Posted by andy@assembla.com Thu, 14 Dec 2006 16:10:00 GMT

I’m seeing a lot of the phrase “Enterprise Web 2.0�. We’re doing some work with Nexaweb, a company that positions itself as delivering Enterprise Web 2.0. I recently had a great discussion at the Enterprise Web 2.0 meetup here in Boston. Google turns up a bunch of hits, including a blog and a conference. What does it mean? Is it important, or just spin?

I fought the “Web 2.0� label for a long time. It seemed vague, and I suspected that as soon as I started using the phrase, I would find it replaced by “Web 3.0� and thrown into the “Expired� column in Wired magazine. But as I started learning more about how to launch Web 2.0 products, I found that the term started meaning something to me. It represented a distinct package of techniques that could solve some big problems with enterprise systems. So, for us, it’s not just spin. It’s the useful product of intense evolutionary pressure and innovation.

Web 2.0 players like Assembla, working on startup projects under severe time and cost pressure, in a global marketplace, have developed processes that will deliver substantial benefits when they are applied to enterprise problems.

Some people define Web 2.0 with product attributes like ajax interfaces. That’s one part of it. Others define it around the way the product is built and used – with user-generated content and mashups. Those are other parts. In reality Web 2.0 is a product strategy that uses all of the parts. Web 2.0 is a product strategy that is designed to maximize adoption.

The fundamental building blocks of a Web 2.0 product add up to this whole.

  • It’s delivered over the Web. The Web is global, so anyone can use the product. It’s delivered to standard browsers that everyone has.
  • Users can get started quickly. Usually, there is a free trial. If registration is required, it’s fast. Even the email confirmation step is being squeezed out so that users can get in faster. I would describe the ideal Web 2.0 adoption sequence as free, fast, and fun.
  • The UI is fast and fun overall. We don’t want people getting frustrated and moving on before they have fully adopted the product. That’s why the ajax and other RIA techniques are important.
  • Product launch and improvement cycles are very fast. That means that the product is better. You get what you want fast.
  • The software is in permanent beta mode. If users want fast product cycles, they have to pay for it by doing testing. This means you have to find a group of users who want the newer and less reliable stuff.
  • Users share data and documentation. They know what they want, and if they can share it directly, it dramatically shortens the product cycle. Over at MySQL, users add comments directly to the online manual. Often the comments are better than the manual entries. And if you need to sort your data, forget edited topics. Users need to put in their own tags. An editor can’t keep up with them. It’s a small step from that to Wikipedia. What about teachers sharing lesson plans? It’s faster than a 3-year textbook publishing cycle. Programmers sharing code? It seems so obvious now.
Why is Web 2.0 important for “The Enterprise”?
  • The biggest risk with enterprise systems is user adoption. Most planned enterprise systems are never adopted. When they are adopted, they require expensive training and infrastructure. Web 2.0 is a silver bullet aimed directly at the largest risk of enterprise software deployment – the failure to adopt in a timely way.
  • Web 2.0 product cycles and deployment costs are cheaper than typical enterprise software costs.
  • As an added benefit, Web 2.0 systems can capture value from SOA investments by putting apps on top of them.