Finally - The answer to adoption of Enterprise 2.0 in the traditional Corporation

April 9, 2008 at 6:15 am · Filed under Change, Culture, Dr David Vaine, Euan Semple, Interviews, KM, Management Theory, Public Media, Relationships, Social Media, Social Networking, Story, The 'Phoric, Video, YouTube, interaction, podcasts

On April 1st, we had the honor of recording a podcast of the esteemed Dr David Vaine, Senior Partner of Apparently KM PLC, who has finally revealed how to make 2.0 work in the most traditional organization.

The link to the “Phoric” is here. I must warn you that some of the material may not be workplace safe.

The ‘Phoric” is a site where well known people in the 2.0 world choose 3 clips from YouTube and discuss why these are important to them. You may find some of the other guests moving and funny. Guest include Matt Moore, Euan Semple, Alex Kjerulf (Chief Happiness Officer)

All fun aside, and there is lots of fun here, the “Phoric shows the “heart” of the 2.0 relationship explicitly and it shows how simple tools can have a huge impact.

Enjoy

Comments

Worth Watching

March 12, 2008 at 12:21 pm · Filed under 2.0 Design Thinking, Adoption, Business Model, Cloud Computing, Community, Emergent, Enterprise 2.0, Enterprise Social Computing, Relationships, Social Computing, Social Networking, User Revolution, Web 2.0, open source

In a recent keynote at SXSW, Charlene Li of Forrester Research predicted that social networking platforms will be "like air" … "They will be anywhere and everywhere we need and want them to be."

More specifically, she broke down the use of such platforms into four components of utility and impact:

.

• Profiles - universal identities
• Relationships - a single social graph
• Activities - a social context for activities
• Business Models - social influence as a key definer of marketing value

.

Here’s an item from the NY Times about recent speculation that Yahoo may join OpenSocial, the Google-led social networking alliance that aims to bring significant degrees of openness to social networking platforms, thus (eventually) stimulating and enhancing ubiquity and pervasive use.

.

Yahoo May Join Google-Led Social Networking Alliance

By Miguel Helft

Yahoo intends to join OpenSocial, a Google-led alliance that is developing a common set of standards so developers can create programs that run on many social networks and other Web sites, according to a person with direct knowledge of Yahoo’s plans.

Yahoo’s backing, which could be announced as early as this week, would bring a large base of users to the OpenSocial alliance, which is seen as a counterweight to Facebook’s successful courtship of application developers. The alliance, which was announced in the fall, already includes MySpace, Bebo and several other social networking sites.

Yahoo’s participation “would mean that the site with the largest group of users, and with the largest base of registered users, would be joining OpenSocial,” said Charlene Li, an analyst with Forrester Research.

When asked about Yahoo’s OpenSocial plans, a company spokeswoman said: “Yahoo has a rich history of supporting open standards, such as OpenID and Apache Hadoop, as we believe industry collaboration is beneficial to the developer community and the Web as a whole. While we are evaluating OpenSocial as an emerging standard, we do not comment on speculation or rumors.”

Yahoo has said it wants to speed up efforts to open its site to outside developers. Although it is not a social network, Yahoo could benefit from third party “social” applications that allow users to share, say, their favorite photos, music or movies with their friends.

Read the rest of the article here …

.

I think that much of what is written here at the FASTForward blog by my colleagues also supports the distinct probability that the foundation is being created for the step-by-step (depending upon take-up and implementation) of collaboration and social computing platforms, tools and services which will redefine the dynamics of knowledge work and tie, tightly, into Charlene Li’s four key components of social networking platforms.

Powered by Qumana

Comments

A Meaning for the Yahoo bid by MSFT

February 2, 2008 at 6:59 am · Filed under Apple, Business Model, Enterprise 2.0, Microsoft, NPR, PBS, Public Media, Relationships, barriers, iTouch, iTunes, podcasts

As sure as the sun rises in the morning - the web will become the primary delivery platform for all information.

Many in public radio and TV, have told me that my feelings about how fast the shift would take place from “air” and cable to web are exagerated. My argument is this. “Weight of money”.

When you pay $45 billion dollars you are not fooling around.

MSFT wish to get ready NOW for this new reality for when the bulk of advertising revenue and action are on the web. Ad revenues are $50 billion right now and are expected to rise to $80 billion by 2009/10. This is the prize. When the ad money shifts out of traditional media, you will hear the sucking sound of a mortal wound. It will be too late to reinvent your self then.

