…to Usenet (aka Google Groups.)
Usenet has had a remarkable 30-year run. Note: Usenet is not a listserv or LISTSERV®. Usenet is Usenet. Period. It is what you have been using for a decade. For some of us it’s been over three decades.
In 2001 Google acquired DejaNews, a Usenet service, to create Google Groups. It is still Usenet, but with a Google interface. It’s been a nice experience, but it is simply time to move on.
The successor is, ta-da, Google Plus (G+). You are urged to sign-up today.
These Usenet communities and some others will be consolidated into the Colabria Leadership Networks G+ community. You need to be in G+ to join.
The Network Singularity Google Groups will be retired soon. Their content is carried and searchable in Usenet in perpetuity, of course. Usenet will probably be around forever too.
Remember, lurkers and all, now and more in the future:
anonymity = irrelevance
Welcome to the Network Age of Identity.
“Within search results, information tied to verified online profiles will be ranked higher than content without such verification.”
- Eric Schmidt,
Executive Chairman of Google,
5 February 2013.
Join G+ and Colabria and prosper.
AngelList User Group Meeting
Tuesday, March 12, 2013
Runway, 1355 Market Street, Suite 488
San Francisco, California USA
(Runway is a new tech startup incubator located in the Twitter Building.)
A while back, the IFTF and Forrester Research both independently identified disruptive innovation inhabiting the network nexus of the entrepreneur + enterprise + venture finance + academia. All four constituents need to be active to spawn authentic innovation. If you want to see this innovation dynamic revealed, laid open to witness, in all its glory, join your AngelList User Community. Forget the theories, hypotheses, hokum, ‘dilemmas’ and pretentious nonsense of innovation. Rather, see it in action. See how talent, capital and ideas congregate and flow to create sustainable innovation. Embrace the rapidly advancing innovation revolution and help propel the future.
The goal of frictionless flow of capital, ideas and talent is important and ambitious. Over the last 36-months novel Web-based applications have achieved fundamental advancements towards this goal. Of the crop, Angellist [ https://angel.co/ ] has distinguished itself among the leaders. These subsystems are a genuine innovation of innovation.
Meanwhile, entrepreneurial finance, for the large part, remains a contact sport. Progress has been made through online intermediaries. However, face time is still a critical dimension of risk capital placement, talent acquisition and disruptive innovation. Proximate, personal relationships matter a lot. Raising capital is still an overly difficult proposition for entrepreneurs.
The AngelList User Group was formed to accomplish all the goals of traditional users groups. These activities include use cases, feedback, success stories and application mastery. In addition, and unique to startups and entrepreneurial finance, the group fulfills the need for developing the personal relationships and productive interactions that propel startups, talent and capital investment.
The AngelList User Group is focused on achieving successful outcomes for active participants. For investors this includes robust deal flow. For entrepreneurs this means adequate, timely capitalization. For talent it’s about getting your expertise used. Individual goals are advanced through interactions and relationships.
The modality for the AngelList User Group is proximate, authentic conversation. The group’s priority is nurturing productive interactions and prosperous relationships vis-à-vis the AngelList application and platform. New features, regulatory changes, crowdfunding, use cases and so forth, essential to the evolutionary lifecycle of AngelList and innovation, will be covered in due course.
Note: given the sensitive nature of the exchanges, the online group dimension will concern routine logistics primarily.
Finally, the nexus of ideas, talent and capital is dynamic and social. A combination of application excellence, robust platform technology, social media, proximate interaction and lasting relationships will continuously ease friction and expand flow.
AngelList has shown substantial leadership. You are invited to activate in the AngelList User Group to create the future of entrepreneurial finance, talent and above all, innovation.
RSVP is required for access to the event venue. All are welcome. You are welcome and encouraged to forward your invitation.
Many contemporary memes of the origins of science and innovation are ridiculous and just plain wrong.
In fact, many advances in Big Science and Technology come from science fiction, protoscience and spirituality.
The BIG secret is getting out.
For example, the greatest scientist that every lived by far, was first, foremost and forever an ardent alchemist. Yep, Isaac Newton’s real passions were the principles and practices of mythology, religion and spirituality.
Steve Jobs use of entheogens, to discover the divine within, is legendary.
