I have been working years on software development both as a developer and as a manager and now, being a freelance coach, I’m looking for better ways to make software houses effort more effective.

I think sticking to your post structure will help me to be clearer along my brief comment.

- Internal vs. External

I’m fighting an hard battle against (every kind of) dualism. I strongly believe that external actors (software users and what concerns them) and internal actors (management and then down to the core: developers) are to be kept as close as possible. Agile software development already features pay-per-use business models and now that user centred design is converging towards agile (about this I’m trying to contribute in some useful way) it could be everyday-life using the expression ‘development team’ meant as a single cohesive group featuring users, market analysts, business manager and developers. Externe and interne could never be the same thing – Gian told us above – but I think they must be glued together.

- Features vs. dynamics ***

From an agile development point of view here it’s easy for me to follow you. Agile methodologies value people more than processes. We know how process must be valued more than code. So, easy and aristotelic: we must value people (meaning interactions too) more than code. Riding the good wave of people interactions brings you to the right software production process. Every great software product we know about starts from a successful interaction between people (or no interaction at all!). I use to say: success is an epiphenomenon.

- Is Europe equal to the U.S?

I don’t want to talk about whole Europe, I don’t think I could. I’m focusing my reflection on how the lobby-based italian market should mean a different approach to (agile) software business compared against USA market, where the agile methods come from. No mature thinking about that by now…

When you write “I absolutely agree we should be talking more and more about a different concept of doing business and less about how shining technology could be” I think you got the exact point software development industry is facing hard battles about nowadays. Agile methodologies since their very beginning have always been focusing on business, but they were born in times when social wasn’t a thing. Now customers are (part of) a sort of composite product owner and a better way to grow upon user’s feedback is required by software houses, gluing, as you told us, internal and external.

Ciao!

As I said in this post, I absolutely agree we should be talking more and more about a different concept of doing business and less about how shining technology could be. This can be done focusing on business goals on a side and on people needs on the other.

http://twitter.com/lliu

Caro Emanuele, molto interessante!

1. Internal-external, complementary but different, they need time

Interno de esterno si integreranno? Sicuramente, ma sono allo stesso tempo due realtà diverse, per quanto in stretta relazione (ma è normale nei sistemi complessi si chiama dialogica). Diamo il tempo alle aziende di maturare sia nella cultura organizzativa interna che nella comunicazione esterna prima di integrarle (o almeno in una delle due).

2. E2.0 needs models not only cases. E2.0 needs transdisciplinary competences like psychology, interaction design and knowledge managment, together. You know my way of research
http://ibridazioni.com/2009/05/30/mode-motivational-design/

Lavorare con applicazioni collaborative 2.0 è lavorare con la cultura organizzativa, poche storie!
Non lo si approfondisce perchè mancano le persone e le competenze per integrare ambiti che vanno dalla psicologia dei gruppi, all’interaction design, al knowledge management, ecc.. Non bastano i casi bisogna estrarre i meccanismi centrali, generalizzarli e sviluppare metodologie. Solo allora l’E2.0 sarà maturo. Io con Motivational Design http://ibridazioni.com/2009/05/30/mode-motivational-design/
sai che mi muovo in questa direzione e con un gruppo di giovani talenti stiamo integrando metodologie su questo fronte.

3. Now E2.0 is too vertical on few competences and it need to be more deep to become more present in different ambits.

My point wasn’t really to pay more attention but maybe to pay attention also in a different way. I know Forrester has a number of analysts involved into Enterprise 2.0. What I believe needs to happen is a shift of the role that e2.0 analysts will have in the next few years with a stronger focus on people and their needs with social software, more than on social software itself.

Looking forward to read other comments from people in Forrester and Gartner.