Leveraging social-networks-for-results-13338


Published on

Real Good theory

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Great to see so many people interested in networks. I came from Stanford where networking is part of everyday of life Started my PhD research over ten years ago and one of first things I did was to look at the knowledge flows between the r&D units of three multinationals, HP, Ericsson, and Xerox. At beginnign of knowledge management era and companies investing heavily in KM, these companies no exception. Found that top management invested heavily in different intranet applications, thinking understood how individuals worked. So for example, patent, then spoke with one of scientists and found that on one hand did not even access the intranet this application, nahh, just went next door to ask colleague who working with this. Much easier, faster, and better information. This got me started on my journey of looking into networks. Very much management not understanding the way work gets done and now with knowledge work, thinking can manage knowledge in same way managed physical resources of organization. But not the case… So here today to talk about networks
  • 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
  • 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 Figur 3. Gapet mellan tillväxten av ny kunskap respektive tillväxten av människans förmåga att absorbera kunskapen. (Fritt efter Robert Junks anförande vid framtidsseminarium i Salzburg1989) 3000 new books published daily One week’s issues of New York Times is more information than a person had access to during lifetime in 18th century. The amount of new information produced in number of bytes this year is more than was produced in the past 5000 years
  • 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 Figur 3. Gapet mellan tillväxten av ny kunskap respektive tillväxten av människans förmåga att absorbera kunskapen. (Fritt efter Robert Junks anförande vid framtidsseminarium i Salzburg1989) 3000 new books published daily One week’s issues of New York Times is more information than a person had access to during lifetime in 18th century. The amount of new information produced in number of bytes this year is more than was produced in the past 5000 years
  • The amount of new technical information is doubling every 2 years. It’s predicted to double every 72 hours by 2010.
  • What is interesting is that the world is shrinking bc becoming easier and easier to collaborate with others. Just 15 years ago, much more difficult to communicate with others outside of own organization. Had to go to conferences or located in your home town. Research has found that researchers in silicon valley and boston becoming increasingly connected. Now not only easier to communicate with those who do know outside organization, but easier to find others to collaborate with through mailing lists, electronic communities, and all social networking software. Six degrees of separation
  • 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 Began with 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.
  • How well members of this organization are aware of each other’s skills and capabilities? Mari Mattsson, Master's Thesis. Transactive Memory - "know-who" as resource in work organization. 2004
  • Ray-Adams & Sandberg, 2000, Connecting Firms: A Study of Interlocking Directorates in Sweden's 110 Largest Firms, An example from Swedish business - Sweden’s 110 largest fir´ms. Most members of boards are recommended by people on the board who know them already. This leads to a highly connected network of boards within Sweden. Who is powerful here? Study also found that boards extremely active in strategy development and implementation. Boards look for new members using headhunters, public sources, chairman’s networks, other directors’ networks? Networks and primarily chairman’s network. Rarely used public source or headhunters.
  • Peter Dahlin [peter.dahlin@mdh.se] This is an "ego-network" of Nocom meaning that it has Nocom as its hub. From there, it extends two steps out, i.e. includes those related to Nocom + those related to some company that is related to Nocom. The same goes for M&As (two steps out..) The relationships are of different kinds: customer-buyer relationships (black lines), partnerships (yellow) and ownerships (blue). This is a bit problematic since there can be several types of relations between two actors and only one will show when presented like this.. Note that this is based on the descriptions found in the newspaper articles on which I have based my data collection, so if a relationship is mentioned there it is included in my data (no further check-ups). There are naturally many actors and relationship missing in this picture. From the labels and sizes you can see that some of the central actors are Ericsson, Telia, Tietoenator, Merkantildata, Skandia, Nokia. The nationality is not easy to make out from the picture I'm afraid. I could naturally make the shape or color of the actors represent nationality, but I have decided not to emphasize the (inter)national aspects as my data collection is strongly focused on Swedish companies. The nationality of the actors in this picture is however varied but mostly Swedish.. Nocom AB (publ), www.nocom.se, är ett IT-företag, verksamt inom distribution och programvara. Huvudkontoret är beläget i Kista, Stockholm. Företaget grundades 1985 och noterades på Stockholmsbörsen 1999. Nocomaktien handlas på OMX Small Cap lista och det finns cirka 17 500 aktieägare. Verksamheten bedrivs i självständiga dotterbolag som arbetar under egna namn och affärsidéer. Totalt har koncernen cirka 270 anställda.