All the supporting parts of a web based radio and TV will have to accelerate their plans

• The viewing platforms such as the iPods and the large screen TV’s are ready now for a direct link. The Early Adopters are watching the bulk of their video online.
• Many listen to radio online at the office or on their iPods on their commute
• YouTube is bursting with great content both from traditional sources and from new entrants
• Channels such as iTunes and Miro are building capacity - it will be the ease of use that these channels offer that will pull in the Early Majority.
• Major Networks have their toe in the water and are offering some content online

The Yahoo bid will accelerate all this work.

So what is the work that Public TV and Radio have to do in this context of no time? It is to solve the business model problem. How to offer the best content from TV and Radio AND keep the stations whole. How to do that? I think the answer is to make the offer direct with the forced choice of the show and the station.

I am not saying that people will not listen to radio nor am I saying that people will stop watching TV. People will still buy SUV’s and Trucks. But the bulk of the people, especially people who are naturally curious will make the switch.

Remember Mikey - “Give it to Mikey - he hates everything. Well my wife Robin, is the tech Mikey.

Robin is very very resistant to gadgets. BUT …….. She now listens to all her radio online - loading the podcasts onto her MP3 player which she uses when she is doing stuff around the house and walking the dogs. And in her down time, I hardly ever see her anymore - she has discovered YouTube. She has discovered that it is packed with content that she wants to watch - content that is “serious” that is just what a good Public TV member would want to watch. She has discovered that it is easy to watch and listen to what she wants when she wants and that there is tons and tons of great content out there.

She is closer to 60 than 50 and is in the centre of the demographic for Public TV.

So Robin’s desire for interesting content that intrigues her has been met already. Just imagine how easy it will be for her to have access to even more and what her choices will be soon.

Don’t you want her and the millions like her as your audience?

Comments (3)

Decentralized Co-Creation of Value … and Meaning

January 30, 2008 at 8:29 am · Filed under 2.0 Design Thinking, Artisanal Economy, Business Model, Change, Chris Anderson, Community, Culture, Economics, Emergent, Facebook, Long Tail, Relationships, Social Media, Social Networking, Social Objects, Trusted Space, Web 2.0, Web Advertising

A few days ago I wrote a post and linked to an Aspen Institute report titled The Rise of Collective Intelligence - Decentralized Co-Creation of Value as a New Paradigm of Commerce and Culture.

Today I’d like to offer readers an example of new tools and web services operating in social networks that in my opinion make the concepts and observations in the report come alive. The example involves people using search, content, collaboration and sharing, which are all central elements of the ecosystems of commerce and culture in which we will all be living, working and consuming.

There’s a small company up here in Vancouver, British Columbia (the warm and beautiful part of the Great White North of North America) that develops social networking platforms and customized elearning solutions. The Donat Group is also creating a social music initiative (Project Opus), a part of which involves Mixxmaker, a web service that helps music lovers build playlists collaboratively. Building playlists collaboratively creates a "Social Object", offering people a means of co-creating value around music they like and want to share with others they know.

We all know that the music industry is in real turmoil, and is searching frantically for new business logic and new business models. The major participants have all been under pressure from free downloads, and the price of music is under pressure as never before. Where will additional value, and eventually revenue, come from ?

David Gratton is the founder of the Donat Group, Project Opus and Mixxmaker. David recently wrote a post about why the digital packaging around music, especially as a social object, can and will be of value. Mainly, being able to search for, locate, aggregate and acquire various elements about a song or an artist that someone likes will help create meaning and in turn value.

He also wrote about ‘who’ is involved in the co-creation of this new form of value … or in other words how the market for value associated with songs is being broken up and then co-created anew.   Doing this around a playlist that is built in collaboration with others also helps mightily in creating connections and trust, and lays a foundation for putting the dynamics of word-of-mouth marketing into dynamic operation.

It’s important to note here that David and his colleagues at Project Opus and Mixxmaker put a lot of work into staying within the bounds of Fair Use, an all-important consideration when exploring new paradigms for creating (or co-creating in this case) potentially new economic value.

.

.

Once people start building today’s equivalent of albums together with their friends, the changes to the ways music is distributed and acquired will continue to diversify away from purchasing CDs, as David has noted.  But people will still want that unusual album cover from the old vinyl days, or the most recent YouTube video clip of a given band’s performance, or a series of photos from Flickr (carrying the appropriate Creative Commons license, to be sure) to add to their own personal collection of digital artefacts about that kind of music, that band, that group of friends .. and so on.