“…in 1988, Apple made a promotional video that introduced an imagined tablet computer called the Knowledge Navigator, which even possessed a talking virtual assistant uncannily similar to the iPhone’s Siri. Twenty-two years later— the fictional Knowledge Navigator morphed into the iPad.”
Marshall McLuhan, the spiritual leader of the Internet media revolution and Patron Saint of Wired Magazine, predicted the WWW 30-years before its debut. Marsh was also a fervent Mariologist.
Protoscience, spirituality and science fiction are the foundations that inform and create modern science and technology.
Astrology begat astronomy, alchemy became chemistry, and so forth and so on.
Conference blowhards claiming breakthrough science, technology and knowledge originates from little four-up diagrams of consultant-speak are offensive.
Big Science and breakaway technology thinking must embrace spirituality. Every conference of merit on science, technology, knowledge or innovation must have at least one science fiction writer on the agenda. Protoscience matters.
As an early member (number 4381) and persistent LinkedIn evangelist it is rewarding to see the service eclipse the
100,000,000 200,000,000 member mark. LinkedIn is a practical and thoughtful offering. The service abides, abets and advances the network singularity.
Here is a favorite LinkedIn experience, among many.
In 2004, at a very large company, we were planning a week-long offsite for the top 90 managing directors. A newly-minted MBA suggested we collect simple headshots, biographical, contact and interest data from the 90 directors.We’d create an attractive bound booklet to be handed out at the meeting. The practical business purpose was to expand relationships and facilitate collaboration among the company’s management for their retreat. Many loved the idea.
The team set out on our mission. The 90 directors were delighted to share their information. “Anything to aid collaboration!” they exclaimed. The booklet was printed and bound. We were ready to go…
Towards the end of the final executive review of the retreat agenda, with the firm’s top management, we shared the booklet and plans to distributed it. The room fell silent. The CEO & president flipped through The Book, as we called it. He became agitated. We explained our motives. We could tell the executive thought it was a very bad idea…
“What if it falls into the wrong hands?” he questioned. The idea was summarily squashed. The executives felt The Book would be an open invitation to headhunters, talent poachers and other nefarious activities. They explained the hyper-competition for top people.
Management was adamant about tightly controlling the information of their top 90 directors and earners. There were admonishments. We got disdain and the “Are you crazy?” look. We took some stink eye. All copies of The Book were ordered to be destroyed.
(Interestingly, the top executives did keep copies of The Book for themselves…)
A few months after the big retreat, we were looking at a new service called LinkedIn. We tapped in the name of our firm, and about 30 of the top directors names came up. Just to ‘inform’ executive leadership, we sent these LinkedIn data to them in an email. The reaction was not good.
Upon seeing their managers out there, for the world to see, in LinkedIn, the top executives seemed to embarked on the Seven Stages of Grief starting with Shock and Denial. Meanwhile, even more and more of the firm’s employees were joining LinkedIn. The mood of insurrection was palpable.
We tried to explain to executive management the enormous benefits of openness and transparency of people information. We described social networks and knowledge markets. They did not get it. We tried to explain the myth of command and control.
We said it is an exceptionally good thing that our people are so proud that they announce to the world via LinkedIn their firm, role and station. We said LinkedIn profiles are an effective strategy for employee retention and talent management.
These principles were all rejected. They would not have it. Disbelief, disdain and disorder carried the day. However the network pattern was set. The inexorable change was underway. There was no turning back. The LinkedIn genie was out of the bottle.
In conclusion, we’re not sure if management ever reached Stage Seven of Acceptance and Hope. We do know, however, a year or so after our revelation and today, all of the senior executives are members of LinkedIn!
In addition, today, in 2011, all the firm’s employees are on LinkedIn, of course.
LinkedIn is a breakthrough, a disruptive innovation. In a brief 60 months it promptly dispatched a century of rigid and often paranoid control of people information. LinkedIn enabled deliberate, conscious mastery of personal networks and business relationships.
LinkedIn has earned its rightful place at the corporate table. It sits next to to email, the spreadsheet and word processing. As predicted, LinkedIn has fundamentally altered enterprise logic. Overnight it delivered the era of social networks, knowledge markets and relationship economics. Best of all, LinkedIn is fun.
Congratulations to LinkedIn and its first 2*10^8 members.
