Thanks for taking the time to respond. Have you reviewed Michael Cayley work around “Social Capital Value Add, see http://socialcapitalvalueadd.com/share-the-scva-ebook/

He and several others are pushing the edge but gaining momentum and getting attention from the right markets of conversations.

There are people thinking about all this social stuff in different and valuable ways. The problem is getting all these thought leaders connected and on the same page….go figure

I want to see new thinking that abstracts the best of what the technologies can offer and apply them to the larger problems that business faces. To me that comes down to collaboration. But even then I know this is an incredibly tough nut to crack.

I think I have part of the answer but confess to staring ‘through the glass darkly.’ It will emerge and no doubt change but right now, I’m not sure we have enough people thinking seriously about this in ways that make sense.

I know what Doc says about vendor managed relationships and while I struggle with the concepts from a practical view, I see the value. What I find truly hard to parse though are the revolutionary undertones of some people in that group. Revolutions are bloody places. People get hurt. I’m not sure that’s a great idea.

True – it is not a generational thing which is why I also dislike this way of describing what is happening – it makes it seem like a passing fad.

We are dealing with the legacy of something that is 600 years old – and these things don’t change overnight – but they do change. The interesting thing is that very few people are able to really understand the nature and direction of the change because they are always looking backwards and using the past as their frame of reference. This is why so few people are actually analysing this shift in terms of a Gutenberg and post-Gutenberg world.

That’s anyone – accountants, marketers, salesmen, whoever they may be – who talk about all the wonderful things they’re going to do, spend ages talking about “planning a framework”, “putting together a strategy”, etc, etc, and then never actually do anything. It’s fair enough to make a plan, the hard bit is to carry it out!

And it’s also accountants who talk to their clients in accountantese so that the client can’t understand what they’re saying. Don’t get me started on that one.

I think Web 2.0 can make this problem worse – because the guffers have got so many more media to spout their rubbish.

But Web 2.0 is also an excellent way to separate the sheep from the goats. A pithy, to-the-point blog makes so much better reading than a waffly one.

Jay, I’d certainly be interested in taking part in the forum you mention.

M

There are no business processes that do not require human interaction and all this social stuff is about human interaction fueled by advancing technology. This goes way beyond marketing and PR and yes I too am tired of what seem to be a consumption with “social media” as purely a marketing play.

I am studying the implications and writing about my findings and my perspective at http://www.relationship-economy.com.

Maybe we need a new focus on ideas that transform business as usual. Just maybe we need outside views that discuss implications other than marketing. A conference of visionary leaders who see all this “social stuff” beyond todays definition would be a good start. Hmmm….anyone interested in collaborating and creating such a forum? I know Doc Searls would agree and participate.

Also – the reason why “adopt web 2.0 or fail” also doesn’t work is because many continue just fine without adopting “web 1.0″, if there is such a thing. :/

“Gen Y” already scorns web 2.0, noting that people who don’t know what they’re talking about – the cherished awful example is the job description that asks for a person with “5 years of web 3.0″ experience, and even more equally ridiculous nonsense.