Toddlers are often scolded for various offenses, one being selfishness. They may cry and scream to keep what they think belongs to them without even considering that the doll, the book, or the candy belongs to someone else. What makes matters worse for the child is that all the crying and screaming does not change the fact that the toddler needs to either share what he or she has or give the item back to the owner. Don Tapscott and Anthony D. Williams (2006) explore a similar concept in Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything. They posit that businesses (i.e., the toddlers) must consistently and effectively reveal some tricks of their trade and allow consumers to freely share their creative minds with them, for a prosperous and evolving operation. Essentially a business thrives from the thoughtful planning and precise execution of their blueprints; however, in the end, the company owes a great deal to the consumer because the consumer is what drives the business to do what it does in the first place. So, in a real sense, the business belongs to the consumer, and this is a way for the company to give back by permitting hands-on feedback from their clients. Similarly, Howard Rheingold (2002) completed part of his discussion in Smart Mobswith the WiFi phenomenon and how the telecomm and cable industries are reluctant in sharing the Internet industry so that the public may have access to various Web advantages: low-cost, higher connection speeds, and mobility. Furthermore, Rheingold reasons that “…the consumer [has] no obligation to remain loyal to obsolete technologies when something better comes along” (2002, p. 155).
The connecting theme of the authors is the benefit of collaboration, cooperation, and participation of business-to-business and business-to-customer. Eric S. Raymond (1999) contends in The Cathedral and the Bazaar how the collaboration of the Linux open-source created a kinship, a group of people working towards the same goal. Tapscott and Williams also highlight the open-source operations of BiOS and Marketocracy. I agree with Tapscott and Williams, Rheingold, and Raymond that collaboration is central in inter- and intra-groups, nevertheless, the inter-group has by far the most transitions to make. Despite the advantages from collaboration, many businesses will keep the blinders on in the hope that this form of teamwork will phase out like the dotcom era.
Cooperation may be a better term to describe the dichotomy of the closed-source business compared to an open-source operation. Often cooperation suggests that one may not like the idea of working together; nonetheless, he or she is willing to comply to hammer the problem out on the basis of the good that could emanate from working together.
Last, participation is freely chosen. The modes of citizen journalism via blogs, YouTube, and flickr are classic examples of voluntary ways for one to present news from an independent standpoint. Tapscott and Williams sum it up this way, “Whether people are creating, sharing, or socializing, the new Web is principally about participating rather than passively receiving information” (2006, p. 37). Mainstream (closed-source) companies that have not jumped on the bandwagon should take this to heart and open the door to active participation within their borders regardless of the “prosumption dilemma”, in order to truly reap the benefits, albeit the customer may not always be right.
References
Raymond, E. (1999). The cathedral and the bazaar (pp. 21-63). In the Cathedral and the bazaar. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly Media.
Rheingold, H. (2002). Smart Mobs: The next social revolution. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Books.
Tapscott, D. & Williams, A. (2006). Wikinomics: How mass collaboration changes everything. New York: Penguin Group.
