Web 2.0 technologies have contributed the most?
(Please select all that apply.)
We have not seen