• presenting the most relevant results in Social Network Analysis when data are collected across space and time;
• looking at the development of new space/time representations and methods for the analysis of networks in society, economics and nature.
The workshop also aims to deepen existing scientific cooperation between social network analysts, to establish new cooperation between researchers, and to provide a multi-disciplinary forum for exchange of ideas.
The workshop will include invited and contributed sessions.
The Scientific board is very pleased to announce a number of world-class keynote speakers:
“Analyzing and visualizing large networks” (Organizers: V.Batagelj, P.Doreian)
Invited Speakers: Vladimir Batagelj, Jure Leskovec, Ludo Waltman
“Data collection” (Organizers: A. Ferligoj, M.P. Vitale)
Invited Speakers: Peter Marsden, Tina Kogovšek, Betina Hollstein
“Networks and international relations” (Organizers: L. De Benedictis, G. Fagiolo)
Invited Speakers: Marc Berthelemy, Lucia Tajoli, Ethan Cohen-Cole
“Networks and space: a multi-disciplinary perspective” (Organizers: M.A. Maggioni, M.R. D'Esposito, S. Zaccarin)
Invited Speakers: Patrick Doreian, Philippa E. Pattison, Nicolas Carayol
“Network Dynamics” (Organizers: G. Giordano, P.Panzarasa, A. Ferligoj)
Invited Speakers: Alessandro Vespignani, Carter Butts, Johan Koskinen
The organizing committee is soliciting abstracts for paper presentations on any facet of network analysis relating, but by no means limited, to:
• Dynamic network visualization
• Large networks
• Longitudinal social networks
• Models for spatial-temporal networks
• Networks and geography
• Network data collection
• Social Network Analysis methods for longitudinal data
• International networks
• Statistical methods for network data
We especially welcome papers that cross disciplines and methodologies.
Authors who wish to submit a contributed paper should send a tentative title, via our website,
www.ars13.unisa.it, by FEBRUARY 15, 2013 filling in the online form.
An abstract should be submitted by APRIL 15, 2013 following the online procedure.
Full details about the abstract submission process can be found on the workshop website.
Abstracts should be no longer than 1000 words.
Acceptance will be notified to the authors by APRIL 30, 2013.
Coming up in the next few weeks:
We also have two new lean groups starting in the area. If you're interested in lean in the enterprise, please join Lean Startup Circle: Lean in the Enterprise. Their first event will be:
Also, if you're in the Silicon Valley / San Jose area, we have a group that meets locally:
Lastly, if you missed out on presenting your MVP to the panel and group...we're doing it again at our next speaker event! Extra thanks to Rich Collins, William Pietri, and Paul Howe for an awesome night and great feedback to our group:
P.S.: If you can't afford the events, don't despair! Just volunteer. We always need people to help collect feedback, get food, run the camcorder, etc.
- Tristan Kromer
Modes of Explanation
May 21-25, 2013
Three days to discuss and learn about advances in modes of explanation. A look at how our mode of explanation affects our affordances for action.
Modes of Explanation is a discussion conference, the actual presentations of attendee's work will occur on-line and only a five minute or less synopsis will precede the discussion session during which the work is discussed.
The challenge to prospective attendees is to prepare a presentation which can evoke meaningful discussion amongst the attendees. One's presentation could, for example, focus on:
1) how we go about explaining and the limitations/strengths of our approach,
2) what kinds of explanations "work" and which kinds "fail"
3) the context dependency of explanatory form
4) the differences in use between "good enough explanation" and "truth claims"
5) the need for/use of mechanisms and "narratives" as a meaning of "explaining" (making understandable in a coherent way) some aspect of complexity or of a real in life complex system
6) how a reliance on sameness or of category as a simplifying reduction was inadequate to the situation being examined or
7) how modes of explanation vary by discipline.
