Leveraging Networks Teigland May2011
Denunciar
Robin TeiglandSeguir
18 de May de 2011•0 gostou•647 visualizações
Leveraging Networks Teigland May2011
18 de May de 2011•0 gostou•647 visualizações
Baixar para ler offline
Denunciar
Negócios
Tecnologia
My presentation on networks and social media to a group of international managers from multinational organizations as part of IFL training program (www.ifl.se).
Robin TeiglandSeguir
Mais conteúdo relacionado
Mais procurados
Social Media Four S MsPatti Anklam
The Complete Organizational Network Analysis Handbook_APR2014 #SocialNetworkA...Stephen Tavares
Organizational Network Analysis (ONA) - Practitioner Course Module 2 - Settin...Optimice
+CrossChangkun Qiao
Using social network analysis to improve innovation and performanceScott Smith
H C I Business Relationships Learning FinalMike Gotta
Destaque
Network LeadershipRobin Teigland
Teigland Spel och Pengar 2010Robin Teigland
NVWN at VU AmsterdamRobin Teigland
Breaking out of the bank with BitcoinRobin Teigland
Innovation through networks and immersive internetRobin Teigland
Sharing Economy May 2015Robin Teigland
Similar a Leveraging Networks Teigland May2011
Energizing Change Through Network Leadership 1225920401627479 8Guido Heijman
Energizing Change Through Network LeadershipRobin Teigland
Ifl Womens Network TeiglandRobin Teigland
Leveraging Social Networks for ResultsRobin Teigland
Leveraging Social Networks For Results 13338Mohammed Hayath Nisar Ahmed
Leveraging social-networks-for-results-13338Spreeas
Mais de Robin Teigland
Leading in a Digital World_MCS_Overview.pptxRobin Teigland
Future of Digital Currencies and PaymentsRobin Teigland
Network Leadership for a Sustainable FutureRobin Teigland
Network leadership in an uncertain worldRobin Teigland
Teigland Exploring Future Value Creation for a Sustainable WorldRobin Teigland
New Industrial Revolution for Bestseller 2020Robin Teigland
Último
PersonalBrandCanvasAariana1
Noriega_Sebastian_MBBS_PB1_2023-Sep.pptxSebastianNoriega12
Test presentatie.pptxMarlous1
Lex Wilson_KillerB&B_Project_Summary.pdfLexWilson1
Webinar Sept. 21 Bloomerang_FINAL.pdfBloomerang
2023-09 Bloomerang Academy Text Fundraising Presentation.pdfBloomerang
Leveraging Networks Teigland May2011
- 3. Everyone is talking about networks National Innovation Networks Formal Networks Entrepreneurial Networks Facebook. LinkedIn, Twitter Regional Networks Infrastructure Networks Social Networks FAS.research Electronic Networks Informal Networks Networks of Practice Networked organization
- 5. Human capacity cannot keep up… Growth Time Information and knowledge Human absorptive capacity Adapted from Cohen & Levinthal 1989
- 8. Swedish hip hop artists – mid 2000 Liljeros 2006 ?? Timbuktu
- 9. Social network analysis has a long history and is based on matrix algebra http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_network
- 11. Uncovering networks in an organization Teigland et al. 2005 Formal organization Informal organization
- 12. Central connectors within one location Bottleneck Teigland 1998 Surprise!! Stockholm
- 13. Individuals within a firm Mattsson 2004 < 1 yr 1-5 yrs 5-10 yrs 10-15 yrs > 15 yrs Time at firm
- 15. Boundary spanners between locations Stockholm London Brussels Helsinki Madrid Copenhagen Transferred from Stockholm Teigland 1998 San Francisco
- 18. Trust & reciprocity are essential for knowledge exchange in networks
- 19. Peripheral players between organizations San Francisco Stockholm London Brussels Helsinki Madrid Copenhagen Teigland 1998 Other firms Electronic communities
- 20. Dual loyalties Loyalty Loyalty Organization Professional network Teigland 2003
- 21. Managing information overload Whelan & Teigland 2010
- 23. How does informal power arise? Krebs 2004 Jack gains informal power, weakening the boss Lisa ’s formal power… Jill Jack Bob Lars Anna Sue Lisa Mira Sam Fred
- 24. How does informal power arise? … and now Jack ’s informal power is greater than the boss Lisa’s formal power Krebs 2004 Jill Jack Bob Lars Anna Sue Lisa Mira Sam Fred
- 27. Two individuals with the same number of contacts… B A
- 28. … but with very different access to resources B A
- 29. Performance differs based on one ’s network Firm A Low on-time High Creative High on-time Low creative Teigland 2003 High creative Virtual community Firm B
- 31. When you hire someone,… … ..you “hire” his or her network.
- 32. Network structure affects performance Division 1 Division 2 Improved efficiency over time Stagnant performance over time Schenkel & Teigland 2008 Two divisions within Sundlink (Öresund Bridge)
- 33. Network structure affects performance Barsh et al 2007, McK Quarterly
- 34. Comparing performance across firms Teigland et al 2000
- 37. Avoid creating insular networks http://www.enronexplorer.com/focus/19185#
- 40. What do you notice about the informal network? Cross, Introduction to organizational network analysis
- 41. More social get-togethers and coffee breaks are not the solution
- 42. “ Managing” networks in your organization Before After Anklam & Welch 2005 1. Uncover networks 2. Analyze networks 3. Improve connectedness
- 45. “ Managing” networks in your organization Before After Anklam & Welch 2005 1. Uncover networks 2. Analyze networks 3. Improve connectedness
- 46. Analyze and visualize data http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_network_analysis_software18
- 47. Knowledge sharing across client teams
- 48. Knowledge sharing across client teams
- 49. Network of top two leadership layers Cross, Introduction to organizational network analysis
- 50. Multinational best practices team Cross, Introduction to organizational network analysis
- 51. IBM ’s Atlas shows the social network of a topic and how to get to someone Poole 2008
- 55. Build relationships with people at all hierarchical levels Look for complementary skills while maintaining a balance! Cross, Parise, & Weiss 2006 Higher: Help with making decisions, acquiring resources, developing political awareness, explaining organizational activities beyond local setting Equal: Help brainstorm and provide specific help, support, and needed information Lower: Provide best sources of technical information and expertise
- 56. Build relationships before you need them Strong ties Weak ties Outside organization Inside organization
- 57. Get active!
