Early look at use of web2.0 in business

1. Collin Canright, Principal
773 248-8935
Pilot Study to Look at Awareness and
Usage of Web 2.0 in Businesses Today
– An Evalueserve Report
August 16, 2007
Bart Zehren, Client Executive
847 864-7159

2. Research Objective and Methodology
Objective
To shed light on how organizations know about web 2.0, how they use Web 2.0 and how it may
improve results with prospects, customers, vendors, and employees.
Methodology
Email invitations were sent to 5,540 executives of which 275 answered by answering at least one
question, but one in three disqualified for the complete survey due to lack of awareness. The
response base for most questions in this pilot study ranges from approximately 110 to 150.
The sample for this survey was provided by e-mailing lists from the following sources:
Canright & Paule : 1,340 invitations emailed 6/20 and reminders emailed 7/2
lawmarketing.com : 4,200 invitations emailed 6/27 and reminders emailed 7/3
The survey primarily contained closed-ended questions with some open-ends.
After the data was collected, it was cleaned and checked for logical consistency.
Quantitative analysis primarily comprised frequencies and cross-tabulations. The findings were
also cross-tabulated by company size and age of the respondents.
Open-ended responses of qualitative questions were visually screened for identifying trends.
2

3. Pilot Study Executive Summary
• Real awareness of Web 2.0’s relevance, but interest leads by far
over knowledge, understanding
• Specific knowledge of Web 2.0 language, terminology appears low,
scattered and selective
• Expected impact on business seems focused on external benefits
involving customers, service and marketing
• Resistance/Challenges to Web 2.0: Free expression by employees
or customers leading to loss of brand control; lack of knowledge,
difficulty proving ROI and integrating it effectively
• Media habits re: Web 2.0 center around Google, the all-purpose
search solution; Seth’s Blog leads other blogs

4. Web 2.0’s Basic Impact
Effect Has Begun: Awareness Underway, but
Interest Leads Knowledge and Understanding
4

5. One Third of Respondents have Never Heard of Web
2.0 and Opted-out of Most of the Subsequent Analysis
• Majority of the respondents have heard about Web 2.0 but are not thoroughly familiar with it
“Diverse Awareness Levels of Web 2.0”
N = 275
5
Q1. Have you ever heard or read anything about the phrase Web 2.0?

6. One Expert “Respondent” Neatly Defined Web 2.0
• Web 2.0: “Participative web, including
user generated content, where users
are actors of the knowledge available
on the web”
– Respondent who did not complete our survey

7. Web 2.0 Identified as Next Generation Web Technology;
Greater Interactivity is a Commonly Cited Aspect
• Next Generation of Web Environment
- “To me, it means learning new technology and watching the industry updates; to the company, it
presents new ways to reach our audience and new options to offer to advertisers”
- “Social networks, online communities, users create content/share content instead of search for
content providers”
- “It means a new generation of web services: collaboration, community and conscience”
- “New opportunities to deliver legal services and information over the internet”
• Interactivity
- “New interactive online products and strategies”
- “It means a tremendous opportunity to reinvent our Web presence to engage members
interactively”
- “A more interactive site as opposed to a billboard”
- “Interactivity; Web self-service; User-created content; Web services”
- “Using the internet as an interactive communication tool with clients and prospects”
7
Q2. Based on whatever you may know or have heard, what does the phrase Web 2.0 mean to you and/or to your company?

8. Closely Following Interactivity: Idea that Web 2.0 has to
do with Web Communities of Shared Interests
• Web 2.0 for building and sustaining communities
- “To me, Web 2.0 means ‘community’; the internet is no longer a place to just go find
information, it is now a community where people share and contribute”
- “It means a higher level of two-way, user driven interactivity where increasingly its less push at
the customer and more towards enabling ‘pull’ choices, enabling integrated service and
enabling and aligning behind communities”
- “Use of interactive participation tools to communicate and create community”
- “It's the social web; Web 2.0 isn't necessarily a new ‘web,’ it's an evolution of the web that
focuses more on community, communication, and self-publishing”
- “Low overhead consumer focused media retail and service companies”
• Some stressed the business side of things, even at the risk of showing some
misunderstanding about Web 2.0
- “Open-source architecture, focus on information over products and end-user collaboration/
influence/ownership”
- “Advances in the way the web is used, including to promote business; more interactivity”
- “Products being compatible and ready to support new platform; testing and configurations are in
place to ensure that no major disruptions occur; synergies”
8
Q2. Based on whatever you may know or have heard, what does the phrase Web 2.0 mean to you and/or to your company?

