I am reading Enterprise 2.0 book from Andrew McAfee and I now have a better understanding of your point about complexity science.

I believe that what you mean is that complexity science helps in understanding how structure emerge from pattern of usage from multiple users.

And I understand that my understanding of emergence is a bit shallow compared to the actual meaning that Andrew of yourself can put behind Emergence, again, based on complexity science.

However I stick to my take against complexity in a organisational environment : as Scott Berkun puts it nicely, there are 2 types of people : complexifiers and simplifiers.

And I have noticed that we just achieve far more with the second category of people.

Hey, many thanks for this long reply. Generally speaking of course E2.0 embraces a lot of both. But keep in mind the idea here is to convince managers who are not E2.0 fan about the need of having a paradigm shift with the principles they use to take decision in their day to day management.

1- When I talk about broadcast i'm talking about the old broadcast way where some happy few broadcast to the masses without any way for the latter to reply. These days are over. Of course we all broadcast but a) this is mass broadcasting, I.e you and I can broadcast and b) this engages conversation – i.e you are able to reply. Which is completely different to the old broadcast way as Chris Locke spots it

2- you definitely are right on this one; i've never been very comfortable with it either. I guess it was there to make the number but that's a second mistake as there already was one too many. So you're right it's not quite there : I promise 10 principles and there are 11 (2 #3) so that's already 10% off the mark.

3- emergence may requires structure, just like an enterprise with E2.0 approach needs structure. What I wanted to stress was that E2.0 needs the absence of too much predetermined structure to be successful. Managers love to put too much predetermine structure, especially on methodologies they are not familiar with. This makes innovation and emergence suffocate.

4- I am talking about folksonomy to handle information. I don't now about workflow. But my bet is that if you're using pre-determined tags as in enterprise folksonomy, this is still folksonomy and not taxonomy. I.e it's still information findable through meta data as opposed to their location.

5- Actually, every single points would deserve a full blog post on their own. Agree with you : it's quite easy to pretend doing agility in order to relieve oneself from commitment, etc …When I talk about agility, I mean the agile manifesto and getting real (37 signals). Probably the most agile bunch of hackers in the world and they don't use Scrum. But agree that scrum is a quite efficient framework. Actually, i've wrote about it in techiteasy already and I've been practicing it for about 2 years now.

6- There obviously needs for balance on every single point. Again, the objective here is to make ol fashion managers think that there is a strong need of paradigm shift.

7- As far as interwined networks are concerned, this is a translation of a french post. In France we talk about someone's or some team's "réseau" (singular). I guess it makes more sense talking about interwining all these personal and team networks in french, then.

8- Complexity is simplicity. And black is white, if you put enough Red, Green and Blue in it. I guess I am not relevant talking about the complexity science, but that’s ok because that’s not what I intended to do here. But I have enough experience in the industry to make the difference between professionals that make life difficult to everybody setting up complex systems to impress people (and God knows there is quite a few of them), with professionals that make life easier to everyone striving from simplicity. That's what the quote of Cottmeier is all about. And that's what this point is all about. But simplicity is complex, that's for sure. As Mark from 37signals puts it : "Simple requires deep thought, discipline, and patience – things that many companies lack".

7- Surely not. IT technology is HTML, Ajax and web servers, all of which we wouldn't be discussing without today. IT Governance is "No one has ever been fired for buying IBM" or "We are an Oracle House so we'll put an Oracle system as an E2.0 solution because this is the company IT policy" regardless of the usability of the solution. So I stick with IT governance as the enemy and user-oriented technologies and technical solutions as the goal.

10- You're far too generous

Then you might love this: http://bit.ly/7F5zSB

2. It's neither bottom up or top down. Indeed, the beauty of E2.0 is that it 'flattens' the organization. That means there is no bottom or top. Suggesting that it's bottom up just embraces a concept that E2.0 eschews.

3. Emergence requires some structure (see the lava lamp analogy http://www.fastforwardblog.com/2009/09/16/e2-0-un...

4. Folksonomy is relevant to individuals, but it is really bad for using tagging as an architectural mechanism to manage flow. For example, you can do away with programmed workflow and replace it with work that flows on conversations with tags. The standard list of tags would effectively be a taxonomy.

5. Agility is nice, but so many are so used to the principles of Project Management (and the corresponding controls) that many existing practices of Agile are bastardized to the point that it's difficult to use the term with any degree of confidence that people who claim to be practicing it actually are. Take it to Scrum and you're doing a bit better.

6. I agree with you fundamentally here. But again, there's still need for a balance (you even intimated the same).

7. [Isn't an intertwined network redundant? Sounds a whole lot like 'spaghetti code' to me?] Again, fundamentally agree, but the description leaves me flat.

8. Complexity IS simplicity. The concepts of complexity science are fundamental to E2.0. It's clear from your comments here that you're not familiar with the relevance or the meaning.

9. User oriented technologies vs. IT governance? How about user-oriented governance vs. IT technology? The latter is E2.0.

10. I'll give you the last one : )