- 58. Develop three forms of networking Ibarra & Hunter, HBR Jan 2007 Operational Personal Strategic Purpose Getting work done efficiently Enhancing personal and professional development Developing and achieving future priorities Members Mostly internal contacts and focused on current demands Mostly external contacts and focused on current and future interests Both internal and external contacts and focused on future Network attributes Depth through building strong working relationships Breadth through reaching out to contacts who can refer you to others Leverage through creating inside-outside links
- 64. "...when the rate of change outside an organization is greater than the rate of change inside, the end is near...." Jack Welch…
- 67. Two individuals/organizations with the same number of contacts… B A
- 68. … but with very different access to resources B A
- 69. A High creativity and innovative performance Teigland 2003 B Poor creativity and innovative performance
- 70. Avoid creating insular networks http://www.enronexplorer.com/focus/19185#
- 71. A shift from being problem solvers to solution finders
- 72. The wisdom of the crowd Closed Expensive Complex Accurate Open Inexpensive Simple Close enough Hinton 2007 Accurate
- 74. History tends to repeat itself…. Innovation, financial crisis, industrial revolution, … Steam engine Internal combustion engine Microelectronics Late 18 th C Late 19 th C Late 20 th C Schön 2008 Third industrial revolution?
- 76. A new workforce is appearing… Prensky 2001, Beck and Wade 2004, Mahaley 2008 “ Digital Immigrants” “ Digital Natives” Company loyalty Work ≠ Personal Learning=Behind the desk Professional loyalty Work = Personal Learning=Fun and games
- 77. “ u r always on….” Adapted from FredCavazza.net
- 78. Drivers of change Increased Interactivity DiGangi 2010
- 82. Our economy changes Pine Jr. & Gilmore 1998, 1999; DiGangi 2010
- 83. Business models So, what happens to them? Johnson, Christensen, and Kagermann 2008, DiGangi 2010 They evolve...
- 85. DiGangi 2010
- 87. Access to 24x7 global workforce Average wage approx. USD 1.40 / hour http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~drand/
- 90. Who are the Twitter influencers? http://www.briansolis.com/2011/02/the-interest-graph-on-twitter-is-alive-studying-starbucks-top-followers/
- 91. Word cloud of Starbucks ’ top 50,000 consumer profiles http://www.briansolis.com/2011/02/the-interest-graph-on-twitter-is-alive-studying-starbucks-top-followers/
- 96. eZ Philosophy Connecting people who share a passion for something they do so that they can collaborate, share ideas, learn, and create knowledge
- 97. The backbone of eZ Systems is social media - throughout the value chain
- 98. eZ provides platforms for interaction throughout its ecosystem eZ Software development team
- 100. But how to balance needs of community with needs of firm in value co-creation model? DiGangi et al 2010
- 101. Threadless: What came first – the community or the company?
- 103. Management cannot mandate social relationships My company has blocked my computer from accessing most of the social media sites. But I feel so cut off from my network. So, now I just connect through my phone.
- 104. IBM ’s blogging policy & guidance, created by the employees Policies based on IBM ’s Business Conduct Guidelines Apply internally and externally Available on ibm.com “ blogging guidelines” Adapted from Poole 2008
- 106. Communicate competitive landscape What is our strategy? 1. Who are our customers ? 2. What products do we sell? 3. How do we create value? 4. Who are our competitors? https://www.securestate.com/PublishingImages/Competition-(BIG).gif
- 108. Transparency, transparency, transparency http://twitter.com/#!/zappos Core Value #6: "Build Open and Honest Relationships with Communication
- 109. Some things do not change Innovation Exchange Exchange Trust Trust Relationships Relationships Interaction
- 110. http://slideshare.net/missrogue "E-connection is processed in the brain like an in-person connection."
- 112. Leadership moving forward…… Hierarchy Linear, static, process-based organization Heterarchy Dynamic, integrated collaboration networks Teigland 2010
- 113. From the mobility of goods to the mobility of financial capital to … ...the “mobility” of labor? Teigland 2010
- 115. Karinda Rhode aka Robin Teigland [email_address] www.knowledgenetworking.org www.slideshare.net/eteigland www.nordicworlds.net RobinTeigland Photo: Lindholm, Metro Photo: Nordenskiöld Photo: Lindqvist If you love knowledge, set it free…
Notas do Editor
- Networks find everywhere… From Fas.research at www.fas.at Where do we find networks? physics, chemistry, biology : network laws of physics, animal food chains, metabolic networks of cells, neural networks of brain… technology, information technology : phone networks, information networks, railway networks… communication, sociology : communication networks, social networks, relationship networks… mathematics : network theory, graph theory… management, economics : networked enterprise, network strategy, supplier network… It ’ s a small (but complex) world… Better understanding of networks helps us in the modern world, as more complex phenomena demand faster reactivity (and preferably proactivity) every day Networks are everywhere – organizations are networks as well Every one of us is a part of a global network that connects all people
- RT: One of the major results of the internet is that the growth of information and knowledge now exceeds human capacity to absorb this..and while research shows that the part of our brain that deals with processing signals from the environment has indeed grown and is now larger in the younger generation, we are still unable to keep up. So how do we handle this? (Next slide) Cohen, WM och Levinthal, D A, Absorptive Capacity: A new Perspective on Learning and Innovation, Working paper, Carnegie Mellon University and University of Pennsylvania, October 1989
- RT: Here is a quotation from Pierre Levy, a researcher who studies collective intelligence, or …. He says, ”No one knows……”, but I have adapted this to be that “all knowledge resides in networks”. What good is knowledge if you cannot access it? Knowledge is created and transferred through networks. How many of you have heard of six degrees of separation? (raise hands)…this means that we are collected to all other human beings on the face of the planet through six links, where a link is from me to person x in audience. Thus, each of us actually has access to all knowledge and resources that exist. (Next slide) mobile phone, internet, here could have farmer in Asia, President Obama, Zlatan, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MbX_I2fuqJk&feature=PlayList&p=079F3CFE9701D083&index=0 Pierre Lévy, Collective Intelligence: Mankind's Emerging World in Cyberspace , 1997 My example of how this presentation was made. Asked a question on Socnet and received many good answers with people ’s presentations and links to interesting sources
- Refer to social networks here One of first Jacob Levy Moreno in the 1930s in attempt to quantify social relationships. Based on matrix algebra. Advanced statistics… Nodes can be people, departments, or organizations Networks consist of links that form a structure Links between nodes have different purposes , e.g., task or general advice, expertise, strategic information, navigating the organization (procedures, know-who, etc.) Links can be one or two directional Links can be both formal and informal Links can have different strengths
- Source: Fredrik Liljeros, 2006 A tie is defiend as participated on the same record. The data was collected by some undergraduates for course paper during their first semester.
- A summary of the progress of social networks and social network analysis has been written by Linton Freeman. [7] Precursors of social networks in the late 1800s include Émile Durkheim and Ferdinand Tönnies . Tönnies argued that social groups can exist as personal and direct social ties that either link individuals who share values and belief ( gemeinschaft ) or impersonal, formal, and instrumental social links ( gesellschaft ). Durkheim gave a non-individualistic explanation of social facts arguing that social phenomena arise when interacting individuals constitute a reality that can no longer be accounted for in terms of the properties of individual actors. He distinguished between a traditional society – &quot;mechanical solidarity&quot; – which prevails if individual differences are minimized, and the modern society – &quot;organic solidarity&quot; – that develops out of cooperation between differentiated individuals with independent roles. Georg Simmel , writing at the turn of the twentieth century, was the first scholar to think directly in social network terms. His essays pointed to the nature of network size on interaction and to the likelihood of interaction in ramified, loosely-knit networks rather than groups (Simmel, 1908/1971). After a hiatus in the first decades of the twentieth century, three main traditions in social networks appeared. In the 1930s, J.L. Moreno pioneered the systematic recording and analysis of social interaction in small groups, especially classrooms and work groups ( sociometry ), while a Harvard group led by W. Lloyd Warner and Elton Mayo explored interpersonal relations at work. In 1940, A.R. Radcliffe-Brown 's presidential address to British anthropologists urged the systematic study of networks. [8] However, it took about 15 years before this call was followed-up systematically. Social network analysis developed with the kinship studies of Elizabeth Bott in England in the 1950s and the 1950s–1960s urbanization studies of the University of Manchester group of anthropologists (centered around Max Gluckman and later J. Clyde Mitchell ) investigating community networks in southern Africa, India and the United Kingdom. Concomitantly, British anthropologist S.F. Nadel codified a theory of social structure that was influential in later network analysis. [9] In the 1960s-1970s, a growing number of scholars worked to combine the different tracks and traditions. One group was centered around Harrison White and his students at the Harvard University Department of Social Relations : Ivan Chase, Bonnie Erickson, Harriet Friedmann, Mark Granovetter , Nancy Howell, Joel Levine, Nicholas Mullins, John Padgett, Michael Schwartz and Barry Wellman . Also independently active in the Harvard Social Relations department at the time were Charles Tilly, who focused on networks in political and community sociology and social movements, and Stanley Milgram, who developed the &quot;six degrees of separation&quot; thesis. [10] Mark Granovetter and Barry Wellman are among the former students of White who have elaborated and popularized social network analysis. [11] Significant independent work was also done by scholars elsewhere: University of California Irvine social scientists interested in mathematical applications, centered around Linton Freeman, including John Boyd, Susan Freeman, Kathryn Faust, A. Kimball Romney and Douglas White ; quantitative analysts at the University of Chicago , including Joseph Galaskiewicz, Wendy Griswold, Edward Laumann, Peter Marsden, Martina Morris, and John Padgett; and communication scholars at Michigan State University , including Nan Lin and Everett Rogers . A substantively-oriented University of Toronto sociology group developed in the 1970s, centered on former students of Harrison White: S.D. Berkowitz, Harriet Friedmann, Nancy Leslie Howard, Nancy Howell, Lorne Tepperman and Barry Wellman , and also including noted modeler and game theorist Anatol Rapoport .In terms of theory, it critiqued methodological individualism and group-based analyses, arguing that seeing the world as social networks offered more analytic leverage. [12]
- Large majority of work done through informal networks, some even say approx 80%.
- Can use this to look at one organizational unit, this picture shows the programmers of the stockholm office of one IT multinational. See that well-connected. Good knowledge flows here as well. The Icon Stockholm programmer community was very well connected, indicating a high degree of knowledge flow. But I use this example, bc want to illustrate key players in this network. They are the central connectors. Central information source for everyone in network. In most cases, these individuals are not formally designated go-to people in unit. Provide help or pointers to others if can ’t help. In many cases these individuals are high performers. Interestingly when we showed this picture to management, they knew of three of these but the fourth one was a total surprise. Interesting bc this person was different from mgt, woman programmer. Challenge with these individuals is that even though recognized by their colleagues, often their efforts go unrecognized and unrewarded, yet spend a good amount of time filling this task. Organizations use different kinds of rewards, nominated for best helper, one example is bank that changed its bonus scheme rewarded individuals for their ability to improve communication within unit, to be connectors based on evaluations by fellow employees. McK in semi-annual evaluation process. Mostly positive roles but these individuals can also play power games, using connecting role for private benefit, pitting networks against each other, hoarding information. Sometimes even people just overloaded . Found that this person was a bottleneck, while many people went to this person for help, could not help everyone, so people frustrated. Think about how design teams or redesign jobs, rotating people also. One organization conducted analysis and restaffed teams combining members of both networks. If overloaded, can implement mailing lists, discussion boards to try to reduce workload on central connector Bottlenecks continue to create problems when trying to implement change bc people continue to go to them.
