Future of web apps

by admin on October 5, 2007

in General,Innovation

04102007532
Having just returned from the Future of Web Apps conference in London, I was shocked to find that even basic stuff like back ups is not standard practice among developers. It also seems that 15 years of selling applications into the enterprise hasn’t provided enough visibility for the lessons developers need to learn if they are to be successful in that environment. The most interesting aside is the belief among some that implementing social software like blogs and wikis is easy because they’re relatively cheap.

I spent a good hour discussing this with Suw Charman, who was involved in the Social Text implementation at Dresdner Kleinwort. As I said here, there was a real sense of deja vue during which I found myself nodding furiously in agreement and eventually not bothering to take notes.

So much of what Suw said seems depressingly familiar. Starting with the notion that because there is a lot of excitement around social computing as the Next Big Thing and is incredibly cheap to acquire that it will magically make its way into the business. It won’t. There was a lot of talk about being at the beginning of something and trying to figure it all out. I can relate to that but I believe that adoption patterns for social software are not that different from any other software implementation. You still have to overcome cultural and emotional barriers to adoption but in this case those same issues are attenuated to a higher level.

The good news is that so far at least, the big ticket consulting groups have not gotten into the game to any discernible extent. That means consultants like Suw can plough a furrow that sets the parameters for implementation and cost with which the Accentures of this world will struggle. Who knows, over time we might yet see the formation of a different type of consulting organisation. One that is leaner, agile and intent on achieving results rather than those that are ponderous and loaded with methodologies that stifle and constrict innovation.

The bad news is that companies are often looking at social computing as a marketing thing and engaging with agencies who wouldn’t know a software implementation from a hole in the ground.

The biggest issue is the blase manner in which social computing mavens seem intent on putting a bullet to their brain by trying to find convoluted ways of redefining ROI so that it is rendered irrelevant or unintelligible. That won’t cut it in the finance office where the cheques get cut for those implementations. The sooner we excise that kind of thinking the better.

Comments have been disabled for this post.
Sort: Newest | Oldest

As with any new technology, boiling down the benefits of its provision in order for the financial return to be reasonably divined or enumerated is a really tough call. As you alluded to in your ZDnet KISS piece Email had to tread this fire-coal path before general acceptance.
I can't for the life of me remember the exact ROI enumerations for Email in it's emergence, but I do remember the difficulty in getting it implemented and paid for in businesses of that period, many of those struggles ring true today with social software, with the IT department often making it more difficult than before.

However as you know for us we are actually on the other side of the equation today, trying to enumerate new social software patterns, services and products and more importantly what they mean in terms of returns for organisations and businesses. This post is timely as we (at Folknology) are in the process of boiling down what the real deliveries are likely to be for various usage scenarios of rel3 and its no picnic. However we are seeing some clues, these are obviously edge collaboration benefits due to rel3's nature but it's a starting point :

1. Contextual resources/files -> De-duplication of shared resources/attachments internally and inter-business, less storage, avoids file version time wasting
2. Frequent in band Packet communication -> Decreases travel and meeting costs in terms of time, disruption and direct expense
3. Topic/project or event based aggregation -> Access relevant information in the natural context, less time is wasted, higher efficiency and competency especially with third parties
4. Interaction online -> Relationship building, strengthens edge ties and often bonds third parties to the organisation, great for customer retention.
5. Contextual filtering & notification -> Removes the everyone copied on this email scenarios, reduces attention waste and procrastination.
6. Realtime awareness - > Improves internal and external response times, in some cases can actually help preventing issues before they occur
7. Centralisation and aggregation of disparate tools/services/resources -> Reduces management , administration, support and training costs.
8. Third party participation -> Allows third parties to help themselves to resources and information leading to customer satisfaction and reduced administration costs.

These are just some of the more obvious ones emerging from our work, I would love to see Suw's and others practitioners views on more direct accountable benefits.

Most of us are still working this out so It's a great topic D, I am by no means an expert either, thats why I love events like Wiki Wednesdays where practitioners get to through around real experiences.

regards
AL

Previous post:

Next post: