“Web 2.0 brands are on the way in, and Web 1.0 brands
are threatened to be on the way out, unless they find a way
to turbo-charge their offers with social features, provide
mobile access, and add online video to their offers.”
–Karsten Weide, IDC Research VP, Media and Entertainment
A Curious Proposition
What are the benefits in offering “features, mobile and offers”
versus adopting a business model that reflects a social oriented
culture and its communication tools?
In its recent study, IDC‘s 2009/2010 U.S. Online Consumer Survey, the study’s “Abstract” raises a curious supposition:
What makes a Web 2.0 “brand” vs. a Web 2.0 “company?”
The answer is culture.
Are companies allowing consumer technologies and their attitudes toward using them to drive innovation from within? The evidence shows companies as slow to adopt to this change.
Weide’s call-to-action itself rings like a Web 1.0 analytical perspective: of “What works for business,” compared to, “How does the consumer want us to work?”
The latter offers a more Web 2.0 approach. It presumes a malleable business model that seeks to be directly informed of consumer wants and needs, interests and behavior to enable a real time business response using the tools of the day to maximize its business interest. Not just the application of web 2.0 “features” appended to an already outmoded business model.
Business 2.0 vs. marketing your business to look 2.0.
Is your company a Web 2.0 company or a Web 2.0 brand?
Leave your comment here.
- Digital Disruption: How’s It Going For You? (adpulp.com)
- Web 2.0: Is the public sector really behind the private sector? (customerthink.com)