Deployment Strategies For Web 2.0


Published on

A talk on "Deployment Strategies For Web 2.0" given by Brian Kelly, UKOLN at the University of Nottingham on 12 March 2007.

Published in: Education, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Deployment Strategies For Web 2.0

  1. 1. Deployment Strategies For Web 2.0 (or let’s stop talking and start doing!) Brian Kelly UKOLN University of Bath Bath Email [email_address] UKOLN is supported by: Acceptable Use Policy Recording/broadcasting of this talk, taking photographs, discussing the content using email, instant messaging, blogs, SMS, etc. is permitted provided distractions to others is minimised. This work is licensed under a Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.0 licence (but note caveat) Resources bookmarked using ‘ nottingham-2007-03 ' tag
  2. 2. About Me <ul><li>Brian Kelly: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>UK Web Focus: a Web advisory post based at UKOLN </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Funded by JISC and MLA to advise HE/FE and cultural heritage sectors </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Web enthusiast since Jan 1993 (helped set up 1 st institutional Web server in UK HE) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Published many papers & given many presentations on variety of Web issues </li></ul></ul><ul><li>UKOLN: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>National centre of expertise in digital information management </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Located at the University of Bath </li></ul></ul>
  3. 3. About You <ul><li>Some quick feedback would be useful </li></ul><ul><li>Who works in: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Service departments: IT service; Library; Admin; … </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Academic departments: teaching; research; … </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Other: ??? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Who: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Has a blog? Reads blogs? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Uses a Wiki? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Uses social networking services (for any purpose)? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Uses Skype: openly? secretly?! </li></ul></ul><ul><li>What would you like to get out of this seminar? </li></ul>
  4. 4. Contents <ul><li>Web 2.0 – What Is It? (Talking …) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Blogs  Wikis </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>RSS  Mashups </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Microformats  Comms tools </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Social bookmarking  … </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Deployment Strategies (… doing) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>User focus </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Information literacy; staff development </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Risk assessment </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Safe experimentation </li></ul></ul>
  5. 5. Let’s Do It Now! <ul><li>Let’s not just talk about Web 2.0 – let’s use it now (assuming WiFi network available!): </li></ul><ul><li>Let’s Talk </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Go to and in box enter </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Let’s Share Resources </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Go to < nottingham-2007-03> to access resources mentioned in talk </li></ul></ul>Discussion Lecture theatres being WiFied; pervasive networking being deployed  students with laptops will expect to use them  we need to gain experiences to establish best practices & manage possible problems
  6. 6. Web 2.0 <ul><li>What Is Web 2.0? </li></ul><ul><li>Marketing term (derived from observing 'patterns') rather than technical standards - “an attitude not a technology” </li></ul>Web2MemeMap, Tim O’Reilly, 2005 <ul><li>Characteristics Of Web 2.0 </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Network as platform </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Always beta </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Clean URIs </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Remix and mash-ups </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Syndication (RSS) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Architecture of participation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Blogs & Wikis </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Social networking </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Social tagging (folksonomies) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Trust and openness </li></ul></ul>Web 2.0
  7. 7. Blogs <ul><li>The term ‘blog’ is well-known, but perhaps there’s a lack of awareness of the potential of blogs in HE. There’s a need to: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Explore how to blogs to support business functions (support users, staff & organisation) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>There’s also a need for information professionals to: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Understand blogging & related technologies (e.g. RSS, Technorati) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Be able to find resources in the 'Blogosphere' </li></ul></ul>Web 2.0 Openness Syndication Collaboration Key Characteristics Couldn’t find many blogs at Nottingham University, but Student’s Union are using them (accountability; transparency; …)
  8. 8. Blogs & Marketing <ul><li>What happens: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>You’ve done some great research (not quite a cure for cancer!) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>You write a press release (job done?) </li></ul></ul> press-releases/… Who needs to know about and use Web 2.0 apps from this example: PR & marketing; researchers; … <ul><ul><li>Who is linking to & talking about this research (are they disagreeing?) </li></ul></ul> <ul><ul><li>The Nourishing Balance blog has commented on this (That’s great – or are they misinterpreting the findings?) </li></ul></ul>
  9. 9. Blogs - Reading <ul><li>How do you keep informed of developments? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Do you use a dedicated Blog reader? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Are you alerted of changes to key Blogs? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Do you focus on the content, and avoid the distractions of ads, etc. </li></ul></ul>Web 2.0 Bloglines – a Web-based Blog reader. You are informed of changes since you last viewed the page. Openness Syndication Collaboration BlogBridge – a desktop Blog reader. You are informed of changes since you last viewed the page.
