Rather than starting with the assumption that 2.0 (or social) is the answer to anything and try to make the enterprise fit in, he starts with the opposite approach. He starts with problems and ends with a solution that appears to be enterprise 2.0. Like it or not but enterprises are organized on processes that are essential and vital and this won’t change. I’m to talking about the caricature of processes we’re being inflicted to make it too easy to hold them up to public ridicule. but what they should be. Caseau makes it clear that processes should be as light as possible to be manageable, as agile as possible to be improvable. Hence the importance of lean management. Things become really interesting when enterprise 2.0, rather than being seen as a danger for steadiness and processes appears than being a lever that serves agility and innovation. In this context, conversational systems support ongoing learning, innovation and ongoing improvement.
From Bertrand Duperrin’s review of Yves Caseau’s book on Enterprise 2.0.
I like the reference to lean management (I’ve talked about “Lean Operations” myself), although in some circles there is a natural skepticism that this this is a codeword for cost cutting and down sizing. That’s not what I mean when I talk about lean and I don’t think Caseau does either. Being light, lean and agile is also what I think Andrew McAfee’s original paper on Enterprise 2.0 was all about too.
Naturally, if you are skeptical about “lean”, you might ask what we mean by light and agile? Well, here is a starting point:
- Individuals and interactions over processes and tools.
- Working [products and services] over comprehensive documentation.
- Customer [participation] over contract negotiation.
- Responding to change over following a plan.