- How well members of this organization are aware of each other ’ s skills and capabilities? Mari Mattsson, Master's Thesis. Transactive Memory - &quot;know-who&quot; as resource in work organization. 2004
- Here show the multinational ’s networks of programmers. While large office of Stockholm was very well connected, c an see with this that many isolated islands of competence. Even though management spent considerable effort on IT systems to get people to communicate across units, very few doing so. However, we can see few individuals who did act as boundary spanners. These individuals serve as conduits of information between units. Rarely many boundary spanners in an organization. Difficult to become part of network across organization, time consuming, personality traits. Important because bring together different kinds of knowledge. Mgt often does not appreciate these inds. Have to spend considerable time maintaining network. Organizational stress because sitting often between two areas, different demands, etc. Or overload. To our surprise, after interviewing several key people in the community, we found that the boundary spanners, known as global advisors, were more information bottlenecks than connection facilitators. Are they making the right connections? Are they connected to connectors in own and other networks? But what happens if these individuals leave organization? Should reward individuals and acknowledge what doing. One company performed analysis and discovered who these boundary spanners are and helped them further develop their networks, also greater bonuses Can design work processes to bring individuals together. In this example, these inds talked with one another because the two in SF had been rotated from the Stockholm office.
- Growth opportunities come from ability to coordinate and collaborate across product, functional, and geographic lines 78% of approx 7300 executives McK & Company But organizations are ineffective at or experience difficulty in cross-boundary collaboration 79% of approx 7300 execs
- This because feels awkward to just call up someone don ’ t know or if called. Why should I help you?
- If we return to our Stockholm office of programmers, I found that some of these communicated to a high degree with others outside of their firm. Some serve as experts in org, but do not connect a lot with others . Remember story about programmer in SF, easier and faster to go outside and ask question than to bother person at next desk. But why else are these people on periphery? What doing? Could be new to organization, Interested in staying on ” bleeding edge ” . Organization have old friends there. Electronic network – embarassed in asking question internally. No one knows your a monkey on the internet. Many managers want to bring these people into the organization. Some may want to, e.g., those who new. But these individuals might not want to be brought into the group. Some want to stay at the cutting edge of their field, demands that they spend a lot of time in outside networks. Others may not be able to due to personal reasons, family, etc. Some organizations try to bring in these individuals by asking to attend internal events, be on committees, etc. But this may frustrate them. Role conflict, increased stress
- Higher turnover at companies these days. Not life-time employee, many restructurings, acquisitions, etc. People always thinking about where go next. Inds bells and whistles Don ’ t know if working on your problem or someone else ’ s, including the competition ’ s Also often project managers leading technical specialists and do not understand what working with. Difficult to know whether really should take so much time or not. Individual working on computer, often don ’t know what working on or for whom.
- Below are two groups – A and B, each organized as a hierarchy. A node represents a person in each group. A grey line indicates the prescribed structure of the organization – the formal network or hierarchy1. All information and resources flow through each group ’s leader – nodes 010 and 015. Measuring each node’s Power, our InFlow™ software reveals the obvious. Each leader is in complete control of their group – they each have a perfect Power score of 1.00. We see two equivalent groups – same size, same structure. The leaders decide to form a tie between themselves for possible collaboration, or exploitation. By creating this informal tie [purple line], each leader can now monitor the other group. Each leader remains dominant over their respective group and neither leader loses power relative to the other – they have equal power scores. Yet, both leaders have lost some power by joining their groups! Person 014 having learned to trust 016 decides to introduce the new friend to the leader of Group A. Node 015 is currently unaware of this new connection. Person 016 now has more links to the other group than to their home group.
- Soon word gets out in Group B, that 016 is well connected! Networks often, but not always, follow the law of increasing returns – the rich get richer. 2004, Valdis Krebs People who are well connected new ties from others hoping to take advantage of the many connections. 016 ’s colleagues [017, 018, 019] soon form a tie with the emergent boundary spanner[016]. Person 016 lets the tie to node 014 atrophy or weaken – it is no longer critical. One can only maintain a small number of active strong ties. Node 015 finally senses the loss of power. In frustration, 015 cuts the tie to the other formal leader 010, resulting in even more power to node 016! While clinging to formal authority, leader 015 starts making plans to remove 016 from the group. Will this succeed?
- Both nodes 010 and 016 have the same pattern of, and the same number of, connections. Yet, node 010 has more power! Why? Node 010 is taking advantage of structural holes in the network. A structural hole is anywhere in the network where two nodes could be connected, but are not. There are structural holes between any combination of nodes 011, 012, 013, and 014. This leaves node 010 in a position of total control over the local cluster. A hub[010] controls all spokes[011,012,013,014] attached to it – like the formal hierarchy we saw in the first diagram. A combination where a node has easy access to others, while controlling the access of other nodes in the network, reveals high informal power.
- Back to performance. Interesting results here as well. Similar to intra-organizational networks. See creative performance but interesting to see other Why do you think so? Someone who interested in developing first solution, being seen as guru. Helping others all time with problems. Prestige. Also, difficulty of knowledge, applying external knowledge to own organization ’ s problems. Have to maintain connections. Interesting example of company that hired one of these gurus. Guy who fired bc all time working on someone else ’ s problems.
- Here are Sue ’s and Bill’s egocentric networks, but this time in their larger context. Sue is the bridge between different groups or “clumps” Bill ’s network is concentrated within a larger clump Both have advantages, but Sue ’s network is the one associated with higher pay, promotions, etc. Multiple, independent information sources Discover problems and find solutions Create more value http://www.ux-sa.com/2007/09/structural-holes-and-online-social.html But avoid becoming a bottleneck!
- Interesting now that companies changing from hiring fresh graduates to mid-career professionals Everyone knows that when you hire one talented programmer, you get 20 for free! Anders L.
