Web 2.0 isn’t new and it isn’t revolutionary—there I said it. The underlying premise of Web 2.0 is very similar to what Berners-Lee developed the web for in the first place: to gather and share information from multiple sources, in multiple formats. The hype surrounding Web 2.0 just seems louder now that we have realized the web isn’t a billboard and a credit card swipe machine. Yet people are filling shelves with books about The New Rules, writing articles about Web 2.0 and even postulating about Web 3.0 in blogs. Knowing what the new rules are is fine and dandy but in my experience people aren’t struggling with the concepts, they are struggling with implementing the concepts
Yesterday I spoke on a panel at USF and I was struck by how many people are looking at Web 2.0 as a magical elixir. “Sprinkle Web 2.0 over your website and watch your sales charts to grow like Sea Monkeys.” Keep in mind that the guy who invented Sea Monkeys invented X-ray glasses, and the people pushing Web 2.0 as state of the art aren’t that far behind him. The solution is not the solutions: Facebook, Twitter, Blogs, Wiki’s, Widget’s and Viral video—but rather the psychology of the people in your organization and their ability to adopt change.
Here’s the outline of my speech and a primer on the successes and struggles regarding the different stages of business.
Startup Implementation Success Points
—Most start-ups are beginning with 2.0 strategies out of the gate. Blogs/Forums and video’s are second nature to many new businesses and instrumental in why/how they decided to incorporate.
—Successful start-ups aren’t corralling people towards the checkout line but instead they are creating (and sometimes giving away) tools that create trust and establish communites.
—They realize the importance of relationships online and off. It’s not one or the other, it’s a combination of the two.
Startup Implementation Struggle Points
—Disregarding the importance of design. A good product or service coupled with terrible presentation is only overcome by tremendously hard work and luck. It can be done but why take that route?
—Struggling start-ups treat web 2.0 as end-all-be-all solutions and don’t adjust other marketing behaviors to work with web 2.0. This is what Seth Godin talks about in Meatball Sundae.
—The have a leader who is nose down, hoards information and are without a reliable (or can’t keep) a qualified #2.
Mid-Sized Implementation Success Points
—When mid-sized companies invest in solid management people and tools, they create a nimble environments allowing them to retain the creative atmosphere from their start up days.
—Mid-sized businesses often differentiate themselves with voice. A unique service or product these days is not enough, your branding and content has to separate you from the crowd.
—They listen to their competitors, employees and thoroughly evaluate their marketplace (online and off.)
Mid-Sized Implementation Struggle Points
—Mid-sized companies who try to be too corporate right out of the gate are sure to lose out on the incredibly talented Gen Y employees. That 25-year-old you just hired as a Marketing Manager grew up with MySpace and mobile texting, probably has a website she designed and coded and knows more about viral videos than you do.
—When the principals of mid-sized companies still try to do everything themselves, you’ve got trouble. Someone, somehow, has to get through to them that “no, it won’t get done exactly like they would have done it” but in order to grow (implement that new content strategy) they have to let go.
—The biggest struggle I’ve seen in mid-sized businesses is management fearing to change or do anything different than what got them to where they are.
Large Corporation Implementation Success Points
—C-Level executives empower and encourage management to be nimble.
—They are technologically agnostic (not locked into one vendor/CMS/Microsoft).
—They rely on outsourcing and stick with their core competencies.
Large Corporation Implementation Struggle Points
—They compete in The Org-Chart Olympics. No one knows who is in charge or what the most direct rout is to get things done and often different teams want different messages. This is usually caused by a lack of executive buy in, department infighting and general mismanagement.
—Large companies who burn through vendors have to: invest a considerable amount of time to ramp up with new vendors, usually provide rushed/incomplete project specs and fail to look at vendors as valued team-members.
—Upper management fails to realize that the bottom reflects the top. From creativity to attendance to attitude to commitment.