It’s a pity, really, that this fun and easy-to-use capability exists only as a Facebook application at the moment.  I seem to be observing a rapidly-growing trend of people turning down invitations to add another Facebook application to their Facebook profile (I am one of those people).  While supposedly Mark Zuckerberg is aware of the growing dissatisfaction .. and you’d think the Beacon fiasco was notice enough … it’s hard to shake the sense that Facebook and its partner applications are all really just looking for ways to maximize page views and ad impression. 

That, for me, does not fall into the category of decentralized co-creation of value, no matter how you spin it.

But .. I suspect that in the coming months and years we’ll see many more examples of applications and services like Mixxmaker that let and / or help people co-create online things that they care about and enjoy.

.

Tags: Aspen Institute, Decentralized Co-creation of Value, Donat Group, Project Opus, Mixxmaker, Facebook

Powered by Qumana

Comments

The Coming of the Cloud, Networked Knowledge Work and New Business Logic

January 26, 2008 at 11:02 pm · Filed under Business Model, Change, Charles Handy, Cloud Computing, Conferences, Dead Paradigms, Economics, Emergent, Enterprise 2.0, Long Tail, Relationships, Social Computing, Social Networking, User Revolution, Web 2.0, Wisdom of Crowds, open source

Here below is an excerpt from and a link to a report just published by the recent Aspen Institute’s Communications and Society program.

In a previous post I mentioned a growing awareness of the impact of the interconnected digital infrastructure and digital natives on the Enterprise 2.0 market.  The publication of this Aspen Institute report is to me just one more piece of evidence that it’s real and growing … and it’s a credible source (though not quite a tangible case study

David Bollier reports from his OnTheCommons blog about "The Rise of Collective Intelligence: Decentralized Co-Creation of Value as a New Paradigm in Commerce and Culture” (pdf) published by the Aspen Institute.

It may be that the serious jargon of the term "collective intelligence" will put some (or many) off, but increasingly it seems to be becoming clear that the interactive social construction of knowledge put to use in response to constantly dynamic markets is demanding some new business logic, new points of friction with which to fashion transaction and new ways of designing and managing the work that leads to the creation of economic value.

.

The Rise Of Collective Intelligence

Most forwarding-thinking businesses are starting to realize that they need to come to terms with the open Internet environment. This means making some radical changes in how they think about markets, how they structure their own enterprises and how they treat customers.

[ Snip … ]

On the Internet, people have acquired considerable powers of their own. They have developed their own sustainable micro-cultures. They can create their own commons to carry on conversations among peers and develop new forms of reliable “collective intelligence.”

This bottom-up knowledge empowers ordinary individuals to approach market transactions on a more equal footing with sellers, who have historically had greater market power and knowledge. The commoners are able to capture more of the knowledge they create, and use it to their own advantage. Indeed, the commons can be regarded as a source of cutting-edge R&D for companies, as MIT professor Eric von Hippel has shown in his book, Democratizing Innovation.

The phrase that the conference used to describe this phenomenon is “decentralized co-creation of value.” It means that the market is not the sole source of value-creation; dispersed online communities are now sources of value that businesses must collaborate with in order to generate value.

The commons stands on a more equal footing with the market. Instead of all “value” coming from centralized players like corporations, increasingly, value is coming from the “ends” of the Internet – the periphery, where new ideas and innovations first materialize. Value comes from individuals, and groups of individuals, operating in the free space of the commons, where overhead is low to nonexistent, and creativity is not regimented to service prearranged market niches. Thanks to the Internet, social niches are becoming “staging areas” for viable niche markets, a phenomenon also known as the “Long Tail.”

All of these developments create a real crunch for traditional large corporations because large companies like to have extreme control. That’s how they deliver predictable results to investors and protect their brand reputation. But on the Internet, control and predictability are not viable strategies. In fact, they are counter-productive.

Value is generated by having less control. Customers won’t trust a company that tries to use digital rights management or bullying tactics to assert too much control. In a sense, companies are not just competing against other companies, but against the freedoms of the commons.

The challenge for businesses, then, is to develop new sorts of “open business” models that can respect the social dynamics of the Internet, while still monetizing certain forms of value (e.g., selling advertising to the Web users who like your site). Companies have to realize that brands are forms of socially created value; brands are not simply the result of advertising and image campaigns. Online communities create and promote a brand every bit as much as mass media.