- Here I would like to show the results of a study in the construction industry with colleague, Andy Schenkel. This illustrates how two departments can have completely different informal networks and connectedness. The one to left did not meet the structural properties of a community, while the one to the right did . As you can visually see D epartment 1 is disconnected no clear core or periphery not particularly dense In contrast, D epartment 2 is well connected has a core with numbers 77 and 82 forming it and a periphery it also appears to be dense
- While research that shows this relationship, thought it would be best to show what I have found in my research. Here have rd operations of three multinationals, Xerox, Ericsson, and HP. Found that HP had highest of three in terms of perf indicators that looked at. Can even talk about regional level – silicon valley vs rte 128 in Boston.
- Did some research in which HP one of companies. Found that this company really understood the importance of informal networks both in terms of ” managing ” the informal structure but also in terms of the visionary organization. Interestingly, HP doing network maps based on email communication. Would like to do something similar here.
- I found this picture of a painting in a presentation by Steve Borgatti on social networks, National Academy of Science Presentation, 2005. http://www.analytictech.com/mb874/Slides/Overview.pdf Position in a network partially determines access to resources and knowledge flows which has effect on performance
- Kenneth Lay delegated responsibility to those in his old boys network – failed to listen to someone outside the club – Sherron Watkins.
- Rob Cross, Nitin Nohria and Andrew Parker, Six Myths About Informal Networks -- and How to Overcome Them, Sloan Management Review, 2002 Most often managers do not know what going on. Moreover, we do not know what going on in our network beyond our first set of contacts.
- First, the ONA identified mid-level managers that were critical in terms of information flow within the group. A particular surprise came from the very central role that Cole played in terms of both overall information flow within the group and being the only point of contact between members of the production division and the rest of the network. If he were hired away, the efficiency of this group as a whole would be significantly impacted as people in the informal network re-established important informational relationships. Simply categorizing various informational requests that Cole received and then allocating ownership of these informational or decision domains to other executives served to both unburden Cole and make the overall network more responsive and robust. Second, the ONA helped to identify highly peripheral people that essentially represented untapped expertise and underutilized resources for the group. In particular, it became apparent that many of the senior people had become too removed from the day-to-day operations of this group. For example, the most senior person (Jones) was one of the most peripheral in the informal network. This is a common finding. As people move higher within an organization their work begins to entail more administrative tasks that makes them both less accessible and less knowledgeable about the day-to-day work of their subordinates. However, in this case our debrief session indicated that Jones had become too removed and his lack of responsiveness frequently held the entire network back when important decisions needed to be made. Third, the ONA also demonstrated the extent to which the production division (the sub-group on the top of the diagram) had become separated from the overall network. Several months prior to this analysis these people had been physically moved to a different floor in the building. Upon reviewing the network diagram, many of the executives realized that this physical separation had resulted in loss of a lot of the serendipitous meetings that occurred when they were co-located. Structured meetings were set up to help avoid operational problems the group had been experiencing due to this loss of communication between production and the rest of the network.
- Interesting to think that just a few years ago, everyone was saying get people together informally, create venues for them to meet. But research in US has found that need to do more than random interventions. This not enough to align with organizational goals. Yes, this gets inds meeting, but may result in coups or negative spirals if mgt does not understand them.
- Source: https://webapp.comm.virginia.edu/NetworkRoundtable/Portals/0/NR04-05/Networks_and_Organizational_Change.pdf There is a structured way of going about ” managing ” informal networks. Today share with you some of the findings from my research and from the gurus in the US. Identify informal network where effective collaboration adn kn sharing has sig impact on organization ’ s operations and strategy. So many networks out there but you don ’ t need to understand all of them. Good for up to 50 individuals, then should look at sub-networks Simple, 10-15 minutes to do, make list of people and ask all to characterize relationship with one another Make sure think through sensitivity of issues, do pretest Uncover networks Identify which networks are important to understand E.g., product development, merger integration Collect network data E.g., observe, interview people, conduct questionnaire Ask appropriate questions, e.g., advice, trust, innovation Analyze the causes of fragmented networks Leadership style, office layout, virtual work, politics, knowledge sharing attitudes, workflow processes, job descriptions Improve connectedness and u nplug bottlenecks Reevaluate formal structure, e.g., team desi gn, roles Rethink work processes Reassign tasks, rotate individuals, s hift responsibilities Are central connectors hoarding info? Is unit too isolated? Are boundary spanners talking with right people? Is unit losing technical expertise? Think about how design teams or redesign jobs, rotating people also. Restaff teams to override hoarding connectors. One organization conducted analysis and restaffed teams combining members of both networks. If overloaded, can implement mailing lists, discussion boards to try to reduce workload on central connector Shift responsibilities, Put in mailing list, discussion boards, socnet example
- Cross, Intro to ONA Identify a strategically important group. The first step is to identify a group within the organization where investments made to improve collaboration have the potential to yield a significant payback either strategically or operationally. We typically look for groups crossing functional, physical, hierarchical and organizational lines because networks often fragment at these junctures. 2. Assess meaningful and actionable relationships. The second step is to identify relationships that will meaningfully reveal a group's effectiveness as well as be actionable for managers once results are disclosed. Most companies are keenly interested in work-related collaboration. As a result, we almost always map information flow. We can also look at relationships that reveal the information sharing potential of a network, decision-making or power relations, or those that reveal well-being and supportiveness in a network such as friendship or trust networks. Organizational network information can be obtained in a variety of ways, from tracking e-mails to observing people over time. Often the most efficient means is to administer a 10-20 minute survey designed to assess relationships within and outside of a group. 3. Visually and quantitatively analyze results. Once the data have been collected, it can be analyzed using a network software package. There are a variety of different packages available, some of which combine drawing functionality with quantitative analysis and some of which specialize in one or the other. For more information on visual assessment see the interpreting a network diagram section. 4. Create meaningful feedback sessions. We typically conduct feedback sessions in two phases. In the first half of the workshop, we present an overview of network analysis to orient the participants, and then provide a summary presentation highlighting important points from the analysis of the specific group. The second half of the workshop consists of breakout sessions with smaller groups that brainstorm ways to promote appropriate connectivity and ensure that organizational design, culture and leadership will not push the network back to ineffective patterns. These subgroups then debrief the larger group, and ideas are catalogued for action planning. In this process, it is always important to focus on what can be done to improve the effectiveness of the group. Rather than questioning why someone or some department is peripheral or central, it is more constructive to focus on how the organization can overcome unproductive patterns. 5. Assess progress and effectiveness. Conducting an organizational analysis of a group indicates the level of connectivity only at a specific point in time. Repeating this process after six to nine months can reveal whether appropriate change has occurred in the network. It is also a good idea to track objective measures of performance over time.