9. All Web 2.0 Activity Accounted for by Two Thirds of
These ‘Aware’ Firms; One Third Remains Inactive
• More than a third have actively researched Web 2.0 themselves and/or think their competitors or
their colleagues are using it
• An advanced 25% subgroup has already incorporated Web 2.0 into their businesses
Web 2.0 Activity
N = 112
9
Q3a. Which of these activities you have done or are aware of with regard to Web 2.0?

10. Blogs lead for Incorporating Web 2.0; then Collaborative
Brainstorming/Knowledge Sharing Seems to Catch On
Blogs
• “We have started using blogs and are researching a social network environment, which we plan to add
in the next few months”
• “I've created a blog for my business and have marketed that blog through various social bookmarking
sites and feed software”
• “Blogging, wikis, social networks”
• “Our company has blogs; I am also personally an active participant in Facebook”
Collaborative Environments
• “Especially around internal collaboration; nascent for collaboration with clients”
• “We are using Microsoft SharePoint to build collaborative sites for the purposes of sharing information
and coordinating with employees in various offices stretching across five states”
• “Enabled some limited user communities - not as fully free form as 2.0 might imply; we are using it for
internal employee interactions and community”
• “Created and use listserv to communicate to candidates and interested individuals about job openings
and updates from my firm”
10
Q3b. In what ways have you incorporated Web 2.0 into your business?

11. Most Find Web 2.0 Interesting and Relevant to their
Businesses, but Feel they Lack Knowledge
• Nearly 80% are (extremely or very) interested in learning more about Web 2.0 technologies
• Relevance follows (62%), but only 17% feel extremely/very knowledgeable about the subject
Appeal of Web 2.0
N = 109 N = 109 N = 106
11
Q11. How 1) Relevant 2) Interesting 3) Knowledgeable is Web 2.0 to your business?

12. Respondents Want to Know Specifics on How Web 2.0
can be Successfully Implemented in their Firms
How to adopt Web 2.0 in their current business and how the new technology will help them
• “A 60-minute ‘get your arms around it’ Webinar that would permit me to identify areas that I personally
should explore in the short term or that I thought the company should”
• “How they can be used strategically in business (not just a ‘nice to have’)?”
• “How many of these applications can be beneficial in a services marketing environment, rather than a
product marketing environment?”
• “I'd like to know more about the analytical tools being deployed by the service industries, as opposed to
the product or commerce-oriented organizations”
• “I need a plan on which ones I need and in what order, how to integrate them and control them and use
them; I need to then figure out how to market my firm because I am using them”
Cost of adopting Web 2.0
• “What tools would make sense? How much time and money to devote? Is this taking me away from the
work at hand? Hype?”
• “The biggest challenge for me is not any of the options in Q9 - it's the budget - this stuff takes money to
build”
12
Q12: What would you like to know about the development of Web 2.0 technologies from this point forward?

13. …and Some Successful Case Studies
Successful adoption of web 2.0 by other businesses
• “Give me some examples of companies doing this; help me understand from a business and
marketing perspective the advantages and disadvantages; give me some guidance on baby steps to
move towards this new technology”
• “I'd like to discuss what others have tried - successful or not”
• “Much of it is focused or has been successful in the B2C world; or just for play - Youtube &
Facebook”
• “How it's being used by law firms, how many firms are using it, and how to get the ‘older’ generation
of law firm leaders to adopt it”
To summarize:
“What tools would make sense? How much time and money to devote?”
-- 50-54 year old engineer in a small consulting/professional firm
13
Q12: What would you like to know about the development of Web 2.0 technologies from this point forward?

14. Awareness/Familiarity with Web 2.0 Terminology
Awareness / Knowledge of Specifics is
Low and Selective
14

15. Nearly Half are Familiar With Web 2.0 as a ‘Business Designation’
Though One Third Have “Never Heard” of That
• Business 2.0 is next with 19% familiar with or using it
• Awareness and familiarity of all the other 2.0 designations are dramatically lower, as two in three
respondents have never heard of any of them
Online Business Designations
N = 90
N = 107
N = 106
N = 106
N = 107
N = 106
N = 105
N = 102
Q7a. How familiar are you with each of these online business designations, denoting new or broader uses of the Internet by business? 15
*The percentages may not add up to hundred due to rounding-off.

