Good post, Paul. From my perspective as a small business owner, Web 2.0 applications offer a wide array of tools. It's up to business people to use these tools selectively. They should help us to expose our services and philosophies to potential clients. Too much of a good thing is, well, too much of a good thing. There are enough distractions in our modern work life as it is. We don't need to add more. And I agree with you: if we are going to be able to focus on the work at hand, and give our customers the service they deserve, we have to minimize Web 2.0 tools to only those that directly correlate to growing our businesses. My customers deserve--and get--my firm's best efforts and there's no way I could deliver that if I spent all of my time trying to keep up with all of the social media out there.

Great post, Paul. MT is here to stay, let's face it we're not going backwards.. We have to embrace

Paul,

Wonderful, thought-provoking post. I agree with Ted. 2.0 tools are no different than any other communications tools but some (many?) treat them as if they are. I think that is because they are fun, which is a new experience.

As for me, I only own and use those that help me to communicate and/or market. No Blackberry, IPod, and very few apps find their way into my business day. Too much clutter, in my mind, and too many distractions. I have a business to run.

I just wrote about virtually the same thing in that Baby Boomers for instance might be willing to join the web 2.0 world but they might not have a clue what to do, how to do it, and when to do it. What does a cool tool or widget mean to a Boomer? Absolutely nothing.

Ted, thank you for commenting. You bring up a good point about focus and service quality. If being on Facebook all day is good for you and your clients, and drives value for both, then that's an appropriate strategy.

Joe, as you point out, multi-tasking is here to stay. Don't take me for a Luddite, but I wonder if there's something to be said for "simpler times and simpler lives." As our world and lives become more complex, concepts of focus and prioritization take on much more importance.

Lewis, I like your take of the novelty of these tools and applications. They're "fun" to play with and explore.

But as you and Ted aptly point out, for busy working professionals and business owners they must drive business value. Otherwise, they can become a distraction in delivering the very best products and services to customers.

Marc, for a technology neophyte, even turning on a computer can be intimidating. I have, however, seen plenty of "Boomers" that can work circles around me with Web 2.0 tools...

I agree with some of the comments already posted here, Paul. Focusing on what is truly important and prioritizing are a "must" in today's frenetic business world. I'd also like to comment on what Lewis said. It is fun to experiment with all kinds of new Web 2.0 apps, but in the end, we need to hone in on those tools that help build our businesses. That takes some self discipline, doesn't it? It's important to decide which information is worth holding onto, and what needs to be erased from our hard drives. Clutter makes for very disorganized people.

Also, when it comes to Web 2.0, I prefer having fewer but more meaningful interactions over the course of my day. It is far more satisfying on a personal and professional level. This approach leads to more satisfying relationships. . .guess I'm a Luddite.

Claire you and others bring up an interesting topic, something that I've been pondering but definitely will trigger a variety of opinions. Topic is the level of "richness" of our interactions, value, and the constraints of time.

First variable -I wonder if there is a "strata" or levels of richness in interactions, perhaps where a face-to-face conversation is on top, phone conversation next, and a SMS, Twitter, or Facebook poke in the middle and no interaction on the bottom. Is one level of interaction more rich than another?

Variable #2 - time. In our frentic lives, I am sure we'd all like to devote the time to maintaining and building key relationships with friends, family, and business associates. However, there is a key constraint--time. There just isn't enough hours in the day to do what we need to do. So we focus, prioritize, and use different tools to maintain and manage our relationships. And yes, we attempt to multi-task to get it all done, or at least to a level we're comfortable with.

Final variable, that I can see, is "value". How much personal or business value does the relationship have? What do we want out of it? How valuable is the relationship to us/to them?

Not sure what the exact formula is, but maybe unconsciously we are using these variables and a weighting factor to decide how long, what tools, and when to build our relationships.

Thoughts?

We should not blame this only on Web 2.0 but look back at MTV and the speed at which your eyes and brain had to compute the visuals. Add to that the various computer games that sprung up and you had the seeds for what your seeing today.
Our pre-occupation with speed, data and gadgets has definitely dumbed down many. I also think it is one of the main reasons for attention deficit disorder. How many people do you know that don't own a TV or don't have a need to listen to the radio on in the car while driving - how many people can stand silence longer than a nanosecond – unfortunately not many in the Western world.
Did you ever think what would happen if terrorist blew up the net and our satellite communications systems? Just think the only people who would know what to do would be the baby boomers because they worked without all of this technology and don't have the need to multi-task. The best thing people who are addicted can do is to try meditation and be alone in nature several times a week if they can.

Courtney, thanks for keeping us on topic. Our brains wonderful creations and massively parallel, but we're not computers.

We feel a "need" to stay connected and absorb as much information as we can--to the point of overload and addiction. You rightly point out, sometimes what might be best for us is a quiet room or a nature hike (minus the cell phones!)

Thought-provoking, Paul. I'd like to know whether the subjects in the study included a mix of generations.