- Source: https://webapp.comm.virginia.edu/NetworkRoundtable/Portals/0/NR04-05/Networks_and_Organizational_Change.pdf There is a structured way of going about ” managing ” informal networks. Today share with you some of the findings from my research and from the gurus in the US. Identify informal network where effective collaboration adn kn sharing has sig impact on organization ’ s operations and strategy. So many networks out there but you don ’ t need to understand all of them. Good for up to 50 individuals, then should look at sub-networks Simple, 10-15 minutes to do, make list of people and ask all to characterize relationship with one another Make sure think through sensitivity of issues, do pretest Uncover networks Identify which networks are important to understand E.g., product development, merger integration Collect network data E.g., observe, interview people, conduct questionnaire Ask appropriate questions, e.g., advice, trust, innovation Analyze the causes of fragmented networks Leadership style, office layout, virtual work, politics, knowledge sharing attitudes, workflow processes, job descriptions Improve connectedness and u nplug bottlenecks Reevaluate formal structure, e.g., team desi gn, roles Rethink work processes Reassign tasks, rotate individuals, s hift responsibilities Are central connectors hoarding info? Is unit too isolated? Are boundary spanners talking with right people? Is unit losing technical expertise? Think about how design teams or redesign jobs, rotating people also. Restaff teams to override hoarding connectors. One organization conducted analysis and restaffed teams combining members of both networks. If overloaded, can implement mailing lists, discussion boards to try to reduce workload on central connector Shift responsibilities, Put in mailing list, discussion boards, socnet example
- Core competencies or capabilities in knowledge-intensive work are usually a product of collaboration across functional or divisional boundaries. ONA allows executives to determine if the appropriate cross-functional or departmental collaborations are occurring to support strategic objectives. Challenge: We conducted an organizational network analysis of a large health services organization. This was an organization that had grown by acquisition over several years with the intent that acquired companies combine their expertise in developing and taking to market new products and services. The CEO of this organization had become acutely aware of the need to create a leadership network that was able to recognize opportunities in one sphere of the network and know enough of what others in the conglomerate knew to combine appropriate resources and expertise. As there was some evidence that this was not happening, we were invited to conduct an organizational network analysis of the conglomerate's top two layers of leadership (114 executives). Key Findings: The table above is an alternative to the diagram format. Each cell indicates the percentage of connections that exist out of a possible 100% if all people within a given cell were connected. This simple summary of collaborative activity within and between divisions provided a great deal of insight into the inner-workings of the organization. The company had acquired various organizations with the intent that they collaborate in bringing their offerings to market. However, the organizational network analysis showed that there was only limited collaborative activity in pockets of the organization. For example, a quick review of the table shows that divisions 3 and 4 had reasonable levels of collaboration, whereas divisions 1 and 7 did not. Changes: Various reasons existed for this. In some settings members of the executive team were not sure what a given division did and so did not know how to even think about involving them in their projects. In others, cultural norms or incentives kept people from seeking information outside of their own division. And in some the complementarity of product offerings that was presumed when an acquisition was made did not exist. As a result, different interventions were applied as appropriate throughout the network; however, it was the view of collaborative activity afforded by the organizational network analysis that allowed the organization to intervene appropriately at each of these strategic junctures
- Promoting Innovation Most innovation of importance today is a collaborative endeavor. Whether concerned with new-product development, process improvement or R&D departments, ONA can be particularly insightful in both assessing how a group is integrating its expertise and the effectiveness with which it is drawing on the expertise of others within and outside of an organization. Challenge: The following group had been formed from highly skilled subject-matter experts drawn from across the organization to develop and disseminate leading-edge manufacturing processes and technologies. In the old structure, these experts were dispersed in myriad functions and business units. In the new, they were brought under one leader to ensure focus and consistency in manufacturing processes and technologies. The network analysis was conducted to find out the extent to which collaboration and innovation was occurring across the new group. Key Findings: The ONA provided a great deal of insight to the incoming executive. For example, he was surprised by the central role some employees were playing and concerned with the extent to which some of the leading experts were peripheral members of the group. And while he was pleased to learn of practices in some countries that promoted effective collaboration, he was very concerned with clustering in the network, which indicated that the division was not yet well integrated. The employees were still mostly collaborating only with others in their own country. In fact, the only connections across countries were those of the leadership team and a few relationships formed during past projects. Changes: In this case, an offsite meeting of the division's leaders resulted in some recommendations. First, a meeting of all employees was held that consisted of a series of workshops focused on projects under way in various countries. In these joint problem-solving sessions, people not only found solutions and shared recent successes but also learned about one another's expertise. And to make sure that this was not a one-off event, monthly conference calls were initiated to follow up on the projects discussed during the workshops. Just as important, the firm's leaders began to adopt policies and procedures that encouraged collaboration throughout the network. First, in hiring they began to target collaborative behaviors in interviews rather than focusing too heavily on individual accomplishment. Second, they changed project management and evaluation practices to ensure that people reached out to relevant colleagues for advice at the start of a research program. Third, the leaders centralized staffing to facilitate cross-group collaboration and to ensure that the best expertise was placed on each research project (rather than staffing locally from each country). Finally, they redesigned individual performance metrics to focus less on individual productivity and more on collaborative behaviors.