  • Teigland, Hallencreutz, Lundquist, Malmberg, and Waxell, Investigating the Uppsala Biotech Cluster. Research Paper 2004:1, Uppsala University, CIN. http://www.cind.uu.se/Uppsala_Biotech_Cluster.pdf We also investigated the degree of interaction between the various groups of actors within the Uppsala regional innovation system. Thus, we probed into both the respondent’s personal and his or her organization’s involvement in the Uppsala biotech cluster. This interaction between the various actors was measured in several ways in the survey. One measure of interaction asked respondents to rate how much time they personally spent together with people from various categories of actors of the Uppsala biotech cluster on social occasions . In this case, replies were rated on a seven-point scale from 1, “not at all” to 7, “to a great extent”. We find a similar picture to the other interaction questions. For example, as reported by government, the frequency of interaction by government organizations with academic/research organizations is 4.0, while the frequency of interaction by government with financial actors is only 1.7. The academic/research category and government organizations are close to each other while government is distant to all types of commercial actors. Another interesting observation is the degree to which the actor in general interacts with other categories. For example, the financial services category reports by far the highest overall degree of inter-category personal social interaction while the government category reports the lowest. To be conducted: Flow of resources, Power structure, Performance
  • 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
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • 1 out of 4 workers today is working for a company they have been employed by for less than one year. More than 1 out of 2 are working for a company they have worked for less than five years. Today’s learner will have 10-14 jobs by age of 38
  • 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.
  • Well-known theory within social networks, the theory of weak ties by famous sociologist at Stanford, Mark Granovetter. Studied how inds found jobs. Saw that those with high number of weak ties found job more easily than those with few strong ties. Info, kn is redundant within tight network. Those who know well, all know about same jobs, but it is the weak ties that helps out. Your brief contacts that can help out. Fresh non-redundant info. Same goes for when working in firm. Able to take kn from across organization and combine into new creative idea.
  • 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
  • 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.
  • 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
  • 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.
  • Alliances - In addition, they found that successful collaboration between university and industry was often the result of emergent personal relationships. Kreiner & Schulz RD - 40% of potential solutions and opportunities derived from personal external contacts powell et al - interorganizational networks in biotech industry provide knowledge critical to innovation mgt unaware of what going on - 10 vs 57 ongoing efforts at partnering in multinational telecom company.
  • 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
  • Minister of Labour, Mr. Sven Otto Littorin
  • If a tree falls in a forest and there is no one to hear it fall…
  • Rob Cross, Nitin Nohria and Andrew Parker, Six Myths About Informal Networks -- and How to Overcome Them, Sloan Management Review, 2002
  • Photo courtesy of tschaut’s photos, http://www.flickr.com/photos/tschaut/ Stocks of socialt kapital tend to be self-reinforcing and cumulative based on the principle of contribution and reciprocity Successful collaboration in one endeavor builds stronger relationship and trust socialt kapital facilitates future collaboration on other, unrelated tasks As with conventional kapital, those who have socialt kapital tend to accumulate more Goes against knowledge is power
  • Leveraging social-networks-for-results-13338

    1. 1. Leveraging Networks for Tangible Results Dr. Robin Teigland Stockholm School of Economics [email_address] www.knowledgenetworking.org
    2. 2. Everyone is talking about networks National Innovation Networks Formal Networks Entrepreneurial Networks Ego Networks Regional Networks Infrastructure Networks Social Networks FAS.research Electronic Networks Informal Networks Networks of Practice Networked organization
    3. 3. A world of rapidly growing knowledge …. Growth Time Information and knowledge Human absorptive capacity Cohen & Levinthal 1989
    4. 4. A world of rapidly growing knowledge …. > One week in 2007 A person’s lifetime in 18th century
    5. 5. A world of rapidly growing knowledge …. 50% knowledge relevant 50% knowledge outdated First year of technical-based education Third year of education
