Service Business

, Volume 2, Issue 4, pp 335–345 | Cite as

Web 2.0 and opportunities for small businesses

  • Sang-Heui Lee
  • David DeWester
  • So Ra Park
Original Paper


The burst of the dot-com balloon closed the era of Web 1.0. In the process, we observed the creation and disappearance of many small businesses globally. The dynamic and linked web pages provided new pathways to online businesses. However, most of the new online business models still followed the traditional practices of the industrial era which could be characterized by closeness, uniformity, and one-way communication. A new set of new technologies, called Web 2.0, offers new opportunities, blurs the boundaries between online and offline activities, opening a new era with flagships of openness, collaboration, and participation. In this study, by reviewing the properties of Web 2.0, we investigate opportunities for small businesses in the Web 2.0 era. The findings of this study can provide helpful guidelines for small businesses to begin using and leveraging Web 2.0.


Web 2.0 Small business Openness Participation Collaboration Two-way communication 


  1. Altinel M et al (2007) Damia—a data mashup fabric for intranet applications. In: Proceedings of the 33rd international conference on very large data bases, September 23–28, 2007, pp 1370–1373Google Scholar
  2. Bandyk M (2008) Now even small firms can go global. U.S. News & World Report, vol 144, no 7, p 52Google Scholar
  3. Bhargava HK, Choudhary V (2004) Economics of an information intermediary with aggregation benefits. Inf Syst Res 15(1):22–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brown JC (2006) Copyright infringement liability for video sharing networks: Grokster redux or breaking new ground under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Comput Internet Lawyer 23(12):10–17Google Scholar
  5. Castelluccio M (2008) A new year, a new Internet. Strateg Finan 89(7):59–60Google Scholar
  6. Chidambaram L, Tung LL (2005) Is out of sight, out of mind? An empirical study of social loafing in technology-supported groups. Inf Syst Res 16(2):149–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Connolly JM (2007) Web 2.0 allows Sun to shine with culture of openness. B to B 92(4):25–25Google Scholar
  8. Curbera F, Duftler M, Khalaf R, Nagy W, Mukhi N, Weerawarana S (2002) Unraveling the web services web: an introduction to SOAP, WSDL, and UDDI. IEEE Internet Comput 6(2):86–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dearstyne BW (2007) Blogs, mashups, & wikis oh, my! Inf Manag J 41(4):24–33Google Scholar
  10. Dellarocas D (2003) The digitization of word of mouth: promise and challenges of online feedback mechanisms. Manag Sci 49(10):1407–1424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Evans P, Wurster TS (1999) Blown to bits: how the new economics of information transforms strategy. Harvard Business School Press, BostonGoogle Scholar
  12. Falkinger J (2006) Attention economies. J Econ Theory 133(2007):266–294Google Scholar
  13. Frana PL (2004) Before the web there was gopher. IEEE Ann Hist Comput 26(1):20–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Friedman TL (2007) The world is flat: a brief history of the twenty-first century. Picador, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  15. Hars A, Ou S (2002) Working for free? Motivations for participating in open-source projects. Int J Electron Commerce 6(3):25–39Google Scholar
  16. Hasan H, Pfaff CC (2006) Emergent conversational technologies that are democratising information systems in organisations: the case of the corporate wiki. In: Proceedings of the information systems foundations (ISF): theory, representation and reality conference, Australian National University, Canberra, 27–28 September 2006Google Scholar
  17. Kim T (2008) MEconomy. Hanbit Media, IncGoogle Scholar
  18. Leadbeater C, Miller P (2004) The pro-am revolution: how enthusiasts are changing our economy and society. Demos, London. Accessed 16 June 2008
  19. Lee SM, Trimi S (2008) Editorial: organizational blogs: overview and research agenda. Int J Inf Technol Manag 7(2):113–119Google Scholar
  20. O’Brien D, Fitzgerald B (2006) Mashups, remixes and copyright law. Internet Law Bull 9(2):17–19Google Scholar
  21. O’Reilly T (2006) Web 2.0 compact definition: trying again. O’Reilly Radar.
  22. Parameswaran M, Whinston AB (2007) Research issues in social computing. J Assoc Inf Syst 8(6):336–350Google Scholar
  23. Paul DL, McDaniel RR Jr (2004) A field study of the effect of interpersonal trust on virtual collaborative relationship performance. MIS Q 28(2):183–227Google Scholar
  24. Stephens M, Collins M (2007) Web 2.0, library 2.0, and the hyperlinked library. Ser Rev 33(4):253–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Threvenot G (2007) Blogging as a social media. Tourism and Hospitality Research 7(3):282–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Toffler A (1984) The third wave. Bantam, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Management, 201 CBAUniversity of Nebraska-LincolnLincolnUSA
  2. 2.Department of Management, 209 CBAUniversity of Nebraska-LincolnLincolnUSA
  3. 3.Department of Management, 278 CBAUniversity of Nebraska-LincolnLincolnUSA

Personalised recommendations