- Cross, Intro to ONA Identify a strategically important group. The first step is to identify a group within the organization where investments made to improve collaboration have the potential to yield a significant payback either strategically or operationally. We typically look for groups crossing functional, physical, hierarchical and organizational lines because networks often fragment at these junctures. 2. Assess meaningful and actionable relationships. The second step is to identify relationships that will meaningfully reveal a group's effectiveness as well as be actionable for managers once results are disclosed. Most companies are keenly interested in work-related collaboration. As a result, we almost always map information flow. We can also look at relationships that reveal the information sharing potential of a network, decision-making or power relations, or those that reveal well-being and supportiveness in a network such as friendship or trust networks. Organizational network information can be obtained in a variety of ways, from tracking e-mails to observing people over time. Often the most efficient means is to administer a 10-20 minute survey designed to assess relationships within and outside of a group. 3. Visually and quantitatively analyze results. Once the data have been collected, it can be analyzed using a network software package. There are a variety of different packages available, some of which combine drawing functionality with quantitative analysis and some of which specialize in one or the other. For more information on visual assessment see the interpreting a network diagram section. 4. Create meaningful feedback sessions. We typically conduct feedback sessions in two phases. In the first half of the workshop, we present an overview of network analysis to orient the participants, and then provide a summary presentation highlighting important points from the analysis of the specific group. The second half of the workshop consists of breakout sessions with smaller groups that brainstorm ways to promote appropriate connectivity and ensure that organizational design, culture and leadership will not push the network back to ineffective patterns. These subgroups then debrief the larger group, and ideas are catalogued for action planning. In this process, it is always important to focus on what can be done to improve the effectiveness of the group. Rather than questioning why someone or some department is peripheral or central, it is more constructive to focus on how the organization can overcome unproductive patterns. 5. Assess progress and effectiveness. Conducting an organizational analysis of a group indicates the level of connectivity only at a specific point in time. Repeating this process after six to nine months can reveal whether appropriate change has occurred in the network. It is also a good idea to track objective measures of performance over time.
- Picture courtesy of Richard McDermott, http://www.mcdermottconsulting.com/ Text from Steve Borgatti on social networks, National Academy of Science Presentation, 2005, http://www.analytictech.com/mb874/Slides/Overview.pdf FAS.Research (www.fas.at): The availability of resources (money, knowledge, relationships) is determined by where one stands, which position one assumes. For the costs of -access to these resources (= the costs of a “ link ” ) as well as the yields to be expected are also defined by the position in the network and by the general structure of the network. This is the central economic and business-related message of network analysis. The second message in this context is that the methods of network analysis can be used to measure and depict both dimensions (position and structure) in quantitative terms. Social capital also reveals both of these dimensions which must also be taken into account in a SWOT analysis based on the methods of social network analysis. The possibilities of added value, of innovation, chances for successful search processes for better solutions as well as the costs of adaptation to changes are distributed differently for each actor within one and the same network. This is not just because each actor assumes a different position and thus the costs of access to the limited resources vary, but also because with each position the immediate environment changes. Thus the character of the network (the “ network profile ” ) is a different one from the local perspective of the actor. Each actor in the network finds a different space of possibilities and has better or worse access to the existing resources by virtue of his relationships to the other actors. The network thus creates the social infrastructure of the opportunities offered to an actor. Networks – relationships iwth others, Political, economical social relationship All have relationships with others, we are all embedded in nws, We retrieve information and knowledge to arrange our lives Decide on success of our activities SNA Networks and underlying relationships – network analysis – Talk about unique relationships that make each individual. Here is a network - can be medicament, interlocking directors of companies. Network is system of relationships Look at people and re Have to look beyond your friends, who are their friends and relatinoshsip
- http://www.ux-sa.com/2007/09/structural-holes-and-online-social.html But avoid becoming a bottleneck!
- Rob Cross, Nitin Nohria and Andrew Parker, Six Myths About Informal Networks -- and How to Overcome Them, Sloan Management Review, 2002
- RT: Here is a quotation from Pierre Levy, a researcher who studies collective intelligence, or …. He says, ”No one knows……”, but I have adapted this to be that “all knowledge resides in networks”. What good is knowledge if you cannot access it? Knowledge is created and transferred through networks. How many of you have heard of six degrees of separation? (raise hands)…this means that we are collected to all other human beings on the face of the planet through six links, where a link is from me to person x in audience. Thus, each of us actually has access to all knowledge and resources that exist. (Next slide) mobile phone, internet, here could have farmer in Asia, President Obama, Zlatan, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MbX_I2fuqJk&feature=PlayList&p=079F3CFE9701D083&index=0 Pierre Lévy, Collective Intelligence: Mankind's Emerging World in Cyberspace , 1997 My example of how this presentation was made. Asked a question on Socnet and received many good answers with people ’s presentations and links to interesting sources
- Speaker notes Because as we see, position has a very important impact on performance. In my research, I was very interested in understanding the relationship between one ’s position in informal networks and performance. Here we find that A’s network is closed and the same knowledge goes round and round. He or She may get better and better at doing what they are doing but no new ideas come into the network – and this hampers creative performance. And as a result, A has a poor degree of creativity and innovative performance. However, if you look at B – we find that B has a high degree of creativity and innovative performance. B has access to several different networks of knowledge and thus can bring in new ideas and combine them with others from other networks, thus B is able to achieve a high degree of innovative and creative performance. This access to several networks is becoming increasingly important as the pace of change, especially technological change – continues to increase. In order for us to be able to continuously innovate as well as to be able to know what is happening in our external environment to make sure we are producing products that the market want, we need to have access to the right networks. So, on the one hand we have A who may be doing all the things right, but not doing the right thing while B can be doing all the right things. Next slide
- Kenneth Lay delegated responsibility to those in his old boys network – failed to listen to someone outside the club – Sherron Watkins.
- Leveraging external resources to find solutions and solve unsolved problems GoldCorp ... a mining company, 50 years old. Geologists couldn't tell him where the gold was. The CEO was ready to shut down the company. Heard about Linux ... and embraced the principles. Took his geological data, published it on the Internet, and held a contest on the Internet called the &quot;GoldCorp Challenge&quot;. Offered $500K for those who could find the gold. Found $3.4 billion of gold. Value jumped from $90 million to $10 billion. Wikipedia…The Canadian gold mining group Goldcorp made 400 megabytes of geological survey data on its Red Lake, Ontario property available to the public over the internet. They offered a $575,000 prize to anyone who could analyse the data and suggest places where gold could be found. The company claims that the contest produced 110 targets, over 80% of which proved productive; yielding 8 million ounces of gold, worth more than $3 billion.
