(we will not mark this if the Deakin id is used)
MIBT Email: Insert you MIBT email address here
Assignment – Part A
DO NOT FORGET TO USE INTEXT CITATIONS IN EVERY QUESTION
Question 1: What is the difference between Web 1.0 and Web 2.0? (~250 Words)
The main differences between Web 1.0 and Web 2.0 platforms are in the technologies involved as well as the application of those technologies. In the case of Web 1.0, the platform is much more plain and simple, and is used primarily for displaying information on the internet (Harris 2008). This means that application is restricted to the ownership of the platform rather than the communal implications of the technology. In this regard, the platform is only applicable to offering information and not interacting with users. This technology is also arguably poor and primitive (Han 2012). The display applications within the platform appears to be the main attractions to the websites, which, in turn, appear as intended for the main purpose of serving as a library; information is only available for use and nothing else.
Contrary to the above, Web 2.0 incorporates interactive applications within its interface (Rainer, Watson, and Prince 2002). Whereas in Web 1.0 email is the only avenue of interaction, Web 2.0 provides a platform where users can write data, modify, and execute them over the internet. In this case, users can add content to a specific website, whether or not they are the owners of the site. For instance, visitors to the Amazon website are allowed by the Web 2.0 platform to add their own content on the site in the form of customer reviews. This enhances the process of interaction since people are, essentially, communicating their thoughts to one another across such platforms. Such interaction far supresses the primitive interaction provided earlier through the Web 1.0 platform.
Question 2: Define each of the following Web 2.0 usages: blogs; microblogs; wikis; social networks and networking. Include an example of each to support your answer. (~250 Words)
Blogs refer to informational websites containing discussions on discreet topics presented in reverse chronology (Hewitt 2005). Reverse chronology, in this context, means that the most recent discussions appear first on the website. Blogs allow for sustained interactions between the people who create the discussions and those who read in the form of comment boxes. This means that readers can express their reactions to the discussions as they read blog. An example of this is WordPress.com. Microblogs are intimately related with traditional blogs since they also entail the creation of discussion posts, albeit on a much smaller scale. In this case, a microblog is a website that allows people to post short discussions on any subject and have other people interacting with them. Examples of this are Tumblr and Twitter.
Wikis refer to websites that allow collaborative editing of content and even structure by different people (Richardson 2009). These websites typically allow for the creation of expansive content or information projects since they incorporate the input of more than one person. In this regard, they have given rise to the concept of online information databases for use and management by the general public. For example, Wikipedia, as a prime example of a wiki site, is an online encyclopaedia that applies the collaboration of several content creators and editors working in harmony. Social networks are websites that allow for the free interaction of people across the web platform (Partridge 2011). During these free interactions, people, primarily, get to share personal information about each other through the process of social networking. Prime examples of this are Facebook and Google Plus (Google+).
Question 3: Explain social collaboration; social publishing and social intelligence in the context of how they may be used by a business? Extend you answer and provide a single example of a collaborative Web 2.0 technology suitable for business information sharing. (~250 Words)
In the context of business operations, social collaboration refers to the integrative cooperation between different people making up a synergetic group. The group element, thus, becomes the foundation of social collaboration (Lazakidou 2012). This means that focus is put on the activities of the group as opposed to the performance or input of each member. Social publishing is related to the concepts of blogging and social networking in that it entails the creation and online publication of content that people can interact with. In this case, though, the social publisher engages in the activity with the aim of making money. As such, it is different from both blogging and social networking, despite being integrally linked to both. Article publishing is, in essence, the most common type of social publishing (Brown and Boulderstone 2008), such as done by news organizations and book publishers.
Social intelligence is a broad concept that refers to the ability to navigate through intricate social interactions. This is a key concept in business. In essence, businesses rely on social interactions (Goleman 2011). As such, managers must be able to navigate through the intricate social interactions in a manner that will benefit the organization by improving the bottom line. Much of this interaction is now taking place online across the Web 2.0 platform. An example of an effective collaborative Web 2.0 platform is Microsoft SharePoint. This refers to a web-based framework for businesses, through which data can be shared and managed. This platform entails the application of both internet and intranet portals. Businesses can benefit from this through the integration of core services across a single interface.
Question 4: Define crowdsourcing and what benefits does crowdsourcing provide? Give an example of crowdsourcing. (~250 Words)
As the name suggests, crowdsourcing refers to the solicitation of services from a group of unidentified individuals, or crowd (Howe 2009). The word comes from the joining of both crowd and sourcing. In this case, the crowd is a group of several people who are unidentified and might not necessarily be interrelated. Organizations might undertake efforts to acquire the input of this crowd through both online and offline platforms with the aim of growing a certain area of their business; this is, indeed, the core principle of crowdsourcing (Brabham 2013). Management might engage a crowd as a way of researching people’s reactions to a certain product or service. In this case, the crowd would effectively serve the purpose of a large-scale focus group.
The organization will benefit from successful crowdsourcing in that it will be able to gather the input of different individuals. Since the persons involved are unidentified and not necessarily related, they provide the organization with a unique opportunity to get the input of people from different backgrounds, whether regionally or socially. The input gathered from such a dynamic group would prove quite valuable to an organization by offering managers insight into how people either perceive or interact with their products and services. Similarly, carrying out crowdsourcing online will be efficient and cost effective compared to the more traditional platforms (Sloane 2011), especially in the area of market research. The data obtained through online crowdsourcing is processed faster and the results implemented. This saves the organization valuable resources in the form of manpower and time, as well as reducing monetary expenses.
Reference List: (Do not move this to the end of the assignment template)
Brabham, D.C. 2013. Crowdsourcing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Brown, D.J. and Boulderstone, R. 2008. The Impact of Electronic Publishing: The Future for Publishers and Librarians. Hawthorne, CA: Walter de Gruyter.
Goleman, D. 2011. Social Intelligence: The New Science of Human Relationships. London, UK: Random House.
Han, S. 2012. Web 2.0. London, UK: Routledge.
Harris, D. 2008. Web 2. 0 Evolution Into the Intelligent Web 3. 0: 100 Most Asked Questions on Transformation, Ubiquitous Connectivity, Network Computing, Open Technologies, Open Identity, Distributed Databases and Intelligent Applications. Raleigh, NC: Lulu.com.
Hewitt, H. 2005. Blog: Understanding the Information Reformation That's Changing Your World. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Inc.
Howe, J. 2009. Crowdsourcing: Why the Power of the Crowd is Driving the Future of Business. New York, NY: Three Rivers Press.
Lazakidou, A.A. 2012. Virtual Communities, Social Networks and Collaboration. New York, NY: Springer.
Partridge, K. 2011. Social Networking. The Bronx, NY: Hw Wilson Company.
Rainer, R.K., Watson, H.J., and Prince, B. 2002. Management Information Systems. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Global Education.
Richardson, W. 2009. Blogs, Wikis, Podcasts, and Other Powerful Web Tools for Classrooms. Newbury Park, CA: Corwin Press.
Sloane, P. 2011. A Guide to Open Innovation and Crowdsourcing: Advice from Leading Experts in the Field. London, UK: Kogan Page Publishers.
Assignment – Part B
A case study analysis using Toulmin’s Model of Argument (~600 WORDS)
Use the Toulmin Table provided for your answers.
- You must use the case study provided in the Assignment Details Document.
- You must analyse every sentence in the case study to establish whether it is a Toulmin element and should be included in the table below
- Not all sentences in the case study will be used in the table below
- Sentences must be copied from case study and pasted into the appropriate Toulmin element section.