...not sure why "ROI" is such a scary and laborious thing to figure out EXCEPT for of course that so many organizations don't understand how to properly do it, getting lost in minutiae and expecting to find hard-quantifiables where they don't exist and then lacking the skills/knowledge to project return from softer factors (engagement, satisfaction, etc.). Whatever the case, when businesses first implemented e-mail and long before that telephones they in some fashion had to figure out "is this worth doing?" and therefore "what will I get," i.e. what is the return on this investment. It's only once a service becomes identified as essential that this discussion starts to go away, but even then we continue to validate the amount of investment versus a general worth at some level.

But even taking a "why bother" approach - and I do appreciate the message here - then I think it's important to answer just how one does justify the expenditure to those who need to authorize the expenditure. This article begs the point that it's become essential due to competition already engaging it, but even then I think when we talk about *specific* efforts we can't just say such as "our competitors microblog so we have to!" when many people can and will argue "our competitors are stupid, microblogging is a waste of their money, so we better not make the same mistake." it's not enough to say "we just have to."

Most interesting article I've ever read on an aspect of Biz/IT alignment and ROI. Thank you, John

Just spoke with a current customer that is about to undertake a 1 year study on whether they can use virtualization (I know) and E2.0 technologies in their organization. Some people will get dragged into this revolution kicking and screaming.