Keynotes: Paul Thagard, Nancy Nersessian, David Snowden, Rukmini Bhaya Nair, Sandra Mitchell, Kevin Kelly, Hugo Letiche, Timothy Allen, Zack Kopplin & more…
- Michael Lissack
ISCE Professor of Meaning in Organizations
Many Network Singularity readers have fought the good fight to kill management training. Still, vestiges exists. Here are some noteworthy reminders, from Mike Myatt at Forbes, to herald the death of training…
1. Training blends to a norm – Development occurs beyond the norm.
2. Training focuses on technique/content/curriculum – Development focuses on people.
3. Training tests patience – Development tests courage.
4. Training focuses on the present – Development focuses on the future.
5. Training adheres to standards – Development focuses on maximizing potential.
6. Training is transactional – Development is transformational.
7. Training focuses on maintenance – Development focuses on growth.
8. Training focuses on the role – Development focuses on the person.
9. Training indoctrinates – Development educates.
10. Training maintains status quo – Development catalyzes innovation.
11. Training stifles culture – Development enriches culture.
12. Training encourages compliance – Development emphasizes performance.
13. Training focuses on efficiency – Development focuses on effectiveness.
14. Training focuses on problems - Development focuses on solutions.
15. Training focuses on reporting lines – Development expands influence.
16. Training places people in a box – Development frees them from the box.
17. Training is mechanical – Development is intellectual.
18. Training focuses on the knowns – Development explores the unknowns.
19. Training places people in a comfort zone – Development moves people beyond their comfort zones.
20. Training is finite – Development is infinite.
- Mike Myatt,
Training creates bureaucrats – development reveals leaders.
A decision framework to take performance to the next level
While discussion of ecosystems may be a recent phenomenon, ecosystems are nothing new at all. Businesses are already in ecosystems today – whether by design or not. Yet for many, these ecosystems have evolved without much attention or planning. In order to succeed in today’s fast-changing business world, harnessing the power of ecosystems is critical. This release from Deloitte’s Center for the Edge seeks to help you, as an executive, take a more strategic approach to this increasingly important issue. In the process, you may find untapped opportunities to drive the performance of your existing ecosystems to new levels and perhaps even form some new ecosystems along the way.
Note: do not login in for at least two weeks or your account is automatically restored.
The 9th UK Social Networks Conference will be held in Greenwich, London, June 27-29th 2013. This is a lively, multi-disciplinary, annual event, with participation from across Europe and beyond and a vibrant social program. The venue is the superb, baroque maritime campus of the University of Greenwich.
Call for papers
We invite submissions of extended abstracts on theories, methods, or applications of social network analysis.
Topics include, but are not limited to:
Deadline for submissions: 19 April, 2013.
Dr Bruce Cronin MA MSc PhD MCMI
Reader in Economic Sociology
Head of the Department of International Business & Economics
Director of the Centre for Business Network Analysis
University of Greenwich Business School
Park Row, London SE10 9LS
Centre for Business Network Analysis:
“Wikipedia’s really good at popular culture, so here’s this article about the superhero Iron Man that’s 10,000 words long. All of sixteenth century philosophy is 66 words long. If you want to have the world’s best encyclopedia, what’s more important? Maybe it’s “Iron Man,” but I doubt it.”
Exploring Humanity’s Evolving ‘Global Brain’ –
We implemented Windows 8 here today on our desktop machines. It is very nice. Recommended.
Nice work Microsoft.
Relational and Social Network Perspectives in Community Psychology
A special issue of the American Journal of Community Psychology
Guest editors: Jennifer Watling Neal & Brian D. Christens
Relational and social network perspectives focus on patterns of relationships between sets of actors (e.g., people, organizations, communities). Community psychologists have long recognized the conceptual importance of relationships and the potential of social network analysis to enhance methodological sophistication in the field. Moreover, recent groundbreaking studies have thrust social network dynamics to the forefront of contemporary social science. The growing prominence of social network studies provides an opportunity not only for increasing methodological sophistication, but also for re-considerations of theory.
A relational perspective is, fundamentally, a challenge to the psychological tradition of individualism, which has viewed individuals as discrete and bounded entities. Community psychology has long sought to provide a counter-perspective to individualism, yet has struggled to articulate a theory of “community” that does not position it as a discrete entity, dualistically related to individuals. Relational and social network perspectives provide potential insights into how patterns of relationships shape perceptions and behaviors, affect the distribution of resources, and define communities.
This special issue aims to advance relational and social network perspectives in community psychology. Proposals (up to 750 words) for manuscripts are invited which address the aim. Possible topical areas include, but are not limited to:
(1) Power and empowerment
(2) Dissemination and implementation of community-based interventions
(3) Understanding communities, partnerships and coalitions.
