<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: How to understand and position enterprise 2.0 in the real enterprise</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.duperrin.com/english/2009/12/01/how-to-understand-and-position-enteprise-2-0-in-the-real-enterprise/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.duperrin.com/english/2009/12/01/how-to-understand-and-position-enteprise-2-0-in-the-real-enterprise/</link>
	<description>The most successful companies are those that think jointly technological change, work design and the changes in internal social relationships.” Antoine Riboud.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 00:51:22 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: driessen</title>
		<link>http://www.duperrin.com/english/2009/12/01/how-to-understand-and-position-enteprise-2-0-in-the-real-enterprise/comment-page-1/#comment-65600</link>
		<dc:creator>driessen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Dec 2010 15:43:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.duperrin.com/english/?p=1407#comment-65600</guid>
		<description>Really good post, Bertrand. We discussed this during the Enterprise 2.0 Summit lately and we should have taken more time! Overall I agree with your approach, but I think the layers are much closer together and integrated. Not yet in the tool set, but in what relates to the real way employees get work done or want to get work done. I blogged about it here among others: http://info-architecture.blogspot.com/2010/05/is-your-organization-process-or-network.html Would love to hear your thoughts on that post. We should continue this live. I&#039;m sure our approaches are even closer together than I think now.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Really good post, Bertrand. We discussed this during the Enterprise 2.0 Summit lately and we should have taken more time! Overall I agree with your approach, but I think the layers are much closer together and integrated. Not yet in the tool set, but in what relates to the real way employees get work done or want to get work done. I blogged about it here among others: <a href="http://info-architecture.blogspot.com/2010/05/is-your-organization-process-or-network.html" rel="nofollow">http://info-architecture.blogspot.com/2010/05/is-your-organization-process-or-network.html</a> Would love to hear your thoughts on that post. We should continue this live. I&#8217;m sure our approaches are even closer together than I think now.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Recommended: Enterprise 2.0 relies on the outside to gain maturity &#171; Fredzimny&#39;s Blog</title>
		<link>http://www.duperrin.com/english/2009/12/01/how-to-understand-and-position-enteprise-2-0-in-the-real-enterprise/comment-page-1/#comment-63655</link>
		<dc:creator>Recommended: Enterprise 2.0 relies on the outside to gain maturity &#171; Fredzimny&#39;s Blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Jun 2010 18:39:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.duperrin.com/english/?p=1407#comment-63655</guid>
		<description>[...] How to understand and position enteprise 2.0 in the real enterprise &#124; Bertrand Duperrin&#8217;s Note... (duperrin.com)   Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)No TitleRecommending Andrew Mcafee&#8217;s What Does Corporate America Think of 2.0?Maturity models of Enterprise 2.0  51.542209 -0.317528 [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] How to understand and position enteprise 2.0 in the real enterprise | Bertrand Duperrin&#8217;s Note&#8230; (duperrin.com)   Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)No TitleRecommending Andrew Mcafee&rsquo;s What Does Corporate America Think of 2.0?Maturity models of Enterprise 2.0  51.542209 -0.317528 [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ellen Feaheny</title>
		<link>http://www.duperrin.com/english/2009/12/01/how-to-understand-and-position-enteprise-2-0-in-the-real-enterprise/comment-page-1/#comment-63382</link>
		<dc:creator>Ellen Feaheny</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Jan 2010 09:22:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.duperrin.com/english/?p=1407#comment-63382</guid>
		<description>I had a funny analogy to share on Enterprise 2.0 adoption and success, maybe one that C-level managers can relate to - since I will assume they have some life experience as well and didn&#039;t get to be C-level managers overnight. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Similarly, when you build a company, it is not success overnight. When you marry your wife or husband,  it also is not success all the time (i.e. everyday). It is work, it needs nurturing, it is challenging at times, it is engagement, it is commitment , it is work - based on a starting foundation that grows, and grows with time  (in the case of E2.0, that is the foundation of the supporting tools and content by the people contributing to them!) .. but when done well, it is worth it.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;For E2.0 to succeed, C-level managers should buy Andrew McAfee&#039;s book (&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.amazon.com/Enterprise-2-0-Collaborative-Organizations-Challenges/dp/1422125874&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.amazon.com/Enterprise-2-0-Collaborat...&lt;/a&gt;) (or read lots of blogs!), then install and try out the tools (most have free evals), and then finally and most importantly - COMMIT to the theories and practices (meaning personally committing to being more open and less closed of an executive). &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The best adoptions always have C-level active engagement since employees will follow the leader&#039;s examples, and if done well, be inspired by the leaders. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Just like a marriage - commitment is paramount, it is not all easy, but it is worth it, eventually - at the human level, and more tangibly, at the bank with resulting innovation to the company.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I had a funny analogy to share on Enterprise 2.0 adoption and success, maybe one that C-level managers can relate to &#8211; since I will assume they have some life experience as well and didn&#39;t get to be C-level managers overnight. </p>
<p>Similarly, when you build a company, it is not success overnight. When you marry your wife or husband,  it also is not success all the time (i.e. everyday). It is work, it needs nurturing, it is challenging at times, it is engagement, it is commitment , it is work &#8211; based on a starting foundation that grows, and grows with time  (in the case of E2.0, that is the foundation of the supporting tools and content by the people contributing to them!) .. but when done well, it is worth it.</p>
<p>For E2.0 to succeed, C-level managers should buy Andrew McAfee&#39;s book (<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Enterprise-2-0-Collaborative-Organizations-Challenges/dp/1422125874" rel="nofollow">http://www.amazon.com/Enterprise-2-0-Collaborat&#8230;</a>) (or read lots of blogs!), then install and try out the tools (most have free evals), and then finally and most importantly &#8211; COMMIT to the theories and practices (meaning personally committing to being more open and less closed of an executive). </p>
<p>The best adoptions always have C-level active engagement since employees will follow the leader&#39;s examples, and if done well, be inspired by the leaders. </p>
<p>Just like a marriage &#8211; commitment is paramount, it is not all easy, but it is worth it, eventually &#8211; at the human level, and more tangibly, at the bank with resulting innovation to the company.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