  10. 10. Blogs – Engaging With Users <ul><li>The ukwebfocus.wordpress. com blog provides: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Comments option for all postings </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>A realtime chat facility </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Benefits: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Feedback on my thoughts and ideas </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Evaluation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>… </li></ul></ul> 2007/01/25/experiments-with-meebo/ Blogs aren’t just one-way publishing, but an implementation of Tim Berners-Lee’s vision of a collaborative Web See (and discuss) blog posting 25 Jan 2007 Blended blogging
  11. 11. What Are They Saying About Us? <ul><li>Blogs are very interconnected with each other (bloggers discuss other’s blog postings). </li></ul><ul><li>This can help to provide feedback; measure impact; engage in discussions; etc. </li></ul><ul><li>You can also monitor what they are saying about your Web site. </li></ul>Web 2.0 Find out what bloggers have been saying about your blog or your Web site – possibly minutes after they’ve said it. You can then take the praise – or issue a rebuttal in a timely fashion Criticism : this may be comment spam. This may be true for popular home pages, but not for many other pages
  12. 12. Finding Resources <ul><li>Technorati can help find Blog articles, RSS feeds, etc. </li></ul><ul><li>Technorati search for “ SHERPA JISC &quot; finds: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>11 blog posting postings, most recent 196 day ago (nothing new since then?) </li></ul></ul>Web 2.0 RSS Syndication What do users want: the home page and what people are saying today. Google & Technorati are valuable tools, so organisations should ensure that their Web site can be found in both. A search for “ JISC ” finds a posting from 6 hours ago Note you can receive RSS alerts of new search results search/sherpa+jisc
  13. 13. Social Networks <ul><li>But what if: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Students aren’t interested in university-provided blogging services? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Students use commercial social networking services such as Facebook? </li></ul></ul>Web 2.0 <ul><li>Should we: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Make use of these environments (save money by not reinventing wheels) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Inform students how our information can be integrated? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Ignore? </li></ul></ul>There may be ethical issues about using students’ social spaces (cf bars)
  14. 14. Wikis <ul><li>Wikis – collaborative Web-based authoring tools </li></ul><ul><li>I use Wikis for: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Collaborative papers (avoiding emailed MS Word file around) </li></ul></ul>Web 2.0 Writely – Web-based word processor or Wiki? Does it matter, it does the job Openness Syndication Collaboration IWMW2006_Discussion_Group_Notes_for_Group_A <ul><ul><li>Note-taking at events </li></ul></ul>Remember when notes were trapped in the non-interoperable world of flip charts & paper. This need no longer be the case. <ul><ul><li>Social discussions at events </li></ul></ul> IWMW2006_Information_About_Social_Aspects
  15. 15. Wikipedia <ul><li>Wikipedia – a community-developed encyclopedia … and also a well-linked Web site, which boosts Google rankings Note created by Andre Engels in Sep 2003 </li></ul> Nottingham_University <ul><li>Issues (philosophical): </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Should we be doing this? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Who should create & maintain pages? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Issues (practical): </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Who maintains this page? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>What else should be in Wikipedia related to the university’s key interests & expertise? </li></ul></ul>
  16. 16. Sharing - Flickr <ul><li>Web 2.0 includes community-building </li></ul><ul><li>You can help support your community-building by making it easy to share photos at events (e.g. this seminar) </li></ul><ul><li>Simply suggest a tag e.g. ‘nottingham-2007-03’ and encourage delegates to upload their photos with this tag </li></ul>Web 2.0 ?w=all&q=iwmw2006&m=text Openness Network effect Syndication Collaboration iwmw2006/interesting/?page=6
  17. 17. Sharing – <ul><li>Another aspect of sharing is sharing bookmarks </li></ul><ul><li>This can be used to: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Manage your bookmarks </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Allow others to contribute resources </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Allow lists of bookmarks to be repurposed </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Carry out impact analysis </li></ul></ul>Web 2.0 Openness Network effect Syndication Collaboration Note how the bookmarks can be embedded (‘mashed-up’) elsewhere Who else has bookmarked this resources? What are their interests? (I may have similar interests) How many have bookmarked my resource?
  18. 18. Microformats <ul><li>Add simple semantics using < span >, < div >, etc. classes: </li></ul><ul><li>Pages on IWMW 2006 Web site have microformats </li></ul><ul><li>Plugins such as Tails display contact and event details & allow them to be uploaded to Outlook, Google Calendar, etc </li></ul>Web 2.0 workshops/webmaster-2006/sessions/kelly World Cup Web site also has microformats. This avoids the cumbersome downloading dates, entering calendar, selecting import, finding file, … Tags Collaboration
  19. 19. <ul><li> can deliver traffic to your Web site, who may then book for the event </li></ul><ul><li>They provide </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Event details </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Microformats (event, location) </li></ul></ul>Web As A Platform <ul><ul><li>Exporting functionality </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Community space </li></ul></ul>Web 2.0 Other people can take my data and use it to provide my event. They also provide additional functionality for me  Network Users Tags Collaboration
  20. 20. Creative Commons <ul><li>Hasn’t contributor infringed my copyright (even though it’s to my benefit?) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Creative Commons licence assigned to publicity details </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Also described in microformat to allow software to find licence </li></ul></ul>Web 2.0 workshops/webmaster-2006/publicity/ Openness Tags Collaboration Note that the openness is a key aspect of Web 2.0: open source; open standards and open content can all help to bring benefits through maximising usage of services
  21. 21. Mapping Services & The Web <ul><li>Web 2.0 provides valuable opportunity to provide mapping & location services: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Embedding Google maps on your Web sites </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Developing rich services using this </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Providing location metadata / microformats which can be processed by simple browser tools </li></ul></ul>Web 2.0
  22. 22. Google Maps Mashups <ul><li>Google Map ‘mashup’ used for IWMW 2006 event: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>~ 20 lines of JavaScript. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Code taken from Googler Maps Web site and coordinates added </li></ul></ul>Web 2.0 workshops/webmaster-2006/maps/ Openness Mashup APIs More sophisticated mapping applications are being developed, such as Radius 5 at Northumbria Univ.
  23. 23. Location Metadata <ul><li>Embedded location metadata can now by exploited by 3 rd party tools </li></ul>Web 2.0 Openness Mashup Open source APIs Why don't all our organisation provide location data in this way? Note issues about quality of data & responsibilities for providing the data (e.g. is this the right address?) events/meetings/nottingham-2007-03/ <ul><li>This service is based on the following HTML content: </li></ul><ul><ul><li><meta name=&quot;geo.position&quot; content=&quot;52.937745,-1.19593&quot; /> </li></ul></ul><ul><li>The Greasmap script processes this data is shown </li></ul>
  24. 24. Communications: Chat <ul><li>Realtime discussion is a key part of the Web 2.0 & the .net generation (IM, SMS messaging, …) </li></ul><ul><li>How much effort does it take to provide an instant messaging service for your organisation? </li></ul><ul><li>Try </li></ul><ul><li>Note: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Most effective with ‘clean URIs’ </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Data an be exported using RSS </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>User support? What user support? </li></ul></ul>Web 2.0 Communications Clean URIs
  25. 25. Communications: Audio <ul><li>Control approach: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Skype is evil because … </li></ul></ul><ul><li>User-centred approach: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Always beta approach (cf Bath, Oxford, Manchester) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Just-in-time accessibility </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Support for overseas students </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Environmental issues </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Real-world integration (forget the app.) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>… </li></ul></ul>
  26. 26. Web 2.0 Backlash <ul><li>When significant new things appear: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Enthusiasts / early adopters predict a transformation of society </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Sceptics outline the limitations & deficiencies </li></ul></ul><ul><li>There’s a need to: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Promote the benefits to the wider community (esp. those willing to try if convinced of benefits) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Be realistic and recognise limitations </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Address inappropriate criticisms </li></ul></ul>Web 2.0: It’s a silly name. It’s just a marketing term. There are lots of poor Web 2.0 services. There wasn’t a Web 1.0. What follows it? It does have a marketing aspect – and that’s OK. It isn’t formally defined – it describes a pattern of related usage. There will be poor (and good) Web 2.0 services – just like anything else. Any usage will arrive at a follow-up term. Deployment Challenges
  27. 27. Takeup Of New Technologies <ul><li>The Gartner curve </li></ul>Developers Rising expectations Trough of despair Service plateau Enterprise software Large budgets … Early adopters <ul><li>Chasm </li></ul><ul><li>Failure to go beyond developers & early adopters (cf Gopher) </li></ul><ul><li>Need for: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Advocacy </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Listening to users </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Addressing concerns </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Deployment strategies </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>… </li></ul></ul>Let’s now look at approaches for avoiding the chasm
  28. 28. Beware The IT Fundamentalists <ul><li>We need to avoid simplistic solutions to the complexities: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Open Standards Fundamentalist: we just need XML </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Open Source Fundamentalist: we just need Linux </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Vendor Fundamentalist: we must use next version of our enterprise system (and you must fit in with this) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Accessibility Fundamentalist: we must do WAI WCAG </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>User Fundamentalist: must do whatever users want </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Legal Fundamentalist: it breaches copyright, … </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Ownership Fundamentalist: must own everything we use </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Perfectionist : It doesn't do everything, so we'll do nothing </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Simplistic Developer : I've developed a perfect solution – I don't care if it doesn't run in the real world </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Web 2.0 : It’s new; its cool! </li></ul></ul>IT Services Barrier