16. For Actual User Involvement, Wikipedia, LinkedIn and
YouTube are Leading the Way Among Social Websites
• MySpace and Facebook: the only other social sites to achieve familiarity among a majority
• Most have never heard of 15 (of 21) sites and none are using Riya, Viewpoints and Technomeme
Familiarity with Social Networking Websites
N = 150 N = 152 N = 151 N = 149 N = 151 N = 149 N = 145 N = 149 N = 145 N = 148 N = 148 N = 145 N = 147 N = 146 N = 146 N = 144 N = 148 N = 144 N = 145 N = 145 N = 145
Q7b. How familiar are you with each of these social networking websites? 16
*The percentages may not add up to hundred due to rounding-off.

17. Most Familiar and Widely-Used Tools: Blogs, Podcasts,
RSS Feeds, Social Networking and Wikis
• Nearly 50% or more have never heard of Social Bookmarking, Tagging/Folksonomy and Mashups
Familiarity with Web 2.0 Tools
N = 149 N = 150 N = 151 N = 148 N = 150 N = 149 N = 146 N = 149 N = 148 N = 148
Q7c. How familiar are you with each of these Web 2.0 tools? 17
*The percentages may not add up to hundred due to rounding-off.

18. Leading Web 2.0 Marketing Communication Tools:
User Generated Content and Viral Marketing
• Two in three have never heard of Citizen Marketing and Long Tail
Familiarity with Marketing Communication Tools
N = 147
N = 149
N = 148
N = 147
N = 148
Q7d. How familiar are you with each of these marketing communication tools? 18
*The percentages may not add up to hundred due to rounding-off.

19. Development Tools are the Most Specialized Elements
of Web 2.0; Only XML and XHTML are Widely Known
• 19% are already involved with or using XML, while 17% are using CSS and 13% XHTML
• Only 5% are using SOA and 72% have never heard of Software as a Service (SaaS)
Familiarity with Web Development Tools
N = 149
N = 149
N = 149
N = 146
N = 149
N = 143
Q7e. How familiar are you with each of these web development tools? 19
*The percentages may not add up to hundred due to rounding-off.

20. 2 respondents pointed out
Advertising 2.0 and Virtual
Reality on the Web
(Second Life Systems) as
technologies that should have
been covered in our survey Others felt that we had
covered all relevant
terms and technologies
of interest
Q7f. If we missed any others terms, technologies or Web 2.0 concepts that are relevant to your business, please enter them here. 20

21. Influence on Businesses
External Focus is First,
Involving Customers and Marketing
21

22. Talking with Customers is the Strongest Factor Driving
Belief in Web 2.0’s Applicability to Business
• 80% think that using Web 2.0 for customer communications does apply to their businesses
already (not necessarily already in use), or that it will apply in the near future
• Employee collaboration is a distant second (53%), followed by talking with suppliers/vendors (37%)
Application Areas of Web 2.0 in Business
N = 112
22
Q4. Which, if any, of these purposes and uses of Web 2.0 apply to your business or that you think will apply in the near future?

23. Web 2.0’s Main Revenue Impacts: Traditional Marketing,
Customer Service, Branding and Customer Acquisition
• “Modern” applications involving internal and external collaboration are seen by far fewer businesses
as likely to influence their revenues, though even for these the expected impact is notable
Impact on Business Revenues
N = 112
23
Q5. In the near future, how do you see Web 2.0 influencing your business revenues?

24. Implementation of Web 2.0 is Expected to Increase
Sales, Competitive Edge and Customer Satisfaction
• 55% respondents expect that Web 2.0 will increase their competitive edge, while 51% expect it to
increase customer satisfaction
Expectations About Using Web 2.0
N = 106
N = 104
N = 106
24
Q6. How likely is it that Web 2.0 will help your business in the near future in any (or all) of these three ways?

25. Main Expected Areas of Impact on Marketing Strategies:
Social Networking, Ease of Collaboration by Employees
Impact by Social and Business Networking
• Customers/Marketing
- “I am using LinkedIn to try to connect with potential clients/employers for my marketing services; I look
forward to using Web 2.0 for my clients, but I don't want to use it for the sake of using it, where it's not
useful or effective”
- “Creating an online branded community of dedicated followers will position the business and cement
customer relationships”
- “The key for my business is interaction with the prospective client that moves them through a sales
cycle funnel to my most wanted responses; to the extent this occurs and there is a lot of traffic I can
make a difference and make money; I think Web 2.0 can help with this process”
- “I am hoping this is a new avenue for marketing to the next generation, a way to communicate and
become more connected; I'd like to think it will be easier to obtain feedback from our clients, speed
service and offer a better form of communication”
• Internal Collaboration
- “I believe that the collaborative sites we are implementing within the marketing/sales/strategic planning
department are the most important and impactful application of Web 2.0 that we have; the use of these
technologies is still in the nascent stages, but it's already made communicating among our group much
easier; it should make coordinating strategies and initiatives easier and more efficient in the future”
Q10: Of all the different aspects and components of Web 2.0 we’ve discussed in this survey which, if any, will have the most 25
significant impact on your company’s marketing strategies in future?