Manuscripts may be conceptual, empirical studies or praxis-oriented pieces, but all must hold promise for linking relational and social network perspectives to theory that is relevant to community psychology. Thus, proposals should include a description of how the manuscript makes these links. In addition to contributions from community psychologists, we encourage contributions from researchers in other fields or disciplines who are doing related work.
Submission process: Authors should submit proposals by email to the Guest Editors of the Special Issue no later than November 15, 2012. Guest Editors will review the proposals and invite authors within 4 weeks to submit a full manuscript, subject to peer review and consistent with AJCP guidelines for reviewers. The deadline for submission of manuscripts is May 15, 2013. Initial acceptance and Online First publication is anticipated as early as Fall 2013.
All submissions should be in English and proposals should state the type of article proposed as described in the AJCP Instructions for Authors available on the online submission portal (www.edmgr.com/ajcp).
Types of articles may include: original articles (theory or research), mixed methods research, first person accounts, advancing science or empirical reviews.
Send proposal submissions or inquiries to the Guest Editors: Jennifer Watling Neal: firstname.lastname@example.org or Brian D. Christens: email@example.com. Please share this call for proposals with interested colleagues.
- Jennifer Watling Neal, Ph.D.
Michigan State University
Department of Psychology
127A Psychology Building
East Lansing, Mi, 48824-1116
Dawn R. Gilpin, PhD
Arizona State University
Detecting Causality in Complex Ecosystems
George Sugihara, Robert May, Hao Ye, Chih-hao Hsieh, Ethan Deyle, Michael Fogarty, Stephan Munch Science 26 October 2012:
Vol. 338 no. 6106 pp. 496-500
Identifying causal networks is important for effective policy and management recommendations on climate, epidemiology, financial regulation, and much else. We introduce a method, based on nonlinear state space reconstruction, that can distinguish causality from correlation. It extends to nonseparable weakly connected dynamic systems (cases not covered by the current Granger causality paradigm). The approach is illustrated both by simple models (where, in contrast to the real world, we know the underlying equations/relations and so can check the validity of our method) and by application to real ecological systems, including the controversial sardine-anchovy-temperature problem.
Spontaneous network formation among cooperative RNA replicators
Nilesh Vaidya, Michael L. Manapat, Irene A. Chen, Ramon Xulvi-Brunet, Eric J. Hayden & Niles Lehman Nature 491, 72 77 (01 November 2012)http://unam.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=0eb0ac9b4e8565f2967a8304b&id=1a81d10214&e=d38efa683e
The origins of life on Earth required the establishment of self-replicating chemical systems capable of maintaining and evolving biological information. In an RNA world, single self-replicating RNAs would have faced the extreme challenge of possessing a mutation rate low enough both to sustain their own information and to compete successfully against molecular parasites with limited evolvability. Thus theoretical analyses suggest that networks of interacting molecules were more likely to develop and sustain life-like behaviour. Here we show that mixtures of RNA fragments that self-assemble into self-replicating ribozymes spontaneously form cooperative catalytic cycles and networks. We find that a specific three-membered network has highly cooperative growth dynamics. When such cooperative networks are competed directly against selfish autocatalytic cycles, the former grow faster, indicating an intrinsic ability of RNA populations to evolve greater complexity through cooperation. We can observe the evolvability of networks through in vitro selection. Our experiments highlight the advantages of cooperative behaviour even at the molecular stages of nascent life.
Stability analysis of financial contagion due to overlapping portfolios
Fabio Caccioli, Munik Shrestha, Cristopher Moore, J. Doyne Farmer http://unam.us4.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=0eb0ac9b4e8565f2967a8304b&id=4812414756&e=d38efa683e
Common asset holdings are widely believed to have been the primary vector of contagion in the recent financial crisis. We develop a network approach to the amplification of financial contagion due to the combination of overlapping portfolios and leverage, and we show how it can be understood in terms of a generalized branching process. By studying a stylized model we estimate the circumstances under which systemic instabilities are likely to occur as a function of parameters such as leverage, market crowding, diversification, and market impact.
