Many people point to interface interactivity (Ajax JavaScript usually) and mash-up functionality or data when talking about Web2.0. I personally think that these two things are simply symptoms of the underlying phenomenon which is really a change in the way people think about themselves, their projects, and the people around them. Yes I think Web2.0 is a cultural revolution not a technical one.

You see the underlying common thread of Web2.0 is that people are sharing with each other. They have learned that it is better to build their websites to talk to other websites. This makes it easier to collaborate with people who have built complimentary tools and services. It also makes it easier for end users to use the information and functionality, RSS is probably the best example.

So the true Web2.0 revolution is that people intentionally build their technology to be flexible and interconnected. Their motivation is survival and success. Websites are more successful if they provide value to users (end users and peers) and people are more successful when they find ways to form partnerships and relationships with other people. For instance a group of friends help each other out. A single isolated individual has only themselves to rely on.

To see how a large enterprise benefits from the true benefits of Web2.0 you only need to extend my logic a tiny bit father and take an honest look at the most common people problems in a large organization, bureaucracy.

Red tape (cumbersome bureaucratic processes) tend to form when the size of an organization reaches a size when people are unable to understand all the social structures around them. It is a protective reaction. People begin to created request forms, document processes, ask for sign-offs on work performed, and so on. Projects slow down and costs go up. But is bureaucracy really a reaction to size or is it a reaction to a misunderstanding about where each person fits in and how they contribute to the larger effort?

The Internet is large and people there are not creating bureaucratic red-tape as a requirement to empower and collaborate with each other. It’s not size that creates bureaucracy, it’s people intent. In a large organization people loose track of the big picture. They are also compensated (judged, evaluated, rewarded) based on performance. Performance is defined by the organization and this is the problem.

The real problem is that people in a large organization are often not given the same reasons to collaborate with their peers the way web2.o dotcom people are by their environment. In the real world people have found that facilitating collaboration and making themselves more usable (in every way imaginable) makes them more successful. In a large organization people have found that spending their budget, meeting their numbers, protecting their teams reputation, and making their boss look good make them more successful. Did I hear an ah-ha? Good.

So the fix is simple and some big companies (like Toyota) have figured it out. To eliminate bureaucracy and get back to speeding your organization to success you simply have to give people a reason to change their intent. In other words reward them for collaboration. Do not encourage red tape by rewarding those common behaviors. Change your organization by helping people change the way they see themselves and their success.