What's in a Name?What's in a Name?

It seems the term Enterprise 2.0 is still a point of contention on Wikipedia with well over 100 revisions to the entry since it was established in May of 2006. You would think in its relatively short history that Enterprise 2.0 would not be so difficult to pin down, but that's not the case. In it's first few months of existence the entry was listed for deletion and threatened to be moved to Wiktionary. But the entry stuck and was expanded upon and debated for over a year until being renamed Enterprise Social Software in September 2006. As Enterprise Social Software the debate continued until just last month when an entry for Enterprise 2.0 was resurrected, only to once again be redirected to Enterprise Social Software a month later. Adding to the confusion, it has been proposed that Enterprise Social Software be merged with another Wikipedia entry: Social Computing. Confused yet?

Truthfully, I'm not one to debate the subtleties in a definition but I will go on the record that there needs to be a separate entry for Enterprise 2.0. Why? I think my biggest hang-up with both enterprise social software and social computing is the word "social". While I agree that the social qualities of software are the major ingredient to Enterprise 2.0 but I don't think it stops there.  Enterprise mash-ups, mobility and enterprise search are as much Enterprise 2.0 as social software is and they're not necessarily social tools.  What I believe Enterprise 2.0 is and what is missing in the Wikipedia entries is the idea that we're significantly changing something.  Social software has been around for decades. Enterprise 2.0 is a relatively new concept that does significantly change how we do business. Exactly what those changes are should continue to be debated on Wikipedia, not whether or not Enterprise 2.0 deserves it's own entry.