    6. 6. ....that is increasingly connected new friends family local colleagues old friends old colleagues colleagues at other offices Just a click away… virtual communities local networks old classmates
    7. 7. <ul><li>” No one knows everything, </li></ul><ul><li>everyone knows something, </li></ul><ul><li>all knowledge resides in humanity.” </li></ul>networks. Lévy 1997
    8. 8. What is a network? A set of actors connected by ties <ul><li>Ties/Links </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Knowledge, trust, team, sit by, dislike, etc. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Alliance, customer, investment, etc. </li></ul></ul>Tie <ul><li>Actors/Nodes </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Individuals </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Teams, organizations, etc. </li></ul></ul>Actor
    9. 9. Swedish hip hop artists Liljeros 2006 ?? Timbuktu
    10. 10. Individuals within a firm Mattsson 2004 < 1 yr 1-5 yrs 5-10 yrs 10-15 yrs > 15 yrs Time at firm
    11. 11. Individuals between business firms SEB Ray-Adams & Sandberg 2000 Interlocking directorates of Sweden’s 110 largest public firms, 2000 ??
    12. 12. Networks of firms Dahlin 2007 Nocom Ericsson Telia Nokia TietoEnator
    13. 13. Groups of organizations (Sectors) Teigland et al. 2004 Social interaction in Uppsala Biotech Cluster Government Inter-sector organizations Academia Biotech firms Servicefirms Financial Institutions
    14. 14. Uncovering networks in an organization Teigland et al. 2005 Formal organization Informal organization
    15. 15. Central connectors within one location Bottleneck  Teigland 1998 Surprise!! Stockholm
    16. 16. Boundary spanners between locations Stockholm London Brussels Helsinki Madrid Copenhagen Transferred from Stockholm Teigland 1998 San Francisco
    17. 17. Trust & reciprocity are essential for knowledge exchange in networks
    18. 18. Peripheral players between organizations San Francisco Stockholm London Brussels Helsinki Madrid Copenhagen Teigland 1998 Other firms Electronic communities
    19. 19. Dual loyalties Loyalty Loyalty Organization Professional network
    20. 20. Increasing job turnover Time Number of jobs in lifetime Estimated time at one organization in Silicon Valley: ~18 months
    21. 21. What about performance? Firm A High creative Low on-time High on-time Low creative Teigland 2003 High creative Virtual community Firm B
    22. 22. The strength of weak ties Network A’s knowledge Network D’s knowledge Network B’s knowledge Network C’s knowledge Granovetter 1973
    23. 23. Two divisions within Sundlink (Öresund Bridge) Section 1 Section 2 Improved efficiency over time Stagnant performance over time Schenkel & Teigland 2007
    24. 24. Comparing across firms Teigland et al 2000
    25. 25. Hewlett-Packard (1990s) <ul><li>Networking activities recognized and rewarded at individual and unit levels </li></ul><ul><li>Management support for informal and formal networking activities across internal and external boundaries </li></ul><ul><li>Extensive socialization : personnel rotation, cross-office teams </li></ul><ul><li>A visionary organization </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Clearly defined mission: ”To make technical contributions for the advancement and welfare of humanity” </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Supporting core values, e.g., teamwork </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Company-wide goal of World’s Best Laboratory </li></ul></ul>
    26. 26. Other network outcomes? <ul><li>Individual level </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Improved effectiveness </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Improved job opportunities </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Higher salaries </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Faster promotions </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Increased influence & power </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Improved health </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Organizational level </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Organizational learning </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Improved innovation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Increased sales </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Decreased employee turnover </li></ul></ul>Painting by Idahlia Stanley
    27. 27. Myths about networks <ul><li>I already know what is going on in my network </li></ul><ul><li>We can’t do much to help informal networks </li></ul><ul><li>To build networks, you have to communicate more </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Adapted from Cross et al. 2002 </li></ul></ul>
    28. 28. More social get-togethers and coffee breaks are not the solution
    29. 29. “Managing” networks in your organization Before After Anklam & Welch 2005 1. Uncover networks 2. Analyze networks 3. Improve connectedness
    30. 30. When you hire someone,… … ..you “hire” his or her network.