As for Courtney's comment about ADHD, I beg to differ. Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (the name according to the DSM-IV-TR -Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders of the American Psychiatric Association) is a neurobiological disorder that affects 3-5% of all school-age children and an estimated 4% of adults. Genetics play a role in 80% of ADHD diagnoses. The term is misused in Courtney's reference.

I use a lot of web 2.0 tools (blogs, facebook, del.icio.us and twitter as well as IM systems like skype). I find most of them are very useful for work and general communication. But I think you need to balance the use of them. There are times when I am stressed and I just shut them all out and say if a person needs to reach me they should call me. I find if I do that I stay productive and don't get overwhelmed by my technology.

J.

Elaine, thank you for commenting. I wonder, are you suggesting that a generation, more used to multi-tasking (say Y, iGeneration) might be better at it - through repetition, training and practice?

Hmmm. There might be something to this logic, however I'm sure the scientists quoted in the Atlantic article would say "better" is relative and that we're still causing brain atrophy with our approaches to multi-tasking.

Paul,

Terrific post, and thought-provoking as usual. I would be curious to see what effect Web 2.0 is having on a more social level. Communication and response is much more immediate, but paradoxically, I think the tools also give a false sense of anonymity at the same time. People feel empowered to express themselves, but they also communicate ideas that they would never say to a person if they saw him/her face-to-face.

What do you think?

Cheers,
Michael

Michael, thank you for the kind compliment.

Speaking for myself, I try to be very careful what I communicate online. For blogging, I'm sensitive to the fact that these posts and comments have a long--if not eternal-- shelf life. With other electronic vehicles, I'm thinking IM, email, micro-blogging, a "poke" etc, sometimes my intentions could be misconstrued due to the limitations of the communication vehicle.

Interesting topic, sounds like you have some fodder for a good blog post!

Excellent point. I often have to argue with my employees that, no they aren't really more productive with music, IM, email, and texting while working. They confuse feeling busy with being productive.

Check out this link for improving one's life "usability"
http://www.vascentinteractive.com/2007/11/21/improve-your-worklife-usability/

David, thank you for contributing to the discussion. The url you provided has some good tips, especially about work/life balance and 'always-on" technologies.

At the time of reading this blog I had a word processor, IM conversation, another blog and the back end of my CMS website open.

This article got me to pause and think about what I have accomplished this evening. Being honest with myself, I definitely could have used my time more effectively if I had focused on one or two projects instead of all the mini ones.

I'll give this a shot tomorrow and will hopefully be more productive.

Jesse, thank you for commenting. The neuroscientists would be proud! Let me know how your experiment goes.

I think we're confusing the technology/tools of Web 2.0 with the philosophy of Web 2.0 - to me, Web 2.0 is a way of using web tools to make things easier for us in our work (and play) life.

If we find ourselves being busy (just for the sake of being busy), we're missing the point with the technology.

To me, I blog, IM, use wikis, social bookmark and network, etc., as I way to make me more productive in my job - not to spread my brain-cells too thin (although I have to admit spending plenty of hours figuring out the latest widgit =)...

Chris, thank you for commenting.

Nothing against Web 2.O tools, or any communication tools for that matter. In these studies, neuroscientists are pointing out our proclivity towards using too many at one moment in time, attempting to multi-task too much and therefore not being as productive as we could be.

As the old adage goes, "everything in moderation"...

Wow, the dumming down with the use of W 2.0. I think the idea of knowledge being power may have gone to our heads. If we don't retain the information, our lives are like a blog post without references, quite empty, and very void of authority. I use many of the W2.0 systems, am at the tail of the BB gen, and take the time to understand what I am reading... My life need not pass before my eyes with these tools, but the tools make research easer. It's not the tools we use, rather how we use them. Take a deep breath, unless you are in a hazardous waste area, and relax the world will go on tomorrow for most of us.

Kevin, thanks for chiming in. I've said, the best course of action is a careful balance of the use of these value adding technologies with our innate ability to capture, process and store information. You and I are in agreement.

Great post, and something we should all think more seriously about. If multi-tasking reduces performance (along with all of the other physical maladies mentioned), how is it really impacting our business and decision-making? A good example is an article I read today on the use of cellphones while driving (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22472921/), which essentially proves that this type of multi-tasking is both a health-hazard and performance-reducer. To me it seems obvious that the more you try to do at once, the less effective you'll be at any of the things you're trying to do. I agree that you have to be careful about balance -- but there are way too many examples of people enamored with the technology -- "because I can" -- and not being able to make cogent decisions as a result. Kinda leaves the door open for the "luddites" who ARE focused and know when to say, "enough information, act!"

Phil, thank you for commenting. Your comment "because I can" really resonated with me. Sometimes we think we can do it all, but in fact we're only doing everything with 50% quality and productivity. I've found when I do too much multi-tasking I make mistakes - sometimes little, sometimes costly.

buy cheap tramadol fedex overnight