This is “Introduction”, section 7.1 from the book Getting the Most Out of Information Systems (v. 2.0).
This book is licensed under a Creative Commons by-nc-sa 3.0 license. See the license for more details, but that basically means you can share this book as long as you credit the author (but see below), don't make money from it, and do make it available to everyone else under the same terms.
This content was accessible as of December 29, 2012, and it was downloaded then by Andy Schmitz in an effort to preserve the availability of this book.
Normally, the author and publisher would be credited here. However, the publisher has asked for the customary Creative Commons attribution to the original publisher, authors, title, and book URI to be removed. Additionally, per the publisher's request, their name has been removed in some passages. More information is available on this project's attribution page.
For more information on the source of this book, or why it is available for free, please see the project's home page. You can browse or download additional books there. You may also download a PDF copy of this book (2 MB) or just this chapter (245 KB), suitable for printing or most e-readers, or a .zip file containing this book's HTML files (for use in a web browser offline).
Over the past few years, a fundamentally different class of Internet services has attracted users, made headlines, and increasingly garnered breathtaking market valuations. Often referred to under the poorly defined umbrella term “Web 2.0A term broadly referring to Internet services that foster collaboration and information sharing; characteristics that distinctly set “Web 2.0” efforts apart from the static, transaction-oriented Web sites of “Web 1.0.” The term is often applied to Web sites and Internet services that foster social media or other sorts of peer production.,” these new services are targeted at harnessing the power of the Internet to empower users to collaborate, create resources, and share information in a distinctly different way than the static Web sites and transaction-focused storefronts that characterized so many failures in the dot-com bubble. Techies often joust over the precise definition of Web 2.0, but these arguments aren’t really all that important. What is significant is how quickly the Web 2.0 revolution came about, how unexpected it was, and how deeply impactful these efforts have become for individuals, businesses, and society. Consider the following:
The Web 2.0 moniker is a murky one because like so many popular technology terms there’s not a precise definition. We’ll add some precision to our discussion by focusing on social media efforts—technologies that support the creation of user-generated content, as well as content editing, commenting, curation, and sharing. Social media efforts include blogs, wikis, social networks, Twitter, and photo and video sharing sites. The rise of social media has also coincided with the rise of mobile computing—meaning the worldwide Internet conversation is always in your pocket. Mobile and social also work together to create entirely new services, like the location-based game / discovery engine / deals platform, Foursquare.
The peer productionWhen users collaboratively work to create content, products, and services. Includes social media sites, open source software, and peer-produced services, such as Skype and BitTorrent, where the participation of users provide the infrastructure and computational resources that enable the service. leveraged by collaborating users isn’t only used to create social media; it can be used to create services, too, and these are also considered to be part of Web 2.0. Skype and BitTorrent leverage users’ computers instead of a central IT resource to forward phone calls and video. This ability saves their sponsors the substantial cost of servers, storage, and bandwidth. Peer production is also leveraged to create much of the open source software that supports many of the Web 2.0 efforts described above. Techniques such as crowdsourcing, where initially undefined groups of users band together to solve problems, create code, and develop services, are also a type of peer production. These efforts often seek to leverage the so-called wisdom of crowds, the idea that a large, diverse group often has more collective insight than a single or small group of trained professionals.
Table 7.1 "Web 1.0 versus Web 2.0" lists several examples typically considered to fall under the Web 2.0 classification (a term coined by publisher and pundit Tim O’Reilly), and each is offered alongside its first-generation Internet counterpart.Adapted and modified from the original list presented in T. O’Reilly, “What Is Web 2.0?” O’Reilly, September 30, 2005.
Table 7.1 Web 1.0 versus Web 2.0
|Web 1.0||Web 2.0|
|domain name speculation||→||search engine optimization, fans, and followers|
|page views||→||cost per click|
|screen scraping||→||Web services|
|content management systems||→||wikis|
|directories (taxonomy)||→||tagging (“folksonomy”)|
|personal Web sites||→||blogging, status updates, and link sharing|
|Ofoto||→||Flickr, Facebook, and Twitter|
|instant messaging||→||Twitter and Facebook|
Millions of users, billions of dollars, huge social impact, and most of these efforts grew to influence millions in less time than it takes the average freshman to complete college. When technology moves that quickly, even some of the world’s most preeminent thought leaders can be sideswiped.
Consider that when management guru Michael Porter wrote a piece titled “Strategy and the Internet” at the end of the dot-com bubble, he lamented the high cost of building brand online, questioned the power of network effects, and cast a skeptical eye on ad-supported revenue models. Well, it turns out Web 2.0 efforts challenged all of these concerns. Among the efforts above, all built brand on the cheap with little conventional advertising, and each owes their hypergrowth and high valuation to their ability to harness the network effect.
This chapter can be considered in two parts. The first explains many technologies behind the social media / peer production / Web 2.0 movement, and we provide several examples of their use and impact. The final part of this chapter describes how firms should organize to engage with and take advantage of social media—specifically detailing how to “Get SMART” (with a social media awareness and response team). After going through both sections you should have a solid overview of major social technologies, how businesses are leveraging them, and how firms can organize for effective use while avoiding pitfalls.
Table 7.2 Major Social Media Tools
|Blogs||Short for “Web log”—an online publication that keeps a running chronology of entries. Readers can comment on posts. Can connect to other blogs through blog rolls or trackbacks.
Key uses: Share ideas, obtain feedback, mobilize a community.
|Wikis||A Web site that anyone can edit directly from within the browser.
Key uses: Collaborate on common tasks or to create a common knowledge base.
|Electronic Social Network||Online community that allows users to establish a personal profile, link to other profiles (i.e., friends), share content, and communicate with members via messaging, posts. Most personal relationships are reciprocal (i.e., both parties agree to be “friends”).
Key Uses: Discover and reinforce affiliations; identify experts; message individuals or groups; virally share media.
|Microblogging||Short, asynchronous messaging system. Users send messages to “followers” who aren’t required to follow back.
Key Uses: distribute time-sensitive information, share opinions, virally spread ideas, run contests and promotions, solicit feedback, provide customer support, track commentary on firms/products/issues, organize protests.