A word cloud of Web 2.0 themes, from Wikipedia
In explaining the business value or advantages of web 2.0, we often have to rely on analogy and metaphor. It’s a common technique to make sense of the unfamiliar in terms of what we already know.
In making these comparisons, it’s useful to juxtapose web 2.0 with what came before – Web 1.0. (We didn’t call it web 1.0 back in the day, the term was called into being only once we came up with web 2.0.)
However, this juxtaposition is often presented in black and white. As if web 2.0 sprang forth fully formed, in complete opposition to what preceded it. A clean break with the so-called 1.0 era. Some might even refer to it as a revolution.
I think it’s important to avoid this — we should recognize that the seeds of what we now consider Web 2.0 were planted way back in the early days of the web.
Today’s commenting systems on blogs have their roots in email newsgroups and internet forums. Twitter has its roots in text messaging and IM. And so on. It’s only when the social, participatory elements that have always been present in the web hit a critical mass that “web 2.0″ surfaced.
Why is this important? It lessens the shock of the new. It emphasizes that today’s web represents an evolution not a revolution. All of which makes it less threatening for people experiencing it for the first time.
I do recognize that today’s participatory web has great potential for social transformation — the documentary film Us Now makes a great case for this. But in a slow-moving, risk-averse bureaucratic context, talking revolution is unlikely to encourage decision makers to take you seriously.
And if you are trying to convince skeptics (your bosses perhaps) to “get social” or at least unblock access to the social web, it might be good strategy to point out that web 2.0 is not such a new thing after all. That the status quo will not be turned upside down from using a wiki or starting a blog. Rather, it makes sense to position these innovations as the logical next step in updating your web presence or your work environment.
What's a spaghetti test?
Peter – After leaving the dry run of my presentation that you attended, I immediately recast all the slides to do exactly as you advocate above. As you say, evolution not revolution is by far the best approach.
Cheers.
Thanks Nick. Gee did I forget to mention my source of inspiration for this post? ;+)
Great post Peter!
I can give you a good example to illustrate:
Replying to a web form inquiry vs. replying to a comment/question on an organization’s blog/web 2.0 site. We’ve been doing the former for a while, and in the case of the latter, the difference is that the reply is publicly visible. Making a reply to a question public, a question that many others may also have, can actually reduce the number of inquiries through various traditional methods (phone/email/webfrom).
It’s important to identify the commonalities and the benefits of the evolving web, rather than saying “it’s a revolution” so we must follow.
Ana @Lissansky
Thanks Ana – excellent example! It’s so simple and direct that even a busy exec could grasp it ;+)
I grant that the move from early web to resent web is an evolution. However the web allowing potentially anyone to publish is a revolution.
It really helps people to understand that the web isn’t just a place to put brochures but a significant change in how humans connect and communicate.
So I think there’s room for a bit of both.
Excellent stuff. It will be very helpful in my 50 minute seminar I am giving on Web 2.0 and Personal Marketing at our national Vision 2000 conference.
Interesting though – my boss is the opposite – he needs no convincing. I got him on the Web 2.0 bandwagon and he’s got the pedal to the metal so I spend a lot of time convincing him (in your words) that it is an evolution – not a revolution and that we need to make it an extension of what we already do – not “spray and pray”.
Thanks for this post Peter. I wholeheartedly agree with it. This is not a “revolution” but it IS revolutionizing the web and organizations using it. The subtlety of evolutionary development of Web 2.0 is something we may need to make more reference of in our presentations and draft briefing materials. (ie – old way vrs new way)
In addition a little bird told me that there might be another screening of Us Now this fall. Will keep you posted.
Thanks Nick, Steve, Angelina for your comments!
Steve, overly supportive managers? that sounds like a nice problem to have!
[...] Seeds of Web 2.0 « Spaghetti Testing | Peter Smith – "…in a slow-moving, risk-averse bureaucratic context, talking revolution is unlikely to encourage decision makers to take you seriously." [...]