Knowledge Infusion is continually asked to define "Web 2.0". This is a term that causes confusion in most technology and HR circles today as far as what it means and what to do to about it?
Computerworld has an interesting piece today about how people can use a "real-life" example of today's political campaigns to help understand some of the principles of Web 2.0. A few examples include:
At McCain's site, you sit there for a second and wonder what to do
At Obama's site, there is an easy "click me" to appeal to many
McCain's site feels very 1.0 according to the author as if people just learned about the web
Obama's site looks like it was developed by people who get the net
Obama's site has obvious links to other sites like DIGG and Facebook
End of article quote:
I suppose, in the end, defining Web 2.0 is an exercise in futility. It's a term that's a bit nebulous and constantly evolving, but one tat is also important because it helps us get a better picture of what is happening on the Web now, where we have to go from here, and how the Internet can help us communicate better, be more productive, and maybe even have some fun online.
Take a look at the sites, hold your political views behind, and let us know which site is easier and fits the mode of what people are looking for when it comes to usability today. Also, this article doesn't express the political views of Knowledge Infusion or anyone here.
The future of HR and Talent Management applications and usability is a constant discussion point by clients and vendors alike. The more that vendors can mirror the usage of day to day sites such as these, the easier the deployment and fewer abandonment opportunities will exist.
Another infusion of knowledge...