Although diversification may be good for individual institutions, it can create dangerous systemic effects, and as a result financial contagion gets worse with too much diversification. Under our model there is a critical threshold for leverage; below it financial networks are always stable, and above it the unstable region grows as leverage increases.
The financial system exhibits "robust yet fragile" behavior, with regions of theparameter space where contagion is rare but catastrophic whenever it occurs. Our model and methods of analysis can be calibrated to real data and provide simple yet powerful tools for macroprudential stress testing.
Guaranteeing global synchronization in networks with stochastic interactions
Johannes Klinglmayr et al 2012 New J. Phys. 14 073031 http://unam.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=0eb0ac9b4e8565f2967a8304b&id=b9f61500d2&e=d38efa683e
We design the interactions between oscillators communicating via variably delayed pulse coupling to guarantee their synchronization on arbitrary network topologies. We identify a class of response functions and prove convergence to network-wide synchrony from arbitrary initial conditions. Synchrony is achieved if the pulse emission is unreliable or intentionally probabilistic. These results support the design of scalable, reliable and energy-efficient communication protocols for fully distributed synchronization as needed, e.g., in mobile phone networks, embedded systems, sensor networks and autonomously interacting swarm robots.
The Implications of Interactions for Science and Philosophy
FOUNDATIONS OF SCIENCE
Reductionism has dominated science and philosophy for centuries.
Complexity has recently shown that interactions which reductionism neglects are relevant for understanding phenomena. When interactions are considered, reductionism becomes limited in several aspects. In this paper, I argue that interactions imply nonreductionism, non-materialism, non-predictability, non-Platonism, and non-Nihilism. As alternatives to each of these, holism, informism, adaptation, contextuality, and meaningfulness are put forward, respectively. A worldview that includes interactions not only describes better our world, but can help to solve many open scientific, philosophical, and social problems caused by implications of reductionism.
Computing Nature: A Network of Networks of Concurrent Information Processes
Gordana Dodig Crnkovic, Raffaela Giovagnoli http://unam.us4.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=0eb0ac9b4e8565f2967a8304b&id=ff5a422241&e=d38efa683e
This text presents the research field of natural/unconventional computing as it appears in the book COMPUTING NATURE. The articles discussed consist a selection of works from the Symposium on Natural Computing at AISB-IACAP (British Society for the Study of Artificial Intelligence and the Simulation of Behaviour and The International Association for Computing and Philosophy) World Congress 2012, held at the University of Birmingham, celebrating Turing centenary. The COMPUTING NATURE is about nature considered as the totality of physical existence, the universe. By physical we mean all phenomena, objects and processes, that are possible to detect either directly by our senses or via instruments. Historically, there have been many ways of describing the universe (cosmic egg, cosmic tree, theistic universe, mechanistic
universe) while a particularly prominent contemporary approach is computational universe, as discussed in this article.
Reconstructing complex networks from time series
Novel method of reconstructing the topology of dynamical networks from time series is proposed. By examining the variable--derivative correlation of the network node pairs, we derive a simple equation yielding the network adjacency matrix. Our key assumption is that the intra-network interaction functions are known. We illustrate the method on a simple example, and discuss the dependence of the reconstruction on the dynamical properties of time series. Our method is applicable to any weighted or directed network, in principle allowing for precision to be estimated.
Desynchronizing Networks Using Phase Resetting
J. Borresen, D. Broomhead
Understanding complex systems which exhibit desynchronization as an emergent property should have important implications, particularly in treating neurological disorders and designing efficient communication networks. Here were demonstrate how, using a system similar to the pulse coupling used to model firefly interactions, phase desynchronization can be achieved in pulse coupled oscillator systems, for a variety of network architectures, with symmetric and non symmetric internal oscillator frequencies and with both instantaneous and time delayed coupling.
The Emergence of Organizations and Markets
John F. Padgett, Walter W. Powell
Princeton University Press (October 14, 2012) See it on Scoop.it
, via CxBooks (http://www.scoop.it/t/cxbooks)
The social sciences have sophisticated models of choice and equilibrium but little understanding of the emergence of novelty. Where do new alternatives, new organizational forms, and new types of people come from? Combining biochemical insights about the origin of life with innovative and historically oriented social network analyses, John Padgett and Walter Powell develop a theory about the emergence of organizational, market, and biographical novelty from the coevolution of multiple social networks. They demonstrate that novelty arises from spillovers across intertwined networks in different domains. In the short run actors make relations, but in the long run relations make actors.
