* A vision that defines the meaning of work;
* Actors : the managers, employees, partners and customers that produce work;
* Interactions : the events in which we sell and purchase products, ideas and services;
* Outcomes: the generated revenue stream
* Gateways : communication channels that integrate the workspace into local context, culture and organization ”

http://leeschlenker.wordpress.com/

Second, and maybe some interesting stuff. Without additional information and as a reductionist, my view is that the debate here reveals an E2.0 anti-pattern. What is the relationship between E2.0 and EA ? What’s implicit in the debate centers around how cohorts arrive at HBS with not only branding and identity beliefs, but high expectations of what Larry and the folks in Cotting House can deliver. This is where EA can be a pretty good help in keeping Cotting House from becoming so cannibalized that Larry’s maintenance costs become unsustainable. One issue that should emerge in the follow up debate is how to develop a transition strategy and sequencing plan for E2.0 to EA technology adoption at HBS. This is a hard questions and HBS is in the best position to lead us all towards the answers. I’d like to hear how things go because if E2.0 does make it in DC more broadly than ONDI, we’ll be facing the same issues soon enough.

Third, your intuition regarding the Semantic Web (SW) well founded. Ironically, the SW is about the best chance we’ve had in years to improve mainstream information sharing for many of the same reasons E2.0 is so good. Unfortunately, its much less than what we need. That being said, hats off to Tim-BL & Co. We need to keep pushing that rock up the hill no matter how steep the incline. The crest of the hill is probably not a good target for E2.0 as much as an effective public policy with targeted private sector investment and public sector adoption as the Markle Foundation recommended a few years back. For the short term, we’ll see a swarm of very smart, creative and energetic folks form around this long standing and much loved (by me) issue.

Anyway, thanks again for your leadership on E2.0 !

Mostly a note to express how much I enjoy and value your blog. I’ve passed it along to dozens of people in my company, and posted it on my FB page. We are going down the E2.0/social path to explore how we might leverage them to improve the adoption of some enterprise and developer products we have. It’s fascinating, mostly a morbid fascination at this point – that is, how hard IT will block efforts at unstructured IT deployments.

Also, your links in this post to WorkLight are broken.

David

•Tapping into the native authentication and access control mechanisms in order to know which information should be served to whom (for Q&A, search, sharing news, building friends lists, etc.) is not simple. The prospect of building a new security layer and a new access control system is a non-starter.
•WorkBook is part of an Enterprise 2.0 operating system called WorkLight, which is also able to incorporate application data from apps like the corporate directory, CRM, HR and other employee-related applications and use it within the WorkBook/Facebook application. Therefore, WorkBook is more than a gadget running in an iFrame, it is a complete application that solves the following key enterprise challenges:
oSecurity –There is a plethora of security challenges that are unique to the world of Enterprise 2.0. Some of these include the following:
Authentication/access control using native systems. How do you make sure only the appropriate people can see snippets of protected enterprise data?
Keeping data from leaving the enterprise while appearing to come from public Web 2.0 tools like Facebook.
A whole new set of threats inherent in Web 2.0 technologies like AJAX and RSS. These have not yet been addressed by customers or vendors, but they have been addressed by WorkBook.
oIntegration – WorkBook comes out of the box with adapters to applications (like CRM, HR, and other apps) and security infrastructure (like SSO systems and LDAP directories), so implementation is quick and simple. We have already solved these problems – creating this from scratch is not trivial, to say the least.
oSelf-service – WorkBook/WorkLight comes with tools that allow organizations to customize and evolve without having to code new changes. Many of the changes can be done by non-technical people.

In short, there are many more pieces involved to making an enterprise Facebook application than just putting a gadget in an iFrame. Some of these are part of WorkLight’s patent-pending intellectual property. Large security-conscience organizations who have “tried to build” their own solutions have come to the conclusion that WorkLight/WorkBook is the right solution once they understood all the issues at hand. We would be happy to spend time with Larry and explain these in detail, if he so desires.

As for the social aspects, we have found that more than a few organizations have tried to build their own Facebook-like applications, and have failed, not because they couldn’t develop the features. They failed because they could not get employees to adopt the new application. And that is where the ‘social glue’ comes in. People are already on Facebook. Why reinvent the wheel if you can make Facebook itself safe to use within the enterprise? This is the realization that our customers and many others are coming to see. And this is where WorkBook provides enormous value to the organization.