Bertrand Duperrin's Library tagged structure → View Popular

Filter:
All
Annotated

10 Jul 09

How 1.5 is Greater than 2.0

I found Tom Davenport's discussion of Why 1.5 is Greater than 2.0 by way of Bill Ives in Mixing Old and New School Communication. Davenport talks about the social reasons in favor of a blend between social and traditional approaches. I think an answer to How 1.5, in this context, is Greater than 2.0 is both social and structural.

traction.tractionsoftware.com/...Blog1084 - Preview

1.5 socialweb structure socialmedia enterprise1.5 enterprise2.0

14 Apr 09

Beyond the Big Bang: Strategy as Habit

Instead of strategy as Big Bang, what about strategy as Habit? ALL organizations require strategic thinking to succeed, but few organizations actually face the dramatic moment -- ever, or certainly very often. If that is true, then the sweet spot for strategy is something more routine, more "everyman", more evolutionary, more of a living process. Strategy as Habit has 2 components, in keeping with the 2 primary definitions of the word "habit": (1) a regular practice and (2) a long, loose garment worn by a member of a religious order. (In case you've forgotten that second definition: picture here). Strategic thinking is a recurrent, involuntary action. Our strategy is both a content statement and a style statement, both of which define and identify our team. Strategy is participative. Strategy has structure without being overly constrictive.

circaspecting.typepad.com/...ig-bang-strategy-as-habit.html - Preview

strategy staff mckinsey 7S socialenterprise people peoplecentrism structure skills sharedvalues values style systems humanresources talentmanagement talent

When we adjust the original diagram a bit, you start to see that the secret to strategy success -- both IMPLEMENTATION and EVOLUTION -- is fundamentally the staff.
The founding strategy may not start with the people, but its implementation and all subsequent strategy evolutions are hugely influenced by the people. They are the ones, after all, who design the business systems, develop their skills, train each other, shape shared values daily, and project the culture's style to thousands of customers every day. They watch competitors on the street, and they listen to prospects who've declined proposals. In all but the smallest organizations, the CEO's ability to drive the details of strategy execution in all these areas around the company is practically nil.

26 Mar 09

Does Social Media really destroy hierarchies or silos?

In an organisation built upon traditional management structures with departments and the like, rigid reporting lines often make for poor communication channels and awkward cross department interactions. Those very structures designed to provide human resource control actually prevent humans from doing what humans do best – connecting. How on Earth does one quickly & easily connect to the right person in another area of the company for help when constrained into following hierarchical chains of reporting? This has been long recognised and working groups, committees and project focussed groups containing staff from across a number of departments or skill bases are commonplace nowadays.

Dr Karen Stephenson, a corporate anthropologist and lauded as a pioneer and "leader in the growing field of social-network business consultants” (Business 2.0 2006), and her company NetForm have been publishing work on social network (think social graph web peoples) analysis for years which quite clearly shows that no matter how one tries to enforce structure on people informal networks of people will emerge – normally based around a specific context. Yet the structure, the hierarchy prevails

www.exponere.com/...y-destroy-hierarchies-or-silos - Preview

structure hierarchy silos socialnetworks management

15 Jan 09

Library clips :: More thoughts on community structure and creation :: January :: 2009

Whereas, existing organisational teams wanting to form a community are a bit harder as the team already has a structure and dynamic, instead of it being born in the community.
They like having order and one community being the definitive hub for a topic, but the problem is that this community is too big, and people don’t always feel comfortable participating in such a big circle.

Smaller communities are better as people trust their peers and feel confident to participate, plus they have a similar shared context, so community activity is to your calibre…soon it becomes your favourite coffee shop to hang out and talk with your favourites friends about your favourite topic.

libraryclips.blogsome.com/...mmunity-structure-and-creation - Preview

communities structure participation creation

1. Usually the lead wants to build a community for their people (a one stop shop of conversations and documents for their business unit). So we build a community for hundreds of people, and structure it by region or topic or sub-teams etc.
2. Another idea, much to the chagrin of the lead, is to have many communities, as now there will be more places to visit to find information, but that’s OK because we can perhaps aggregate or be able to batch communities together and search multiple communities in one go.
2 more annotations...
- If the software is really well designed you don’t need a manual, and therefore you can go with a bottom-up approach where people can create communities.
- Even if you do everything right, participation may still be lower than you would like. This is when the community leader needs to use techniques such as getting some regular bloggers, and sitting down with them and helping them post, for a month or so, till they gain traction.

15 Nov 08

Architecture Organisationnelle: Dix Idées sur la structure des réseaux sociaux

Je suis en train de préparer un exposé sur les réseaux sociaux. Non pas dans le sens Facebook ou LinkedIn, mais au sens de la structure sous-jacente, que l'on l'étudie en tant que graphe ou du point de vue d'un sociologue.

Je m'intéresse aux réseaux sociaux depuis quelques années, ce qui est visible à travers les différents posts de ce blog. En revanche, il n'est pas toujours facile d'expliquer pourquoi je trouve cette nouvelle discipline scientifique, à la croisée de la théorie des graphes, de la sociologie expérimentale, de la physique théorique et de la psychologie de la communication, passionnante. Cette science a son journal « Social Networks », auquel je me suis récemment abonné, et son association INSNA.

Je me suis donc livré à l'exercice suivant : quelles sont les 10 choses les plus remarquables que j'ai lues, retenues et que j'utilise dans ma propre réflexion. C'est un exercice subjectif (à comparer avec Wikipédia) et doublement difficile : d'une part il est difficile de résumer un concept en quelques lignes, et d'autre part ces idées ne sont intéressantes que par ce que l'on peut en tirer, ce que je n'ai pas le temps de développer. Voici néanmoins ma liste :

organisationarchitecture.blogspot.com/...r-la-structure-des-rseaux.html - Preview

socialnetworks connections sociology structure

Ce taux de cluster s'explique par l'adage « qui se ressemble s'assemble » et justifie l'utilisation des réseaux sociaux pour calculer des prédictions d'appétence. Les quelques liens en dehors des clusters (les « liens faibles ») jouent donc un rôle essentiels (ce sont eux qui explique le faible diamètre) ce qui est avéré par des études de sociologie, comme celle de Granovetter.
Les réseaux qui ont ce type de distribution des degrés sont appelés « scale-free » et ont des propriétés remarquables (par exemple, de robustesse). Ils sont caractéristiques d'un processus émergent et intelligent de sélection (cf. Buchanan). On les retrouve un peu partout : cooccurrence des mots dans le langage naturel, biologie moléculaire, etc.
3 more annotations...
- Les connecteurs jouent un rôle clé dans la transmission des informations, ce qui a été avéré par différents exemples en sociologie et popularisé par Malcom Gladwell dans « The Tipping Point ». Ce rôle de connecteur se caractérise avec la notion de centralité due à Linton Freeman. Les HP Labs ont fait des études passionnantes sur les logs des emails pour reconstruire les « communautés de pratiques » à partir de cette notion de centralité (un nœud central est un point focal des trajets de transfert d'information).
- La recherche dans un réseau social est souvent complexe
- Pour terminer, un point clé tiré de CMC (Computer Mediated Communication) qui est un rappel de posts précédents : la communication n'est pas un simple transfert d'information, c'est un processus, un échange dans lequel trois dimensions sont fondamentales : l'affinité (entre les deux nœuds du social net J), l'engagement (« commitment ») et l'attention. Ce dernier point est un contre-point à tous les autres : il ne suffit pas de s'intéresser à la structure !