One of the most fascinating parts of the report is about the next generation of computing, often known as “The Cloud.” Bill Coleman, the entrepreneur who started BEA Systems and recently started the Cassatt Corporation, describes the Cloud as the convergence of voice, data and video in a networked system that also combines computing, telecommunications and the Internet. You plug your computing appliance into The Cloud – and all your data and stuff is “there,” not on your personal computer.

Everyone at the conference agreed that the current trends in economics and technology will make The Cloud inevitable. Software and hardware will become commodity products, computing will become a service provided by very large utilities, and a handful of these Cloud providers will eventually put the telephone service industry, the cable industry and Internet service providers out of business.

.

I have been for some time been calling the emergent organizing principle that I believe underpins the necessary new business logic and models, derived from social-interaction-driven market niches, "wirearchy" - a dynamic two-way flow of power and authority based on knowledge, trust, credibility and a focus on results, enabled by interconnected people and technology.

I am heartened this report has come out (emerged, let’s say) from a group of bright and aware people at the Aspen Institute.  I suspect that it makes those of us who feel something big and different is going on bit by byte, link by link … a bit less iconoclastic.

.

Tags: Collective intelligence, new business logic, new business models, ROII, Return On Investment in Interaction, cloud computing, co-creating value, decentralization, wirearchy, hierarchy

Powered by Qumana

Comments (3)

Public Radio and TV - More than a Mashup

January 16, 2008 at 8:17 am · Filed under Andy Carvin, CPB, Emergent, NPR, NPR Music, PBS, Public Media, Relationships, Social Media, Social Networking, Social Objects, TV, Trusted Space, Web 2.0, Wisdom of Crowds

Wouldn’t it be something if Public TV and Radio got together to cover the election? Would it be great if the local stations got together with the big producers to cover the election?

Well it’s more than a dream now - CPB is funding just such a Mashup - The beginning I think of the key new force in public media - a Real Network of Many to Many.

Many of us had had a problem wit the term “Network” in Radio and TV. What it really means is one powerful producer using a system to distribute its product. Of course a real network is a diverse multi node system that where many nodes add value to the whole.

This is what is being “born” in Public radio and TV. Our hope a year ago was that the Election would be a powerful enough incentive to help the current large players to grit their teeth and really share and work with each other. This is working.

Here is Andy Carvin with the story.

Earlier today, NPR and its partners announced that the Corporation for Public Broadcasting is awarding more than $1.3 million dollars to a consortium of public media organizations to expand our coverage of election 2008 across multiple platforms. The consortium, led by NPR and including American Public Media/Minnesota Public Radio, Capitol News Connection, KQED, PBS, PRX, PRI/Public Interactive and The NewsHour, will work together to produce election-related content and interactive tools available to the entire public broadcasting system.

“By pooling content produced locally and nationally — for radio, television, and online — we will discover new ways of doing business to better serve the public,” said NPR CEO Ken Stern in a note that went out today to the public radio system. “We are pleased to have succeeded in coming together to deliver on the commitments made at the 2007 Annual Meeting.”

“This grant underscores CPB’s support of innovative projects that move public radio and television into the digital future so they can help individuals better connect with their communities wherever they are,” added Pat Harrison, CPB President and CEO. “This ambitious project will provide us with new ways of looking at how we serve the public on existing and emerging media platforms.”

The basic premise of the project was built around a simple reality - many public broadcasters were planning to create on air content and interactive modules for their websites, but we didn’t have a structure in place to work together during the election cycle. Around a year ago, NPR and PBS began conversations around editorial partnerships for the election, including the creation of an interactive map that would work on both of our websites, as well as on the TV show NewsHour. While that conversation was taking place, I co-organized a group discussion at the February 2007 Integrated Media Association conference for public broadcasters to talk about the Election 2008 social media plans and how those activities might be replicable across the system.

The conversation kicked into high gear at NPR’s annual meeting last April, where you may recall I blogged about some of the ideas that were brewing among those of us present at the event. We organized breakout conversation in which we laid out what was at stake and how we might collaborate. It didn’t take long to realize that we had an opportunity that might quickly slip through our fingers if we couldn’t get our act together. We needed to pull together a SWAT team and get to work……….

Now with NPR Music - we are seeing a real network emerging. With a real network, there will come the network effects for all concerned.

Comments

Grooming and Social Software

January 12, 2008 at 9:00 am · Filed under Enterprise 2.0, Grooming, Relationships, Robin Dunbar, Social Computing, Social Media, Social Networking, Trust, Twitter

Why is facetime and going to the “office” so important? Intellectually we know that most of what happens at the office is a huge waste of time - all those meetings - all that posturing! Why can’t we mainly work remotely?

