Bertrand Duperrin's Library tagged → View Popular, Search in Google
"La taille d’une organisation influe sur les modes de prise de décision, de transfert d’information ou de coopération, ce qui fait que les « bonnes recettes » à 10 personnes ne fonctionnent pas forcément à 100 ou encore moins à 1000. Plus précisément, un grand nombre de problèmes apparaissent lorsque la taille augmente, et l’efficacité n’est pas proportionnelle à la force de travail disponible. Cette constatation n’est pas sans rappeler ce qu’on observe dans les systèmes parallèles (cf. la loi d’Admdhal) qui montre que la puissance que l’on obtient en multipliant les processeurs est compensée par la tâche croissante de synchronisation. Ce n’est pas une surprise : les petites structures souffrent moins des problèmes de coordination et de synchronisation !"
-
La tentation d’éviter les tares des grandes organisations opérationnelles en les découpant en plus petites est pertinente si le coefficient est faible, et pas forcément efficace dans le cas contraire. Ce qui nous ramène à la thèse initiale : la bonne organisation dépend du contexte et de la taille.
-
Je pense que la taille de 150 est un seuil critique dans la gestion des organisations, et ceci est conforté par 20 ans de discussions avec des managers opérationnels.
- 15 more annotation(s)...
"Teams that are geographically-dispersed, or virtual, have now been used and studied for more than three decades — yet we all still wrestle with how to get them right. Managers frequently ask for best practices for managing their global teams, and recently we've noticed some common themes. Here are the three questions that keep coming up again and again, and what the research tells us about how to address them:"
-
FTF interaction is especially important early in a team's life, particularly when the team is comprised of people who don't already know each other.
-
Second, Maznevski and Chudoba also found that repeated FTF meetings are best when occurring at predictable times and intervals.
- 8 more annotation(s)...
How many prospects does it take to buy a light bulb?
More than ever it seems, thanks to social networks and a plethora of great collaborative software solutions. Maybe the question should be “how many committees does it take to buy a light bulb?” At least the number will be smaller.
The benefits of ubiquitous conversations are undeniably clear, including shorter decision cycles. Thanks to collaborative technology, we have the ability to ask anyone, anywhere, any time, “Hey, got a minute?” Click to collaborate! How good is that? But every new solution creates new problems. When do business processes become engorged on 24/7 collaboration, and implode into a digital morass of bypassed Outlook meeting requests and defunct online communities?"
-
“solitude is out of fashion . . . most of us now work in teams, in offices without walls, for managers who prize people skills above all. Lone geniuses are out. Collaboration is in.
-
And the most spectacularly creative people in many fields are often introverted, according to studies by the psychologists Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi and Gregory Feist
- 3 more annotation(s)...
"La lecture de la semaine, il s'agit d'un article du New York Times transmis par une aimable correspondante. Il s'intitule : "La domination de la nouvelle idéologie du groupe", et on le doit à Susan Cain, auteure d'un ouvrage sur la question intitulé Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can't Stop Talking (Silence : le pouvoir des introvertis dans un monde qui n'arrête pas de parler)."
-
La plupart d’entre nous travaillent en équipes, dans des open spaces, pour des chefs qui valorisent au-dessus de tout l’intelligence collective. Les génies solitaires sont bannis. Seul vaut le collaboratif.
-
Car les recherches montrent que les gens sont plus créatifs quand ils jouissent d’intimité et de tranquillité. Et, selon les travaux de deux psychologues, Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi (Wikipédia) et Gregory Feist, les gens les plus spectaculairement créatifs, dans des champs très différents, sont souvent introvertis – juste assez extravertis pour échanger et avancer des idées,
- 7 more annotation(s)...
"Recently, I posted a response to all the wonderful comments and contributions that you all made to my last post on “Why Companies Shouldn’t Build Online Communities“. As I plan to delve further into this idea of “Social Teams”, I thought I’d re-post that reply as a post in its own right so as to make it easier for people to find and read – so here goes:"
-
It’s not unlike advocating participating in the lottery as your prime way of getting rich – sure, it’s possible that you could hit the jackpot if you take part, but only a fool would rely on that as their sole chance at fame and fortune.
-
Likewise, whilst there is definitely a place for serendipity in an organization (more on that in a future post) – it would be a foolish management team that would rely on its occurrence to generate value for the company.
- 1 more annotation(s)...
"Perhaps one of the most well-intentioned yet misunderstood categorizations I’ve seen made by a variety of sources has been a segmentation model which draws sharp distinctions between “teams”, “communities”, and “social networks” – essentially treating them as separate entities. "
-
. Formal connections between team members are shaped by a variety of factors such as: reporting chains, roles, and deliverables.
-
A social network is simply a collection of actors (in this case, teammates) where one or more relations connect some actors to each other. Relations (or ties) are a type of contact or association. Using this definition, teams are clearly an example of a social network based on formal and informal ties that connect team members
- 4 more annotation(s)...
"The five attributes the authors identified as relevant for innovation are: associating (making connections across unrelated ideas or problems), questioning (especially focused on "what if" or "why not"), observation (especially observing behavior), experimentation (new experiences or exploration) and networking (especially with people from different industries or perspectives). Let's assume these factors are correct - from my experience they appear to be. Then, let's compare to what happens in many firms today."
-
The point here is that most organizations actively work against many of the attributes that would define good innovators.
So, if you are seeking to build an innovation team, or hire people with a greater proclivity for innovation, perhaps you should ask the following questions:
A push for it was when the company assembled a team for a project but failed to have the most optimal people in that project, as we didn’t know they existed, and most would not be aware of the talent of these people as their job title does not give it away.
-
The fact that we now have online social tools that allow bottom-up grass roots effort to emerge is very enabling. These guys can now create a space and say look at us, come join us. If you create conditions by giving people the tools, the talent will surface, people will do the main aims of KM without you asking them.
-
A middle manager may say they don’t want their people wasting time on other things, but allowing this may just help the business be more progressive and adaptive. I think senior managers and middle managers need to be on par that it’s OK for people to spend some time on stuff that is non team related or better still even complementary to team work.
Starting a social media team? Here are some high level thoughts that you should consider before you get started. This is not a comprehensive list and there are many specific details within each of these to consider.
Selected Tags
Related Tags
Top Contributors
Groups interested in teams
-
Sports
Items: 16 | Visits: 590
Created by: Dylan Okimoto
Diigo is about better ways to research, share and collaborate on information. Learn more »
Join Diigo
