Depends on the definition of success, and Floyd said below. Web 2.0 seems to more of a philosophy than a proscribed set of standards and technologies. Identifying specific outcomes to be achieved with Web 2.0 would be easier than identifying what Web 2.0 actually is.
Seems there are three considerations (I use the same constructs in talking about NG9-1-1 as well): Citizen-to-Authority; Authority-to-Authority, and; Authority-to-Citizen. Substitute Government for Citizen. How do you impact each of these transactions?
Citizen-to-Government: No doubt, citizens are communicating in multiple ways and Government has been slow to adopt these technologies, limiting C2G interaction. Web 2.0 could provide specific outcomes here, improved citizen satisfaction scores, availability of services 24-7, etc.
G2G: Enhanced collaboration and information sharing, reducing the number of person-hours to complete significant tasks of an agency, maintaining current service levels, complying with government regulations, etc.
G2C: Transparency of operations, availability of new services, adoption of relevant social media tools, etc.
[Over-worn Phrase Alert]: Web 2.0 is a journey…not a destination. My .02…
Poll of the Week
Could your inbox use a little more awesome?
Sign up to get a daily dose of awesome gov-focused resources, trainings, blogs and articles to help you do you job better.