Intelligence 2.0

Add a Comment

Comment by Jerry Spencer on July 2, 2009 at 10:40am

Arik, thanks for starting this and inviting me to participate. Am looking forward to more discussion. For now, I tend to echo Seena's comments. Let's see what happens here.

Comment by Carlo Velten on July 2, 2009 at 7:19am

Hi Arik - great idea to circle new ideas about Intelligence 2.0 this way!

From my perspective the term Intelligence 2.0 could help us to bring together the technological AND organizational aspects of enterprise intelligence and the new web 2.0 developments...happy to join the discussion

Comment by Jeanne LaFrance on May 26, 2009 at 6:07am

Arik, Thank you for putting these groups together.

Comment by Andrew Beurschgens on May 15, 2009 at 1:09pm

Again Arik, many thanks for this web 2.0 environment

Comment by Jan Van Loo on May 13, 2009 at 9:57am

Thanks for your initiative Arik.
When I read "Intelligence 2.0" I see a tool that I can configure to the needs of my company (content wise), but that has as basic functionality that it would do analyses (eg early warning) for me : it would gather all that I would tell it to gather (all rss , webcrawler , blogs, ... ) come together in the tool, which is equipped with sufficiently sofisticated heuristic semantics to be able to trigger coloured flags, along with a reason why it triggered that flag (series of weighed key-words, squeezed into a vector if needed, or a small pool of relevant data elements supporting the 'statement').
I did such an exercise years ago with a simple Mac 4D application, combined with cluster analysis, but than came other priorities and I forgot about it. It never worked adequately (too many dimensions for too small datasets). I have now more time again to get involved in such an exercise, and would be willing to actively contribute.
... see where we end up having launched this "call".

Comment by David W. Conley on May 12, 2009 at 9:03am

I like the concept of "innovative new ways of knowing." While there is a wide range of possible intelligence actions, many are based on environmental scanning or targeted data gathering which is often responded to with defensive and reactive planning. Defense is not a bad thing and is certainly better that doing nothing in hopes that everything will work out. However I believe that the old adage "the best defensive is a good offense" is a key learning especially when we want to develop new ways of utilizing intelligence. A shift from organizational analysis to one of product or business system analysis armed with the Trends of Technology and Business System Evolution knowledge puts the recipient in a position to design a strong offense that results in the other players being forced into a defensive and reactionary mode. Once you are one of the leaders it becomes less relevant what the "followers" are doing and more energy can be spent setting a path that the rest will have to follow.

Comment by Jean Wu on May 12, 2009 at 5:18am

Thanks for the invitation, Arik!
I echo Michael Neugarten's comments about the merger...
And, about Intelligence 2.0, I don't think it's sort of replacement of 1.0, but a new area for us to do it maybe smarter.

Comment by Vernon Prior on May 11, 2009 at 8:08pm

Once again, we owe you a huge debt, Arik; I am delighted to be part of it. As for where I'm at - I echo Seena's sentiments in full. Well said, Seena.

Comment by Lesley Howell on May 11, 2009 at 7:35pm

A thread I must read - thnaks for the invite.

Comment by Vickie Sneddon on May 11, 2009 at 7:26pm

Hi Arik. Thanks for the invite.

• First
• Previous
• Next
• Last