Supernova 2008: Challenges for the Network Age
We’re at a turning point. The “web 2.0†boom has lasted longer than its “web 1.0†predecessor, and there are storm clouds ahead for the global economy. Battles over the future of software, the data center, broadband, the media, the social ecosystem, and the planet have been joined in earnest. This is not the time for small ideas or business as usual.
Thursday, May 29, 2008
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
Braintrust 2008
The 10th Annual Braintrust International Knowledge Sharing Summit is taking place November 18-20, 2008 at the Disney Contemporary Hotel, Orlando, FL.
Thursday, May 22, 2008
Politics Of Collaboration
A must read post by David Coleman of Collaborative Strategies - The Political Conundrum of Collaboration. David walks us through the various collaboration technologies that vex the CIO/IT team in organizations but empower people and processes.
I can especially relate to the story of the "Disgruntled Collaborator".Â
Many IT departments today fail to understand that you can not and should not always take the traditional project management/systems development life-cycle approach to organizational collaboration (process or tools). I am not saying to throw process out the window, but collaboration involves people, process, and technology and screams for a more iterative (collaborative!) approach to defining the need, picking the tool, and implementing the process and tool. The process needs to take days or weeks not months or years.
Moving forward with collaboration is not an all or nothing proposition. I am a firmly believe that an organization, no matter its size, needs to form a strategy for leveraging knowledge. But, not having a strategy in place should not keep you from moving forward with solutions that empower and enhance productivity. This is especially true given the low cost of SaaS (software as a service) collaboration technologies. You can start down a path that provides immediate value and then as the strategy and architecture around knowledge management and collaboration are formalized a reevaluation of the current solutions can be undertaken.
The bottom line is that collaboration and collaborative technologies are all about connectedness.
I can especially relate to the story of the "Disgruntled Collaborator".Â
Many IT departments today fail to understand that you can not and should not always take the traditional project management/systems development life-cycle approach to organizational collaboration (process or tools). I am not saying to throw process out the window, but collaboration involves people, process, and technology and screams for a more iterative (collaborative!) approach to defining the need, picking the tool, and implementing the process and tool. The process needs to take days or weeks not months or years.
Moving forward with collaboration is not an all or nothing proposition. I am a firmly believe that an organization, no matter its size, needs to form a strategy for leveraging knowledge. But, not having a strategy in place should not keep you from moving forward with solutions that empower and enhance productivity. This is especially true given the low cost of SaaS (software as a service) collaboration technologies. You can start down a path that provides immediate value and then as the strategy and architecture around knowledge management and collaboration are formalized a reevaluation of the current solutions can be undertaken.
The bottom line is that collaboration and collaborative technologies are all about connectedness.
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
The Knowledge Web with James Burke
Special Web Event with Best Selling Author and Famous Historian James Burke.
8 AM Pacific/10 AM Central/11 AM Eastern
The Knowledge Web with James Burke
Connections and relationships make the difference between static information and useable knowledge. TheBrain proudly presents a special Web event with James Burke, British science historian and author of the Connections television series. This seminar will help you learn how to think innovatively, how to enhance the value of what you know by giving it context and relevance, and how dynamic structures like PersonalBrain are likely to be used in the near future to change many aspects of living, learning and working.
8 AM Pacific/10 AM Central/11 AM Eastern
The Knowledge Web with James Burke
Connections and relationships make the difference between static information and useable knowledge. TheBrain proudly presents a special Web event with James Burke, British science historian and author of the Connections television series. This seminar will help you learn how to think innovatively, how to enhance the value of what you know by giving it context and relevance, and how dynamic structures like PersonalBrain are likely to be used in the near future to change many aspects of living, learning and working.
Thursday, May 8, 2008
Get on the Identity Bus
The Identity Bus
I am all in favor of a standardized service in support of the seamless exchange of identity data. At present, public facing services need to support an alphabet soup of methods for 'sharing' identity data.
It is great for those of us interested in the technical nits and nats to converse about this, but in order to have full scale adoption of identity interoperability it needs to be seamless and mindless. Mindless in the sense the the end user of a system, web site, etc., does not have to think about which credential to use to gain access to a resource.
The thing I am having a lot of trouble understanding is why anyone would want to re-label this as LDAP. The use of LDAP has been so bastardized already, why add more confusion to. History: LDAP is a protocol for accessing data stored in a directory (Lightweight Directory Access Protocol). The term has been used incorrectly for many years. If it is a directory, why can't we just call a directory a directory?
I'm thinking out loud here, but this identity 'bus' should be called something like the IBS - Identity Bus Service...
I am all in favor of a standardized service in support of the seamless exchange of identity data. At present, public facing services need to support an alphabet soup of methods for 'sharing' identity data.
It is great for those of us interested in the technical nits and nats to converse about this, but in order to have full scale adoption of identity interoperability it needs to be seamless and mindless. Mindless in the sense the the end user of a system, web site, etc., does not have to think about which credential to use to gain access to a resource.
The thing I am having a lot of trouble understanding is why anyone would want to re-label this as LDAP. The use of LDAP has been so bastardized already, why add more confusion to. History: LDAP is a protocol for accessing data stored in a directory (Lightweight Directory Access Protocol). The term has been used incorrectly for many years. If it is a directory, why can't we just call a directory a directory?
I'm thinking out loud here, but this identity 'bus' should be called something like the IBS - Identity Bus Service...
Wednesday, May 7, 2008
Enterprise 2.0 Conference
Web 2.0 has been getting a ton of press lately, especially as it's applications for businesses become more recognized. If you are challenged by:
The Enterprise 2.0 Conference will cover this and more. From the latest social tools to the infrastructure and culture needed to support them, you'll learn how 2.0 tools will make your organization more productive, flexible and connected.
http://www.enterprise2conf.com/
- unlocking the information in your organization and workers
- connecting and collaborating more closely with customers
- finding more efficient ways to manage projects and time
The Enterprise 2.0 Conference will cover this and more. From the latest social tools to the infrastructure and culture needed to support them, you'll learn how 2.0 tools will make your organization more productive, flexible and connected.
http://www.enterprise2conf.com/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)