Being @work2work and out-of-reach innovation

Apparently a web year (not to be confused with Internet time) is compressed in comparison to a calendar year. The rate of change on the web and technology in general is rapid; with health and social care constantly cited as key beneficiaries of technical and informatics developments.

In order to be beneficiaries though
what does this mean in terms of time?

It can be argued that to take full advantage of the 'latest and greatest' informatics (ICT) developments in health and social care means being in the early or late majority of adopters - the mainstream. Whichever way you define benefits (and measure them!) one of the factors and qualities must be time? But given the rate of change of technology just how much benefit can be accrued if you are late to the party?

There are articles and websites that extol the initiatives of Web 2.0 within health and e-Health, to the extent that this trend anticipation is labelled Health 2.0 - for example. You can see how the new Health 2.0 applications and personal health records will be the preserve of the new and nimble.

Back on the 'Trust' shop floor - if you try to access anything connected with social networking any e-mails end up in the corporate spam folder and social networking sites and blogs are blocked.

Well what do you expect?
We are @work2work
and that is not in dispute!

There are various studies that show what people get up to when at work with (free) web access. Maybe the filters are also not up to snuff?

Without some special provision - a secure sandpit for experimentation - there's a major worry that innovation and creativity could be marginalised.

This (vital) digital lockdown could mean that
while health and social care services deliver
outreach services, ...
innovative e-Health / ICT developments remain
out-of-reach.

Definition of e-Health: "Having your cake and eating IcT"

To follow: The four other labels for Hodges' model.