This theory of novelty emerging from intersecting production and biographical flows is developed through formal deductive modeling and through a wide range of original historical case studies. Padgett and Powell build on the biochemical concept of autocatalysis--the chemical definition of life--and then extend this autocatalytic reasoning to social processes of production and communication. Padgett and Powell, along with other colleagues, analyze a very wide range of cases of emergence. They look at the emergence of organizational novelty in early capitalism and state formation; they examine the transformation of communism; and they analyze with detailed network data contemporary science-based capitalism: the biotechnology industry, regional high-tech clusters, and the open source community.
When Networks Network
See it on Scoop.it
When networks depend on other networks, such as a communications network that relies on a power grid, failure can cascade back and forth between the two. This behavior may explain sudden breakdowns in interacting systems. Thus, the effects of an attack on a single node can reduce an bernetwork that starts with 12 operating nodes to just four.
Once studied solo, systems display surprising behavior when they interact.
Dawn R. Gilpin, PhD
Walter Cronkite School
Journalism & Mass Communication
Arizona State University
Work in knowledge-based organizations is social. Activities include collaboration and sharing. Work products are improvisational. Success requires judgment and freedom to act. There is a heavy reliance on others. Trust is key. Knowledge creation and flow span organizational boundaries. Social networks propel excellence in knowledge-based organizations.
In contrast, transactional organizations are different. Integrated process activities produce the work product. Work is systematic and routine. There is a heavy dependence on rules and procedures. There is no discretionary activity. High degrees of automation are present. Excellence in transactional organizations depends on processes and ordered activities.
Both forms are needed and exist. A lot has been said and done to make transactional organizations run better. Scarce little has been done or offered to improve knowledge-based organizations. In fact, the naïve use of industrial and information-era practices is highly counterproductive in the knowledge-based organization.
BTW, for scholars this bifurcation is transaction cost economics (TCE) versus the knowledge-based view (KBV). Just Google them.
The most practical approach to knowledge-based organizations is a constitution. Constitutional approaches are highly successful. It is because constitutions specifically and severely limit the scope of governance. This allows people, real humans, to organize in a way that best suits prosperous outcomes.
- Absolute trust and respect for individuals.
- Focus on a high level of achievement and contribution.
- Conduct business with uncompromising integrity.
- Achieve common objectives through teamwork.
- Encourage flexibility and innovation.
These brief constitutional principles led the most successful firm in the history of business. Recall, from 1939 to 1989 HP had an average CAGR of 20% with no down years or layoff. Today, HP is the largest technology firm on earth.
Again, constitutional models thrive because they deliberately enable interaction, emergence, self-organization, dynamic reconfiguration and other key network properties. They are essential to knowledge-based business. Constitutions are robust and survive for centuries because they limit the reach and interference of governance and control.
Inexperienced managers think codifying their rigid rules is culture. Not so.Culture is not led. Culture is only served. Authentic leaders reveal and ascribe the benefits of emergent culture. They lead by example not mandate.
When crafting a Knowledge Constitution embrace the principle of parsimony. Among the worst possible things a knowledge-based organization can do is build rigid practices or confining methods. Look at how all centralized, large-scale, so-called ‘enterprise policies and procedures’ and centralized efforts have failed the knowledge-based firm. Less is more, a LOT more!
“We the People” shapes the very nature of leadership in the Social Enterprise. Nature depends on networks. Organizations depend on social networks. Knowledge, productivity, innovation and prosperity inhabit social network patterns and structures. It’s that simple. Really.
Bill & Dave knew this principle well. For example, when an HP division reached a population of about 200 people, a new, autonomous division was immediately spun off (in). When Bill Gates was asked for one thing he learned from HP, he cited this fact and HP’s dynamic organizational model. This wisdom held well before the Dunbar Number too. It is critical because it is a common-sense limit to maintaining stable, sharing and productive social networks.
Our team helps to reveal Culture and refine Constitutions for the world’s largest firms. We have built (and ratified!) constitutions for a variety of knowledge-based firms. Strive to develop your own Knowledge Constitution. Let’s talk.