- Ency picture from www.versandantiquariat-schmitz.de/Lexika-Brit... http://s3.amazonaws.com/ppt-download/architectures-for-conversation-ii-what-communities-of-practice-can-mean-for-information-architecture-5733.pdf An essential difference between britannica and wikipedia is >>britannica is a one-way medium, handed down from authorities, >> While wikipedia is conversational. It fulfills more of what human beings want in their daily life. That ’s not to say that wikipedia is better than britannica, or that the old way is evil or irrelevant. It ’s just to say that technology has tapped into a latent need people have to be part of conversations.
- I always like to put things into perspective. I think that what is interesting and relevant here is that several economic historians had actually predicted the crisis that we are experiencing now. I don ’t have time to go into all the details, but what we are seeing is a pattern repeating itself. As in the late 18 th and 19 th Centuries there was a technological innovation that led to a period first of transformation as the innovation began to be diffused, then a period of rationalization leading to an imbalance, and then to a financial crisis coming around 40 years after the innovation. However, in the past, these financial crises have then led to periods of great economic development – industrial revolutions, in which industry profitability has been restored through a redistribution of the value-added between capital and labor. But more importantly, these crises filtered out those organizations that could not adapt and change to stay competitive in the new industrial environment. And one of the most important things that is of interest for today ’s discussion is that in one of the factors facilitating these new phases of economic growth following the crisis has been that a generation of people that had never experienced life without the innovation starts to enter the workforce – thus they are not restricted by old ways of thinking. experiencing now some economic historians claim to be due to the innovation of the microprocessor and microelectronics in the 1970s. Similar to what we experienced with the innovation of the steam engine in the late 18 th C and the internal combustion engine and electric motor in the late 19 th C, there was a subsequent crisis about due to various forces converging. We saw that as these basic innovations were diffused, people stopped investing in the existing industrial structure and instead focused on investing in a new generation of competitive machinery, which then led to an industrial revolution in both cases as the innovations became embedded in society. At the same time, the crisis served to release the negative pressure that had been built up as well as to restore industry profitability through the redistribution of value-added between capital and labor. Other notes Notes from article - Schön, L, Economic Crises and Restructuring in History A crisis is connected with changes in the long term or structural conditions built up during a rather long period of time and effects behavior for a long time to come Transformation – changes in industrial structure – resources are reallocated between industries and diffusion of basic innovations with industry that provides new bases for such reallocation Rationalization – concentration of resources to most productive units within the branches and measures to increase efficiency in different lines of production Shifts between transformation and rationalization have occurred with considerable regularity in structural cycle of 40 years – 25 years on transformation, and 15 years on rationalization. Crises been part of this cycle as well International crisis in 1840s – How go from crisis to expansion quickly – went quite rapidly in 1930s for Sweden – but Sweden in opposite corner in 1970s 1850s – upswing of industrial and infrastructural investments was linked to breakthrough of mechanized factories in Sweden, modernization of steel processes and construction of railways 1930s and more marked after WWII late 1940s - expansion of electrification and diffusion of automobiles, processing of electrosteel to small motors in handicraft and household – combination with motorcar – new styles in living and consumption Waves of investments around development of an infrastructure from basic innovation of preceding cycle mid 1970s – microprocessor – knowledge and information in production of goods and services It is not the basic innovation itself – but the diffusion of the innovation that counts! When invented, then expensive to implement, have a narrow range of application – Following generalization – A structural crisis (that has been preceded by an early development of basic innovations) has put an end to old directions of investments mainly in rationalization of existing industrial structure and given rise to investments in ne and devt of new tech that after one decade (the length of the classical Juglar cycle of machinery investments) has created a new generation of economically competitive machinery Reallocation of labor occurs approx 15-30 years after the structural crisis Development of markets – distribution of value added between capital and labour is one mirror of these changes Diffusion of innovations leads to expansion of markets and arrival of new competitors – Structural crises – release negative pressure and restored profitability in industry – get rid of those who not competitive
- Picture source: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ford_assembly_line_-_1913.jpg
- What do these younger people expect? Many people 50 years – high dedication – Mindset – continues to be huge effort to get people to change - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MbX_I2fuqJk&feature=PlayList&p=079F3CFE9701D083&index=0 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOfUR1d9Lsw&feature=related Speaker notes: And that is exactly what we are seeing now. Here on this chart you can see the distribution of the population (US figures). On the right of the red line are the “digital immigrants” or those who did not grow up with digital technology such as the computer and the internet, while on the left of the red line we see the “digital natives” or those who have grown up with the internet always there. I would just like to say that I am not wild about this categorization, especially since I belong to the baby boomers but I see myself more of a digital native – I used to visit the university computer center with my father in the early 1970s, but I think that it works as a generalization to help explain the changes we are seeing. The interesting thing is that this new generation of workers is huge and is even larger than the babyboomers and in fact in the US, 56 mln are old enough to be employees with 7 million already managers. Those that are 38 and younger are the gamers and those that are 28 years and younger are the net-generation and we now have a new generation that is entering the workforce that has grown up with mobile phones. These generations have a different outlook on work, learning, and play. On the right hand side, we have individuals with a high degree of company loyalty and in which there was a clear line between work and one ’s personal or social life and play was something to be done only in one’s free time. However, in these new generations we have individuals who are more loyal to their peers and their professions – choosing to mix their working life with their personal life while also not seeing such a clear line between work and play. And anyway, who ever said that we cannot combine work and play? (Next slide) danah boyd: Unlike adults, who are relearning how to behave in public because of networked technologies, teens are simply learning how to behave in public with networked publics in mind. Other notes The new generation is huge - 90 million people in USA alone Larger than baby boomers 81% of US business population ≤ age 34 are gamers 56 million old enough to be employees 7 million already managers CNRS – isabelle berrebi Points: we are looking at a wave of Digital Natives that are already in our workforce. That design of learning will in large part be for some portion of these 90 million ameri