Oliver Marks adds another twist to the (chances of) innovation in social networks discussion, bonding it to the business use of internal social networks (but while he’s right that “friending” everyone in Enterprise 2.0 is of little use, I think that this – potentially extremely networked – setting is the petri dish for the emergence of more stable, reliable and functional networks) :

“The goal of good collaboration networks over time are to build up ever more valuable repositories of information. The contributors may evolve and change over time, just as the personal connections and relationships that grow from sharing the information may mutate and change, but the body of knowledge and interconnected ‘business fabric’ grows cumulatively ever stronger.”

Of course there’s risk in negation and not-moving-at-all (bear some 21 Risks in not adopting Enterprise 2.0, yes) – but there’s some business transformation execution risks as well that come with Enterprise 2.0. Sameer of Pretzel Logic (what’s up with ’em Enterprise 2.0 consultants and their funny names, frogpond, pretzel logic, what next? Jolts and Pistachios? Right …) writes up some of them, but ends on a motivational tone anyway:

If you’re planning social business design, you have it easier than your predecessors who had had to justify and drive large-scale, traditional enterprise software deployments. Today’s Enterprise 2.0 products are faster and easier to implement than ever before.

I am following the work of Ross Dawson since long – and it’s time or another shout out for clever visualization and sound reasoning (no 10 easy steps to follow but an understanding as iterative and feedback-looped processes …).

This note got triggered by a post by Bill Ives who said that he’s reviewing Ross’ new book, (“Ross Dawson on Implementing Enterprise 2.0“), fitted with my little search for (implementation) Enterprise 2.0 models of late and double-acts as a trackback and hint to Ross (“let me have a peek into the book, will you …”)..