Introduction
The
article “Organizational Adoption of Web 2.0 Technologies: AnEmpirical Analysis” by Saldanha and Krisnan focuses on the use and
adoption of Web 2.0 technologies by business firms. The authors
desire to establish an empirical approach to the issue and the key
factors of what may encourage and discourage the adoption of Web 2.0
technologies by businesses. While this article provides an insightful
foray into business and the private sector, it does prove useful for
organisations outside of the business sector when looking at factors
that facilitate adoption and integration of new technologies, their
potential uses, and impact upon staff and systems such as work-flow
and information collation and dissemination.
What
it does right
The
clear establishment of research parameters in this study gives it a
real authority when looking at Web 2.0 technologies
and their adoption by business. The focus on the strengths of Web 2.0
technologies seeks to prove their usefulness for business and other
organisations, especially through the collaborative nature of Web 2.0
techs and the way they can 'bank' the knowledge within an organisation
through collaborative blogs and wikis.
The
authors strive to provide a starting point for academic research in
this field as there is very little empirical research available. The
hypotheses they develop are great starting points for exploring the
reasons why Web 2.0 technologies are and are not adopted by business.
There
is also a very strong focus on the benefit of open standards, meaning
that the more open an organisations IT infrastructure is to
adaptation and integration of technologies, the more likely new
technologies will be adopted, as there is no need to overhaul the
system, or to support legacy infrastructure. Building and Maintaining
open standards within Information and Communications Technology is a
fundamental step in providing flexibility for the future of the
organisation.
What
it does wrong
Many
businesses claimed the reluctance to move to Web 2.0 technology was
in part based on a fear of the risk to the security of the
organisation. This is not looked at very closely in this paper, as it
clearly states its focus is on 'large' business and not on 'small'
business. It is implied that large business invest in internal IT
departmental support, whereas smaller businesses may have to
out-source their support and thus may find security a more
significant issue.
The
focus on organisation size also creates an inhibiting factor to the
study as it is assumed that larger organisations have more money to
spend on new systems and adoption of new technologies, while a small
firm may not be able to risk dedicating to experimental technology.
This focus on non-constrained adoption is not helpful for smaller
businesses or other organisations who simply cannot afford to adopt
something that is not proven as helpful.
The
article focuses on the private sector, and how adoption of Web 2.0
tech can improve business practices, but I think that Web 2.0
technologies have potentially more significant use and application
outside of competitive market edge. Non-profit and service-industry
organisations, such as libraries, can benefit greatly from the
application of Web 2.0 technologies.
In
conclusion, the report is a great place for the conversation to
start, and for the academic research to begin, and I feel it would be
a great topic to review bi-annually as the technology changes and as
businesses restructure their technological commitments.
References:
McAffee, Andrew (2009) How Web 2.0 is changing the way we work: An interview with MIT’s Andrew McAfee, Accessed here: http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/business_technology/how_web_20_is_changing_the_way_we_work_an_interview_with_mits_andrew_mcafee
O'Reilly, Tim (2005) What Is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software, Accessed here: http://oreilly.com/web2/archive/what-is-web-20.html
Saldanha, T. J. V & Krishnan, M. S. (2010). Organizational Adoption of Web 2.0 Technologies: An Empirical Analysis, Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce, 22 (4), 301-333.

No comments:
Post a Comment