26. Content Aggregation and Management are also Seen as
Impact Points
• Content management and delivery
- “Being constantly user-focused and developing new ways to deliver content to users will have a big
impact on our strategy; we will most likely continue to shy away from user-contributed content”
- “Content aggregation”
- “Ajax seems to hold the most promise for building and distributing content”
- “Social networking, tagging, content aggregation”
Q10: Of all the different aspects and components of Web 2.0 we’ve discussed in this survey which, if any, will have the most 26
significant impact on your company’s marketing strategies in future?

27. Resistance / Challenges to Using Web 2.0
Excess Free Expression, Loss of Brand Control;
Lack of Expertise, Proving ROI, Integrating Into
Work Flow and Measurement
27

28. Adoption of Web 2.0 Apt to Face Some Resistance Due
to Concern Over Employees’ or Customers’ Comments
• Overall, resistance is modest, but does increase with concerns about what employees and
customers might say online and about maintaining control over the brand - areas worth addressing
in the future
Resistance to Acceptance of Web 2.0
N = 103
N = 104
N = 105
N = 105
N = 103
N = 103
28
Q8. In your business, how much resistance to the acceptance or adoption of Web 2.0 is likely to arise, or has already occurred,
due to each of these reasons?

29. Lack of Expertise and Difficulty Proving ROI are Major
Obstacles to Using Web 2.0 Technologies
• Two other related types of challenges recognized by approximately half of these firms center around
integrating Web 2.0 into current processes/technologies and measuring results
Challenges to Using Web 2.0
N = 111
29
Q9. What do you see as the biggest challenges to using Web 2.0 technologies?

30. Sources of Information
Google #1 Source by Far Over the Leading
Traditional Media: WSJ, NYT;
Among Blogs: Seth’s is #1
30

31. Logical, Overwhelming Choice for Information on Web
2.0 is Google, Followed Far Behind by Traditional Media
• The highly regarded traditional sources, The Wall Street Journal and The New York Times, reflect
the business character of our sample and the news media in general
Information Sources for Web 2.0
N = 111
31
Q13. On which of these publications or sources do you rely for information about Web 2.0?

32. Seth’s Blog is the Most Read Web 2.0 Related Blog
• Almost half of the respondents do not read any of these blogs
Blogs Related to Web 2.0
N = 111
32
Q14. Which of the following Web 2.0 related blogs do you read?

33. Demographics
Reflective of Our Pilot Sample: Adv’g /PR Execs
and Attorneys, with Range of Sales and Ages
33

34. One in Four of our Respondents Work in Advertising, PR
or Communications; Next are Executives and Lawyers
• Very few are in IT, Research or Finance/Accounting
Job Function
N = 147
34
Q17. What of these descriptions comes closest to explaining your job function?

35. Place of Work and Nature of Businesses
• More than 70% of these companies do not have overseas Location of Company Office
operations, but 16% of our respondents do work in offices outside
the USA
• 39% operate both at home and an office away from home
• 45% have a business in legal services
• 31% have offices in just 1 location; among the 69% with multiple
offices, the average number of locations worldwide is 8 N = 109
Place of Work Operations Outside the USA Type of Industry
N = 141 N = 145 N = 150
Q15. Do you work at home or at an office away from home?
Q16. Which of these industries is your business in?
Q18. In which state is your company office (where you work) located ? 35
Q19. Do you have any international operations outside the USA?

36. Most Firms Responding (58%) Have <$5 Million Annual
Sales, with Nearly 1 in 3 Having <$500,000
• 40% have from $½ million to $10 million, but a few are large firms: 10% more than $500 million
sales
Annual Total Sales Volume
N = 109
36
Q20. What is your company's annual total sales volume?

37. Bulk of Our Respondents - 48% - are in the Prime of
Their Careers: 40 to 54 Years of Age
• Relatively few at the extremes: 12% are young, i.e., under 30, and only 8% are 60 or older
Age
N = 146
37
Q21. What is your age?

38. Thank You

39. Evalueserve’s Six Synergistic Competencies
Investment Research
Data and Financial
Analytics Business Research
Intellectual Market Research
Property and Legal Research
Slide 39
© Evalueserve, 2007. All Rights Reserved - Privileged and Confidential