Abstract

This is the era of social networking, collective intelligence, participation, collaborative creation, and borderless distribution. Every day we are bombarded with more publicity about collaborative environments, news feeds, blogs, wikis, podcasting, webcasting, folksonomies, social bookmarking, social citations, collaborative filtering, recommender systems, media sharing, massive multiplayer online games, virtual worlds, and mashups. This sort of anarchic environment appeals to the digital natives, but which of these so-called ‘Web 2.0’ technologies are going to have a real business impact? This paper addresses the impact that issues such as quality control, security, privacy and bandwidth may have on the implementation of social networking in hide-bound, large organizations.

Introduction

Fifty years ago information was stored on punch cards. SDI services appeared about 10 years later and databases were available online from about 1978. In 1988 PCs were in common use and by 1998 the web was being used as a business tool. The web of the 1990s might be thought of as ‘Web 1.0’, for now in 2008 there is much hype about Web 2.0, but what does that mean? Web 2.0 is an umbrella term for a number of new internet services that are not necessarily closely related. Indeed, some people feel that Web 2.0 is not a valid overall title for these technologies. A reductionist view is that of a read–write web and lots of people using it. Tim O'Reilly and colleagues [1] introduced the term in 2004 and later produced a report refining the concept [2].

O'Reilly defines eight core patterns of Web 2.0:

He expands on these patterns as follows. Harnessing collective intelligence is sometimes described as the core pattern of Web 2.0; it describes architectures of participation [3] that embrace the effective use of network effects and feedback loops to create systems that get better the more that people use them. The second core pattern above is jargon for the fact that information has become as important as, or more important than software, since software itself has become a commodity.