<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/1.5.1-alpha" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Do group tools get more traction due to not requiring network effects, and being in the context of certainty</title>
	<link>http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2009/05/22/do-group-tools-get-more-traction-due-to-not-requiring-network-effects-and-being-in-the-context-of-certainty/</link>
	<description>sharing ideas thoughts and feedback</description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 18:57:49 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1-alpha</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: John Tropea</title>
		<link>http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2009/05/22/do-group-tools-get-more-traction-due-to-not-requiring-network-effects-and-being-in-the-context-of-certainty/#comment-32937</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 24 May 2009 23:20:05 +0100</pubDate>
		<guid>http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2009/05/22/do-group-tools-get-more-traction-due-to-not-requiring-network-effects-and-being-in-the-context-of-certainty/#comment-32937</guid>
					<description>Great Hutch - you are right. So many people want to do the social computing thing because it's in vogue, or also for a genuine reason. But like other things it's important to know what you are dealing with...social computing is not a xmas present. And unlike other things, it's not deploy and run, as most often these tools don't have a built in purpose, the goal or objective is not in the tool compared to a system built support database...I suppose tools like Spigit have purpose built in, but then the next thing will be, how does spending time on ideas directly relate to getting my task done. 

I really think the consultant has a major role to play, it's no longer just about IT deploying know-how and know-how of the vendor space, the consultant (or internal person) now has to know about line of business and how these tools can be sculptured to best help them achieve their goal (as I said before this is not an explicit part of the product).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Great Hutch - you are right. So many people want to do the social computing thing because it&#8217;s in vogue, or also for a genuine reason. But like other things it&#8217;s important to know what you are dealing with&#8230;social computing is not a xmas present. And unlike other things, it&#8217;s not deploy and run, as most often these tools don&#8217;t have a built in purpose, the goal or objective is not in the tool compared to a system built support database&#8230;I suppose tools like Spigit have purpose built in, but then the next thing will be, how does spending time on ideas directly relate to getting my task done. </p>
	<p>I really think the consultant has a major role to play, it&#8217;s no longer just about IT deploying know-how and know-how of the vendor space, the consultant (or internal person) now has to know about line of business and how these tools can be sculptured to best help them achieve their goal (as I said before this is not an explicit part of the product).
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Hutch Carpenter</title>
		<link>http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2009/05/22/do-group-tools-get-more-traction-due-to-not-requiring-network-effects-and-being-in-the-context-of-certainty/#comment-32936</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 24 May 2009 16:50:04 +0100</pubDate>
		<guid>http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2009/05/22/do-group-tools-get-more-traction-due-to-not-requiring-network-effects-and-being-in-the-context-of-certainty/#comment-32936</guid>
					<description>John - so much good info here, both from you and those you cite. As I read through this, I'm seeing insightful distinctions on the spectrum of &quot;socialness&quot;. It's these distinctions that are critical for understanding adoption patterns and deploying tools to match the business purpose.  </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>John - so much good info here, both from you and those you cite. As I read through this, I&#8217;m seeing insightful distinctions on the spectrum of &#8220;socialness&#8221;. It&#8217;s these distinctions that are critical for understanding adoption patterns and deploying tools to match the business purpose.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Sameer Patel</title>
		<link>http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2009/05/22/do-group-tools-get-more-traction-due-to-not-requiring-network-effects-and-being-in-the-context-of-certainty/#comment-32935</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 23 May 2009 05:20:04 +0100</pubDate>
		<guid>http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2009/05/22/do-group-tools-get-more-traction-due-to-not-requiring-network-effects-and-being-in-the-context-of-certainty/#comment-32935</guid>
					<description>Ha. Thanks for reading my stuff. :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Ha. Thanks for reading my stuff. <img src='http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/wp-images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' />
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: John Tropea</title>
		<link>http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2009/05/22/do-group-tools-get-more-traction-due-to-not-requiring-network-effects-and-being-in-the-context-of-certainty/#comment-32934</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 23 May 2009 01:23:09 +0100</pubDate>
		<guid>http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2009/05/22/do-group-tools-get-more-traction-due-to-not-requiring-network-effects-and-being-in-the-context-of-certainty/#comment-32934</guid>
					<description>Thx Sameer,

I should have mentioned my earlier post on social computing islands, which are not the same as an enterprise wide social network that connects everyone (cross silo connection)...this is where diversity, emergence, opportunities, findability happen...like you say EXPOSES POTENTIAL RELATIONSHIPS

And I like how you say wiki usage is built into the design

I guess my post could of been called &quot;Size and purpose matter in social computing participation&quot;

http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2008/11/14/are-you-really-doing-enterprise-20/

BTW-lately (from the hundreds of bloggers on this topic), I now get my fix from you, Hutch and Gil</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Thx Sameer,</p>
	<p>I should have mentioned my earlier post on social computing islands, which are not the same as an enterprise wide social network that connects everyone (cross silo connection)&#8230;this is where diversity, emergence, opportunities, findability happen&#8230;like you say EXPOSES POTENTIAL RELATIONSHIPS</p>
	<p>And I like how you say wiki usage is built into the design</p>
	<p>I guess my post could of been called &#8220;Size and purpose matter in social computing participation&#8221;</p>
	<p><a >http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2008/11/14/are-you-really-doing-enterprise-20/</a></p>
	<p>BTW-lately (from the hundreds of bloggers on this topic), I now get my fix from you, Hutch and Gil
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Sameer Patel</title>
		<link>http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2009/05/22/do-group-tools-get-more-traction-due-to-not-requiring-network-effects-and-being-in-the-context-of-certainty/#comment-32933</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2009 14:18:42 +0100</pubDate>
		<guid>http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2009/05/22/do-group-tools-get-more-traction-due-to-not-requiring-network-effects-and-being-in-the-context-of-certainty/#comment-32933</guid>
					<description>Hi John
Wow - this is really an amazing post on so many levels. There so little execution / tactical insight on this subject and its great that you dug in.
I agree - wikis might be more prevelant in part because it doesn't require serious or in some cases any network effects to thrive. Its' usage has intent built in from the get go.
That said, to me wikis are an important tactical component towards a larger design. In contrast social networking in the enterprise exposes potential relationships across the extended enterprise. But it also requires the right programmatic push and process adherence so everyone knows about it, participates and exploits value from it. Much harder, but exponentially more powerful if you can pull it  off.  
Thanks for referring to my post.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Hi John<br />
Wow - this is really an amazing post on so many levels. There so little execution / tactical insight on this subject and its great that you dug in.<br />
I agree - wikis might be more prevelant in part because it doesn&#8217;t require serious or in some cases any network effects to thrive. Its&#8217; usage has intent built in from the get go.<br />
That said, to me wikis are an important tactical component towards a larger design. In contrast social networking in the enterprise exposes potential relationships across the extended enterprise. But it also requires the right programmatic push and process adherence so everyone knows about it, participates and exploits value from it. Much harder, but exponentially more powerful if you can pull it  off.<br />
Thanks for referring to my post.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>