Maybe it’s because we are in truth Primates and that what the office really presents is lots of opportunity for that central primate social lubricant - Grooming.

A recent study on grooming shows its economics: (CTV)

SINGAPORE — Male macaque monkeys pay for sex by grooming females, according to a recent study that suggests the primates may treat sex as a commodity.

“In primate societies, grooming is the underlying fabric of it all,” Dr. Michael Gumert, a primatologist at the Nanyang Technological University in Singapore, said in a telephone interview Saturday.

“It’s a sign of friendship and family, and it’s also something that can be exchanged for sexual services,” Gumert said.

Gumert’s findings, reported in New Scientist last week, resulted from a 20-month observation of about 50 long-tailed macaques in a reserve in Central Kalimantan, Indonesia.

Gumert found after a male grooms a female, the likelihood that she will engage in sexual activity with the male was about three times more than if the grooming had not occurred.

And as with other commodities, the value of sex is affected by supply and demand factors: A male would spend more time grooming a female if there were fewer females in the vicinity.

“And when the female supply is higher, the male spends less time on grooming … The mating actually becomes cheaper depending on the market,” Gumert said.

Other experts not involved in the study welcomed Gumert’s research, saying it was a major effort in systematically studying the interaction of organisms in ways in which an exchange of commodities or services can be observed — a theory known as biological markets.

This is where I see tools such as Twitter playing such an important role in facilitating us leaving the office and working more from home. Twitter supports Grooming. I think that that is what Twitter is all about. Without this Grooming, we can’t increase the distance and hence cannot escape the office.

This then raises another aha for me. We have been here before.

Robin Dunbar (Dunbar Numbers etc) has a theory (Grooming & Gossip & the Evolution of Language) about the evolution of language that enables us to see tools like Twitter in a new light.

In short it is this. Grooming is central to social cohesion in all primates - that includes us. Traditional Grooming is socially very expensive. You and I have to stop everything else and focus on each other. We have to be very close physically. Dunbar’s theory is that we started to use vocalizations to groom each other instead of touch. This enabled us to extend the distance and also freed up our hands to do other things such as get food.

Earlier theories are based on the idea that language began as a response to complex hunting. But we all know that men don’t talk when hunting and wolves and lions who engage in complex hunting, don’t vocalize then either.

Intuitively Dunbar makes sense to me. So then Twitter might be a way of dramatically reducing the social costs of our essential need to Groom which now has to take place within the physical presence of our colleagues and our bosses.

Just as language broke the cost of touch, so Twittering can break the cost of going to the office.

Maybe, this simple little tool might be the most important breakthrough in how humans work and unleash the huge costs that we have embedded in having to go to the office to meet our primary social need as primates - Grooming!

Comments (3)

Razors and Plasma Screens? A New Business Model For TV Screens?

January 10, 2008 at 7:33 am · Filed under Business Model, CPB, PBS, Relationships

Gillette pioneered a business model that still works well in many areas of modern life. Sell a complex tool for a very low price and make your money on the refills - in this case the blades.

Most cellphone makers partner with the networks who in effect “give away” the the phone for the service.

All of know now to be careful when we buy a “cheap” printer. It’s the Ink that will cost us.

So now the same guys who make the phones and the printers are working to create the same model for high end expensive Plasma and LCD screens.

“We already all have beautiful HD televisions. How do you differentiate?” said Bob Scaglione, senior vice president for marketing of Sharp’s American arm. “One way to provide some really unique differentiation is to provide new content.”

“That’s why we’re fighting to find the right content providers.”

The world’s biggest television makers announced a series of partnerships with media companies that will allow delivery of Internet content like videos, news feeds, weather and sports directly to the TV, without the intervention of a PC to complicate matters and confuse consumers.

Sharp unveiled deals to provide weather, stock quotes and comic strips. Samsung Electronics has a deal with USA Today to provide news, weather and stock information straight to its TVs. Panasonic showed how its TVs will pull down YouTube videos and images stored on Google’s Picasa service.

The companies also announced a handful of new televisions capable of receiving Internet content — over Ethernet or wireless connections. But to the insiders here, the electronics show 2008 was less about the products than the partnerships.

The deals are just the beginning, the TV makers hope. They say they are a hint of what could become a new and intimate relationship between the heretofore isolationist hardware makers and upstart creators of Internet content. (NYT)

This is what the Netflix/LG deal is about that I wrote about here a few days ago.