  29. 29. The Librarian Fundamentalists <ul><li>Librarians: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Think they know better than the user e.g. they don't like people using Google Scholar; they should use Web of Knowledge (who cares that users find it easier to use Google Scholar & finds references they need that way?) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Think that users should be forced to learn Boolean searching & other formal search techniques because this is good for them (despite Sheffield's study). </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Don't want the users to search for themselves (cf folksonomies) because they won't get it right. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>They still want to classify the entire Web - despite the fact that users don't use their lists of Web links. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Want services to be perfect before they release them to users. They are uneasy with the concept of 'forever beta' (they don't believe that users have the ability to figure things out themselves and work around the bugs). </li></ul></ul>Library Barrier
  30. 30. Deployment Strategies <ul><li>Interested in using Web 2.0 in your organisation? </li></ul><ul><li>Worried about corporate inertia, power struggles, etc? </li></ul><ul><li>There’s a need for a deployment strategy: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Addressing business needs </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Low-hanging fruits </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Encouraging the enthusiasts </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Gain experience of the browser tools – and see what you’re missing! </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Staff training & development </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Address areas you feel comfortable with </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Risk management strategy </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>… </li></ul></ul>Deployment Challenges
  31. 31. Staff Development <ul><li>There's a need for your staff to: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Understand what Web 2.0 is about </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Learn how to make use of Web 2.0 </li></ul></ul><ul><li>subject to constraints of lack of time; resources; etc. </li></ul><ul><li>The Library 2.0 Podcasts Web sites provides a useful resources for learning about new tools, techniques, etc. </li></ul>Deployment Challenges _archives/2006/4/12/1881517.html
  32. 32. Syndication <ul><li>Produce an RSS/Atom feed for key content! </li></ul><ul><li>Why? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Syndicate content to partners, etc </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Allow users to embed in their tools, blogs, etc. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Use of RSS as neutral format for various purposes (tag clouds, generation of PDFs, etc.) </li></ul></ul> RSS can be produced for legacy (cleanish) HTML pages using tools such as RSSxl Your content could be here (but only if you have a feed!) Have feeds for your news, publications, vacancies, funding opportunities, staff lists, …
  33. 33. YouTube <ul><li>You’ve a University entry in Wikipedia </li></ul><ul><li>But where else do students go? How about YouTube: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Entry for NUCU (quality production values) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Other society & individual video clips </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Questions: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Should the University have a ‘proper’ video? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Wouldn’t a better approach be to provide materials for use by students – and maybe a prize for the video with the highest impact? </li></ul></ul> watch?v=p3u_AFTObS4
  34. 34. IWMW 2006 & Risk Management <ul><li>IWMW 2006 has taken a risk management approach to its evaluation of Web 2.0 technologies: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Agreements : e.g. in the case of the Chatbot. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Use of well-established services : Google & are well-established and have financial security. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Notification : warnings that services could be lost. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Engagement : with the user community: users actively engage in the evaluation of the services. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Provision of alternative services: multiple OMPL tools. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Use in non-mission critical areas: not for bookings! </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Long term experiences of services: usage stats </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Availability of alternative sources of data : e.g. standard Web server log files. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Data export and aggregation: RSS feeds, aggregated in Suprglu, OPML viewers, etc. </li></ul></ul>Deployment Strategy
  35. 35. Tools For Your Staff <ul><li>A simple approach for your organisation staff: provide Firefox to give a rich client environment: </li></ul>All these FireFox extensions are available for free! <ul><li>RSS Panel : immediate display and access to RSS feeds on pages </li></ul><ul><li>Blogger Web Comments : immediate access to blog comments on pages </li></ul><ul><li>Various bookmarklets : such as Webmaster tools </li></ul><ul><li>Various sidebars : such as the Meebo chat tool </li></ul>
  36. 36. Broader Issues: Blogs (1) <ul><li>Many individuals are just blogging </li></ul><ul><li>If you want to provide a blogging service you may wish to develop an AUP (or a meta-AUP) </li></ul><ul><li>In my case I describe: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Scope of content </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Purposes of blog: (dissemination, engagement, reflection, surfacing tacit knowledge, …) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>QA (policies & procedures) </li></ul></ul>
