It seems logical that any website has its own range of subject matter – kind of a geography of knowledge that it covers. So for example, Fine Woodworking (www.finewoodworking.com) covers anything related to, well, woodworking while it doesn’t pay any attention to, say, US Politics.
So it seems natural that any website would have its own taxonomy – sort of like the map of its knowledge geography. Or perhaps a better and more common metaphor is a Dewey Decimal System, which is itself a knowledge map that attempts to cover the entire knowledge geography of human interest. Read the rest of this entry »
Clay Shirky gave a presentation last week at Social Computing Symposium 2013, a small invitation-only conference run by Microsoft Research.
The exclusive event may have been inaccessible to most of us, but David Weinberger was there and captured some raw notes, live blogging the Clay Shirky session, which asked the pithy and relevant question “Why do comments suck?” The raw notes are available on David’s Joho site: Joho the Blog » Clay Shirky: Why do comments suck?. Read the rest of this entry »
In a high-level but realistic post today called The Microblogging Maturity Model , Bryan Menell of the Dachis Group describes stages through which organizations evolve as they adopt microblogging culture and value. Cast in the old format of norming, storming, etc, the post delineates four stages that could apply to any social situation, which could be described this way:
- Cautious introduction: you’re one of the first to arrive at the party, nobody else is there and you look around to get a lay of the land.
- Social niceties: the first few people arrive and, very politely, you introduce yourself and others do the same.
- Breaking the ice: conversations ensue, positions are taken and challenged
- Substantive exchanges: real work gets done.
Underlying the seemingly simple move toward adopting an internal social platform is the much trickier and more nuanced change in attitude that is required. Personal information storage and managment is generally a private process, and the instinct to make some portion of your stores of intellectual assets available doesn’t always come naturally.
Effective use of this kind of communication environment is no small change for an organization. It requires new instincts and new priorities, which result in new behavior.
For generations – maybe forever – people have been accustomed to sequestering information, and meting it out judiciously, often for some kind of personal gain. Even the simple act of sharing news or gossip can be done to position oneself as a valued source of information. In the extreme, and often in political organizations, jealously safeguarding information can feel like a survival strategy. Though the behavior may vary from one organization to another, from one person to another, I do believe information hoarding is a natural human instinct.
The place where work generally gets done in a social collaboration environment is in a group. Groups are places where you invite specific participants, collect content, hold discussions, get focused on a particular task or topic.
There are many kinds of groups, depending on the collboration environment. Groups can be open, moderated, or private; groups can also be internal-only (only network members can participate), or they may be made accessible to invited guests. The image below shows the options available when you create a group within Jive: Read the rest of this entry »