I agree with the 50,000 foot vision Aleem has offered. So what is the Bank going to do, exactly, to put those principles into practice? ( The principles aren't new, by the way: network theorists and practitioners on the US West Coast framed knowledge sharing this way around 2000.) Looking at some of the other Bank blogs lately, it's clear that many colleagues "don't have time" for Scoop, or even Staff Connection, and other social media experiments that, as Aleem rightly implies, are how knowledge now gets shared, accessed and reported on. "Don't have time" means "something else is more important": so how do people see the new tools of knowledge as fundamental to how we do our work and serve our clients? One of the big obstacles in the Bank is turf, e.g., early suggestions and leads on Haiti were welcomed by those to whom they were offered, but others crudely asserted their roles as 'gatekeepers', a role that will no longer depend on hierarchy and org charts, but on credibility and humility. One of the other challenges is the language that we use to discuss the new tools. Even I find "Web 2.0" a meaningless term. An organization like the Bank that has its own jargon won't see any meaning in this. In fact, many practitioners and aficionados of social media oppose this term. If we want to built interest and acceptance, we have to use words people won't reject from the start. And, yes, I am awfully busy, too.