  37. 37. Broader Issues: Blogs (2) <ul><li>But what about possible misuse? In my case I am open about this: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Comments are open allowing users to respond </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Wacky postings will undermine my status </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>I need to comply with University regulations </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Possible approach: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Bloggers must define AUP & be open about how they’ll avoid bringing University into disrepute </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Conflict processes </li></ul></ul> 2007/02/05/further-blog-musings/
  38. 38. Broader Issues: External Services <ul><li>Your concerns: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Can I outsource functionality to networked services? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>What about sustainability; reliability; IPR, …? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>You already do! </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Your savings (in a bank or under your mattress?) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Your pension scheme, … </li></ul></ul><ul><li>And in IT: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>JISCMail mailing list </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>All the other JISC services </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Commercial services (spam filtering, …) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Google! </li></ul></ul>Use of third party services is mainstream. This issues are really about business processes, business models, contracts, … (areas that techies tend not to engage with!)
  39. 39. Risks Assessment For External Services <ul><li>Questions: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>How financially secure is the company? If listed, look at company records </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>How stable is the service? Is the company likely to withdraw the service? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>What are the key features of the service? Is it the functionality of the service, the data collected, or the learning, …? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Can the service be withdrawn without risk? Is it a value-added service or is it mission critical? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>How will your users react to service loss? Will users sue? Will users mind? Will users notice! </li></ul></ul>NB similarities to selection of open source software. See QA Focus document on“ Top Tips For Selecting Open Source Software ”
  40. 40. Risks Assessment For In-House Services <ul><li>Also ask questions of existing (or planned) in-house or community-provided services: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>How dependent is the service on scarce technical expertise? If the developer left, can the service be maintained? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>How sustainable are community-developed services? Are services developed by project funding like to be sustainable in the long term? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>How easy is it to withdraw or change in-house services? Are egos involved? Are power struggles likely? </li></ul></ul>What other problems may be associated with in-house development work?
  41. 41. Risk Management For External Services <ul><li>How might you manage the risks you’ve identified: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Panic / be cool If it breaks we’ve real problems vs I’m more likely to win the lottery </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Withdraw service Can the service be withdrawn in a seemly fashion? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Provide alternative service Can you easily switch to an alternative solution? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Duplicate service Can you run a duplicate service (e.g. Sitemeter and usage log statistics)? </li></ul></ul>NOTE: Will a similar approach be needed for in-house solutions? What was your response to the Blackboard/WebCT takeover?
  42. 42. Legal Issues <ul><li>What about legal issues (IPR, copyright, data protection, SENDA/DDA, …)? </li></ul><ul><li>What has your approach been in the past: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Installing an institutional cache in mid 1990s? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Linking without permission? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Including screen shots in training materials without permission? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>How should we respond when legislation trails technology: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Do nothing until legislation changes </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Do whatever we want </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Be pragmatic: understand blatant misuse, but also changing business models, … </li></ul></ul>
  43. 43. Broader Issues: Status Quo <ul><li>Can you justify the status quo: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Continued use of enterprise solutions </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>A continuation of existing working practices </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Students will do things the way you did when you were young </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>… </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Let’s: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Be critical of the new </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Be equally critical of the status quo </li></ul></ul>
  44. 44. Why Not? JISC Adapted from Washington Post cartoon JISC Civil Service prefers ‘best of breed’ systems Where’s the vendor’s roadmap? Google might go bankrupt I want to develop stuff so I’ll always have a job) This Web 2.0 thing is simple to use and can provide lots of benefits! Why Not?
  45. 45. Conclusions <ul><li>To conclude: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Web 2.0 can provide real benefits for our users </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>However organisations tend to be conservative </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>We therefore need: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Advocacy </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>To listen to users' concerns </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>To address users' concerns e.g. risk management </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>The wider community can benefit by adopting Web 2.0 principles of openness and sharing. So let us: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Share our advocacy resources, risk management techniques, etc. </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Develop your own social network based on openness, trust, collaboration, .. </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Read my Blog </li></ul></ul>Conclusions