In a small meeting with journalists, Toshihiro Sakamoto, president and senior managing director of Panasonic, the American brand name for the home electronics of Matsushita Electric Industrial, said the company must do a better job of working with content providers. “Without them, we can’t make a big TV,” he said.

In other words, his television sets, no matter how big (and Panasonic displayed a 150-inch monster), will not compete unless they are better integrated into the content food chain.

In the longer term, a more direct relationship with content providers could give them a little more strength in negotiating with cable companies that are still the main pipeline of premium content.

In the immediate term, it might give them a cut of revenue from the delivery of content. Jeffrey Cove, vice president for technology and alliances at Panasonic, declined to discuss the financial terms of the company’s deal with Google’s YouTube and Picasa. But he did say: “We’re the collectors. We are providing an outlet for eyeballs.”

If I was a senior person at PBS and CPB, I would be wondering what I could do in this new context.

Comments (2)

Here’s how Enterprise 2.0 can fix vexing management issues

January 7, 2008 at 9:38 pm · Filed under Blogging, Business Model, Change, Culture, Economics, Enterprise 2.0, Enterprise Social Computing, Messy World, Public Insight Journalism, Relationships, Social Computing, Social Media, Social Networking, User Revolution, Wisdom of Crowds

Getting people to work effectively together in organizations has been a challenge since Og and Um opened their first wheel shop in 10,000 B.C. Over the ages, various motivational and management techniques have been employed, from floggings to trinket rewards to floggings.

In the 20th century, we saw the rise of “scientific” management, but still, organizations continued to look like pyramids — with a few individuals on top, and the rest at the bottom.

Will Enterprise 2.0 flatten the pyramid, once and for all? Gary Hamel is Visiting Professor of Strategic and International Management at the London Business School says that the Web may finally be sweeping away the rigid hierarchies and replacing them with truly participative and collaborative networks.

Here’s how he says it can happen:

Encourage more corporate democracy: Before, employees further down the food chain rarely had their views heard. Hamel urges organizations to use blogs to unleash the same “citizen media” forces within organizations as is happening across the Internet at large.

Unleash formerly hidden creativity. As Hamel puts it: “Make no mistake, your company is filled with video bloggers, mixers, hackers, mashers, tuners, and podcasters. The question is what is your company doing to help all of these ingenious people become fully empowered business innovators?”

Non-traditional funding for new innovation. Hamel notes the rise of non-traditional lenders, enabled through social markets, which potentially can create more funding options for employees eager to experiment with new ideas. Imagine, he says, a company in which managers and employees “was given permission to invest up to 55% of their discretionary resources in any idea, anywhere across the company that they deemed attractive. Suddenly, internal entrepreneurs would have the chance to appeal to dozens of potential ‘angel investors.’

Internal market for decision making. “The Web is a great tool for collating the views of hundreds—or even thousands—of individuals and has spawned a wide variety of ‘opinion markets,’” Hamel says. Suppose “your company created an internal ‘market for judgment’ that aggregated the views of a broad cross section of employees with the goal of establishing the odds that a particular project will meet its intended return. For every big new project, employees would have the chance to buy a security that would pay out only if the initiative achieved a predetermined rate of return.” Such online markets already exist for predicting the outcome of world events and elections.

Liquid power. “An ideal management system would be one in which power was automatically redistributed when environmental changes devalued executive knowledge and competence,” Hamel says. “You may find it hard to imagine an organization in which authority is a fluid commodity, flowing smoothly toward leaders who add value and away from those who don’t, yet this is how the Web works today. In the online world, power and influence are the product of de facto leadership, rather than de jure appointments. Hierarchies get built from the bottom-up, rather than from the top down.”

Comments (1)

OPB - Public Insight Network

December 19, 2007 at 10:10 am · Filed under NPR, OPB, PBS, Public Insight Journalism, Public Media, Relationships, Social Computing, Social Media, Social Networking

Oregon Public TV is starting a TV version of Public Insight Journalism. Here is a link to a neat video that they are using as the invitation - it makes it all come alive for me.

My own bias is that I want to be connected to people that know a lot about things that are important to me. Knowing what my friends had for breakfast is important - one of the reasons I like Twitter. But I still value expertise.

The web enables me to get connected to individuals who really do know a lot. For instance, the man who runs the music department at Nicholas Hoare’s Book Shop in Toronto is a genius who seems to know everything about serious music - I would love to have him talk online about what he knows and to be available to host a chat.

Comments (4)