Being at the AIIM Expo earlier this week (as discussed here, here, and here) again brought me back to thinking about the tension between “enterprise 1.0″ and “enterprise 2.0″ worlds. To summarize in tabular form:
I’m also again reminded that the left and right sides of this table are not ‘either-or’, ‘duality’, ‘right-wrong’, ‘good-bad’…but closer to a yin and yang relationship. Both sides are needed. The trick then is in finding and keeping the balance, i.e. finding the middle way.
For Further Reflection:
- Jim McGee‘s Knowledge management: the newest battle between the neats and the scruffies (July 2007)
- The ‘neats’ and ‘scruffies’ labels were also used by Ian Delaney in his 5 March tweet: “semantic wikis! oh yes. tension between scruffies and neats in knowledge management”
- My November post: Enterprise 2.0 body analogies and business intelligence
- Nearly two years ago, Nancy White wrote: “Even when open, transparent and open to negotiation by the group, some will perceive norms as controlled and top down. Too few norms = chaos. Too many = oppression. Tough place to balance in between.”
- (added 23 March) David Gurteen shares his own 1.0 vs. 2.0 table in World 2.0
- (added 23 March) Jennifer Okimoto‘s 1.0 vs. 2.0 in the slideshare I embedded in The convergence of L&D and KM (Part-4: why?)
For a future post: finding the middle way with wikis.
photo credit: Christian Benacer
1 Response to “The yin and yang of 1.0 and 2.0 worlds”