Enterprise Software Is Unsexy: Because It's Not About Individuals, But Groups

Scoble sparked an interesting torrent with hisWhy enterprise software isn’t sexy post, recently:

Bill Gates seems to bemoan the fact that enterprise software isn’t covered by blogs and journalists. Instead, he points out, that we like talking about consumer software.

It’s a good point, especially since business software like that from Oracle, SAP, Microsoft etc makes a TON of money.

So, why is it so?

In my case, the basic orientation of enterprise software is a generation behind so-called consumer software in one critical architectural dimension.

The basic orientation of 'consumer' software puts the individual first, at the center of the world. I have written and spoken about this dozens of times (Social = Me First, The Individual Is The New Group, and others). Think of the organization of Facebook, Dopplr, or Flickr, or a hundred other successful social apps.

Enterprise software starts with the premise that the user is an employee, or member of the marketing department, or a minion in the IT department. The users rights and capabilities are tied to membership, not to individual identity.

This may seem like a necessity, but I don't think it is. I am involved in the design of several work-oriented applications in which individual identity is still first, and membership in projects, universities, or companies is second.

I thnk we will see this design principle in more enterprise apps in the future, once people actually learn to see the difference. Today, I doubt that one in a hundred bloggers tracking the Web 2.0 space are aware of that distinction, so it's no surprise that people in the enterprise or the average Joe doesn't get it. Or Bill Gates.

Comments

[Susan Scrupski]

Hi Stowe. Interesting POV on this debate that keeps cycling round. Looks like Bill gets his Christmas wish after all-- the blogosphere is abuzz over Enterprise, eh?

Your thoughts here triggered an enterprise comparison for me along these lines. Jevon had encouraged me to check out a demo of ThoughtFarmer after I had seen those guys (well actually their customer) speak at Office 2.0. Chris McGrath told me ThoughtFarmer was originally supposed to be a Microsoft SharePoint "project" that just couldn't get off the ground. They scrapped the work with SharePoint and ThoughtFarmer was born. When they started from scratch, they did what you suggested: they started with the individual-- the user. What resulted is a really clean, easy to use and navigate social computing platform. At the time, this was SharePoint'03, which has been since improved, I understand, with MOSS (SharePoint '07). Next week, I'm getting a first peek at a SharePoint 100,000+ employee "Facebook for the enterprise" social network at one of our customers. I'm curious to see how this Microsoft platform compares with the simple elegance of ThoughtFarmer's which begins with the individual. Will let you know. :-)

[vinnie mirchandani]

I have responded at http://dealarchitect.typepad.com/deal_architect/2007/12/who-loves-ya-ba.html

"But as they say "Don't mess with a man's money or his mail". Enterprise technologies take care of delivering a man's email and cutting his paycheck. Faithfully and carefully.

So, don't tell me enterprise technologies don't care about individuals...."