Saldanha & Krishnan (2012) Organizational Adoption of Web 2.0 Technologies: An Empirical Analysis . Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce, 22 (4), 301-333.

This article echoes the sentiment of the Lewis et al (2003) – a common thread in discussion of business use of IT (see Stewart, 2003) – that tools are needed to enable organisations and businesses make a properly informed decision about the utility and benefit of adopting a new information technology or program.  This is an initial research foray into determining the contributing factors to enterprise adoption of Web 2.0 applications.

Given the analogy by O’Reilly (2005, para.10) of Web 2.0 acting as the global brain, with hyperlinks, tags, etc between information as synapses and blogs, Twitter, etc as the conscious thought, it is little wonder that businesses are looking to harness the capacity of this growing class of technology to improve their knowledge management, etc. However, according to Saldanha and Krishnan, they are currently doing this in a dearth of information about factors that will influence their and other enterprise’s ability to do so. This echoes Lewis et al’s position that there is not enough research done in the area and obviously a need for this article. In this case, however, the results and analysis that comes from the research, rather than providing a clear direction for subsequent work, points to a myriad tangential possibilities for ensuing research. This is a consequence of the nature of Web 2.0 as an emerging class of technology that has yet to be fully defined, let alone have its possibilities recognised, utilised and analysed.

The collaborative nature of web 2.0 is both a boon and a burden to business seeking competitive advantage. Despite a McKinsey survey showing that almost 60% of respondents see web 2.0 as a driver of competitive advantage (Bughin, Manyika, and Miller, 2008, cited in Saldanha and Krishnan, p. 312), the competitiveness of the industry was found not to be proportional to adoption. A possible reason for this includes concerns with leakage of information which would adversely affect competitive advantage. However as O’Reilly points out, the more you restrict the freedom of information flow in Web 2.0 applications, the less functionality you are likely to get from the very aspects that set this technology apart from other IT (2005, p. 2, Sidenote: para. 5). Thus the authors’ assertion that Web 2.0 technology vendors “need to make Web 2.0 technologies more compatible with other technologies” possibly flags a general lack of vision in business. It also flags another limitation of the study, that survey participants’ understanding of the definition of Web 2.0 is possibly quite variable and/or influenced by the later examples given by the survey itself and that the study is effectively only looking at the adoption by business of mainstream rather than fledgling Web 2.0 applications.

The key finding of this study is really how much information and research is lacking into the adoption and use of this emerging class of IT. The differences highlighted by this study between Web 2.0 and other IT, such as its open-standards, bottom-up adoption pathway, dependency on a critical mass of users and its inexpensive nature are reasons that conventional models of IT adoption in business are not applicable here. It is also one worth noting when reading Nicholas Carr’s 2003 IT doesn’t matter, in that Web 2.0 was in its infancy when this “seminal” piece (Brown, J. S. and Hagel, J. in Stewart, 2003) was written. Carr was referring to a different class (and more physical definition) of IT and probably with a limited understanding of the potential of the emerging “social computing” trend.

References:

Carr, N. (2003). IT doesn't matter. Harvard Business Review, May 2003, 41-49. Retrieved via EBSCOhost Business Source Complete database in the CSU Library

Lewis, D., Hodge, N., Gamage, D & Whittaker, M. (2011) Understanding the role of technology in health information systems. Working Paper Series 17. University of Queensland. Retrieved from http://www.uq.edu.au/hishub/wp17/

O’Reilly, T. (2005) What is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software. Retrieved from O’Reilly Media Inc. website: http://oreilly.com/web2/archive/what-is-web-20.html

Saldanha, T.J.V & Krishnan, M.S. (2012). Organizational adoption of Web 2.0 technologies: An empirical analysis. Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce, 22 (4), 301-333. DOI: 10.1080/10919392.2012.723585

Stewart, T. A. (ed) (2003) Does IT matter? An HBR debate. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from http://www.johnseelybrown.com/Web_Letters.pdf