    31. 31. Encourage an open innovation attitude Not all the smart people work for us. We need to work with smart people inside and outside the company. The smart people in our field work for us. If you create the most and the best ideas in the industry, you will win. If you make the best use of internal and external ideas, you will win. Closed attitude Open attitude Chesborough 2003
    32. 32. So, what does this mean for you? <ul><li>An actor’s position in a social network, i.e., social capital, determines in part the actor’s opportunities and constraints </li></ul>Casper & Murray 2002 German biotech scientists
    33. 33. What can you do? <ul><li>Where do you sit? </li></ul><ul><li>With whom do you eat lunch? </li></ul><ul><li>With whom do you socialize? </li></ul><ul><li>To which communities, networks do you belong? </li></ul><ul><li>Think strategically… </li></ul><ul><li>How are decisions made in your organization? </li></ul><ul><li>What information flows would you like to be in? </li></ul><ul><li>What resources will you need in the future? </li></ul>
    34. 34. Develop participation in a variety of networks Strong ties Weak ties Outside organization Inside organization SOCNET
    35. 35. Start your own network Swedish International Business School Alumni Network (SIBSAN) Stanford GSB Alumni Club Nobel Laureates Government Ministers Stanford
    36. 36. But……. <ul><li>“ Lika barn leka bäst” </li></ul><ul><ul><li>People find similar people attractive and develop relations with people like themselves </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Our networks tend to be homogeneous </li></ul><ul><li>and not heterogeneous </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Marsden 1987, Burt 1990 </li></ul></ul>
    37. 37. Go meet someone different
    38. 38. Make yourself easy to find - Create a live CV <ul><li>Blog </li></ul><ul><ul><li>blogger, livejournal, typepad, wordpress, etc. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Social software </li></ul><ul><ul><li>LinkedIn </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Shortcut </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>ecademy </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Media </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Slideshare.net </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Flickr.com </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>YouTube.com </li></ul></ul>
    39. 39. Myths and reality checks <ul><li>I already know what is going on in my network </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Those who think they know their network the best are usually the ones who know the least </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>We can’t do much to help informal networks </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Informal networks can be “managed” through changing the organizational context </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>To build networks, you have to communicate more </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Networks can be strategically developed </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Adapted from Cross et al. 2002 </li></ul></ul>
    40. 40. The positive spiral of social networks tschaut’s photos Contribution Reciprocity Accumulation Value
    41. 41. References and acknowledgements <ul><li>Books </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Barabási, Linked: The New Science of Networks . Perseus, 2002 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Castells, The Rise of the Network Society . Blackwell, 2000 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Cross & Parker, The Hidden Power of Social Networks . Harvard Business School, 2004 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Gladwell, The Tipping Point . Abacus, 2001 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Scott, Social Network Analysis . Sage, 2000 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Teigland, Knowledge Networking , SSE, 2003 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Teten & Allen, The Virtual Handshake . Creative Commons, 2007 </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Homepages </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Stephen Bird, people.bu.edu/sbird </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Steve Borgatti, www.socialnetworkanalysis.com </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Rob Cross, www.robcross.org </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>International Network for Social Network Analysis http://www.insna.org/ </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>David Krackhardt, www.andrew.cmu.edu/user/krack/index.shtml </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Valdis Krebs, www.orgnet.com </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Fredrik Liljeros, www.sociology.su.se/home/Liljeros/index.html </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>James Moody, www.soc.duke.edu/~jmoody77/presentations/index.htm </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Giancarlo Oriani, www.informalorg.eu (In Italian) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Barry Wellman, www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman/ </li></ul></ul>
    42. 42. Go network! Thanks!!!