Web 2.0 implications on knowledge management.

Web 2.0 implications on knowledge management was written by Monica Levy and published in the Journal of Knowledge Management in 2007. Monica levy is the Chief Executive Officer at ROM Knowledgeware, Reut, Israel (Levy, 2007).


The purpose of the article, according to Levy, “is to provide an understanding of the WEB 2.0 phenomenon and it’s implication on knowledge management; thus, in order to learn whether using WEB 2.0 concepts and tools can yield a better assimilation of knowledge management in organisations.” (Levy, 2007) In layman’s terms, the purpose of this paper is to discover whether Web 2.0 tools can be used by organisations in the development, provision and organisation of information. Issues such as control of information, sharing of knowledge and organisation of knowledge are all addressed by Levy and discussed to varying degrees. In reviewing this text we will look at how the layout in conjunction with the text of the article help or hinder the understanding of the article and its purpose and how well the issues are resolved.

Levy’s article has three key components, each addressing a different aspect of her discussion:

1) Review of Web 2.0; what it is and how people use it;

2) Introduction of Web 2.0 tools and ideas into organisations and

3) Knowledge management through Web 2.0, looking at four different aspects – conceptual, principles, functional abilities and organisational culture

Through her review of Web 2.0 in the first part of her article, Levy sets out to explain the history of the term as well as the principles of Web 2.0. Levy has relied heavily on a couple of papers by O’Reilly, especially a 2005 paper titled “What is Web 2.0 – design patterns and business models for the next generation of software” for support of her thoughts and opinions on what Web 2.0 means. Although as a whole her article is very well researched, as evidenced by the list of references and further reading noted at the back, her constant referral to O’Reilly leads the reader to believe that there must not be many resources regarding Web 2.0’s use; though this is not necessarily a bad thing. Although there may be many resources talking about Web 2.0, from Wikipedia through to YouTube, Levy has stuck with authoritative resources appropriate for the medium for which her article is written.

When analysing the four different aspects of knowledge management through Web 2.0, Levy looks at the different focuses of knowledge management and Web 2.0, concluding that “WEB 2.0 focuses on people, while knowledge management focuses on organisations. In order to benefit from the trust that WEB 2.0 has, the focus has to be changed.” (Levy, 2007). This is an idea that can be seen in a video put together by Assistant Professor Michael Wesch of Kansas State University http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gmP4nk0EOE

Through use of subheadings, tables and point form Levy makes her article easy to follow and showcases her research well. She explains her concepts before discussing them, allowing those new to the field an understanding of what she is about to examine before she examines it. Colour is also used effectively as a way to break the text down.

The one thing that is notably missing from Levy’s paper is an emphasis on the quality of the information provided by an organisation as opposed to the information that can be found just by using an internet search engine. She states three reasons for the implementation of Web 2.0 technologies in organisations and although the three are valid, surely the need to have access to authoritative and current resources needs to be included. As Fryer states: “As the amount of information on the Internet has exploded, searching has become complicated…Too much information is not a good thing. Quality, targeted, easily found information will please your clients and will, most likely, help you stay within your budget because of the shorter search times involved.” (Fryer, 2009).

Levy puts forward a strong argument for implementing Web 2.0 into organisations for the management of information, giving clear and concise insight into what can be learned from Web 2.0 and how it could be beneficial to the life and growth of knowledge management. This adds to our understanding of Web 2.0 and its implications in knowledge management. Her sources are credible and her claims justifiable given the knowledge at the time.