Email
Like
Liked ×
Save
Private Content
Embed
Loading embed code…
We have emailed the verification/download link to "".
Login to your email and click the link to download the file directly.

To request the link at a different email address, update it here. Close
Validation messages. Success message. Fail message.

Check your bulk/spam folders if you can't find our mail.
Loading

+ Follow

Leadership and Web 2.0

by Leadership Learning Community on Aug 06, 2012

368 views

In this webinar Dr. Grady McGonagill, LLC board member and principal of McGonagill Consulting, presenst key findings from his new book—Leadership and Web 2.0: The Leadership Implications of the ...

In this webinar Dr. Grady McGonagill, LLC board member and principal of McGonagill Consulting, presenst key findings from his new book—Leadership and Web 2.0: The Leadership Implications of the Evolving Web—which he has co-authored with Tina Doerffer from the Bertelsmann Foundation in Germany. The Webinar will offer an overview of the leadership constraints and opportunities being generated through innovations in Internet-based technology.

Accessibility

View text version

Upload Details

Uploaded via SlideShare as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

File a copyright complaint

2 Embeds 182

http://leadershiplearning.org	179
http://www.leadershiplearning.org	3

Statistics

Likes: 0
Downloads: 0
Comments: 0
Embed Views: 182
Views on SlideShare: 186
Total Views: 368

I’d like to position the perspective that I’m about to offer by saying something about its history and by being candid about what I think it’s strengths and limits are: I
It is based on a study that has become a book, available on Amazon as a paper back this month, and already available on Kindle. Sponsorship: It was sponsored by the Bertelsmann Foundation in Germany, Europe‘s largest foundation. I had been invited to do a previous study on Leadership Development best practices, based on my expertise as 30 years of consulting and coaching on leadeship and leadership development. I created a chapter inthat book on the impact of the web on l eadership development, which interested my client at the Foundation, Tina Doerffer, who invited me to do a follow up study on that topic. It became a book, for which I invited tina to be co-author, as her partership had been so influential in my approach. (Tina nominated me to be a board member of LLC). Approach I approached the study by assessingthe impact of the Web on organizations in each of the sectors. And then explored the implications for leadership Methods The book is not based Interviews with experts, review of books, articles, Web. It‘s strength is that it synthesizes all the infromatoin I could get my hands on in the period 2009-2011.
I came to this study with an many years of study, practice, and research on leadership development But only moderate knowledge of the emerging digital world. About average for a self-employed consultant with office technology, and a teenage daughter who grew up digital. One limit is that my knowledge of the Web was not deep and still is not deep in the sense of someone who has a great deal of practical experience with web tools. The strength is that I came to the study with fairly fresh eyes. Kind of like an anthropologist visiting a new and strange culture. As a result I think I have been able to see some larger patterns in how organizations are changing, and illustrate them with many examples I think that I’ll be able to expand your awareness of the implications of the Web. But not being a leader in the nonprofit world myself, and not being a practitioner of web tools, it may be less helpful in providing highly practical and specific tips.
The first thing I had to do was make sense of the Web. Let me shorten your learning curve by sharing this map. It simplifies, but I believe in a way that is useful: Web 1.0 in which tools for faster, cheaper and more convenient forms of communication (e.g., e-mail) became widely available and used; Web 2.0 use of another set of new tools for communication (e.g., wikis and blogs) began enabling interaction and communication in transformative ways; and Web 3.0 new platforms for storing data (e.g., you may have heard of “the Cloud”) and ways of managing knowledge (e.g., tags)
Comparisons with the invention of the printing press are often made. I think the analogy is not an exaggeration Clay Shirky, goes further to say that because of the Web, “The Gutenberg revolution is over” This revolution has impacted organizations in all 3 traditional sectors—business, government, and the social sector I’d like to describe 4 patterns of transformation that I see across all sectors, Using examples primarily from the social sector, since that’s where all of the people signed up for this webinar (as of last week) are from.
INTERNAL openness Blogging, It would be hard to find a major corporation without one, and many CEOs have personal blogs. Several years ago Beth’s Blog featured 8 nonprofit CEOs who used Twitter. It included the CEOs or Presidents of the Sierra Club, the Environmental Defense Fund , and Planned Parenthood. The styles range from describing activities, offering opinions about issues, and sharing personal stories. Internal YouTubes. Y o utube has a special feature enabling nonprofits to set up their own youtube. EXTERNAL transparency The Lumina Foundation for Education “has posted its strategic planning process, the plan itself, and the progress measures being used on an interactive website to which the public can contribute comments. The foundation also has a YouTube channel on which the public can watch and comment on video interviews with key decision-makers” (Bernholz, Skloot and Varela 2010: 22). Less choice about availability of data. Guidestar makes non profit IRS data available. Charity Navigator rates nonprofits on criteria Yelp has reviews of some nonprofits—in Boston there are reviews of hospitals and churches.
Accessing expertise outside the organization “ It has always been true that there are a lot more smart people outside any particular company than within it. But there was little to be done about this reality until recently. But that is changing with the help of the Web” (Hagel III, Brown and Davison 2010: 75). The MacArthur Foundation hosted online discussions between clusters of grantees and issue experts (Luckey, O'Kane and Nee 2008: 3). This is an example of Crowdsourcing –which is the act of taking a task traditionally performed by an employee or contractor and outsourcing it to an undefined and generally large group of people or a community by making an open call for assistance. Non-profits such as the Rockefeller Foundation are following the lead of private companies in using crowdsourcing, through organizations such as InnoCentive as a broker to get creative, cost effective solutions. Bringing customers/citizens/stakeholders into the decision-making process Around product or program design. The Omidyar Network , a philanthropy launched by eBay founder Pierre Omidyar, asked the public to participate in awarding its grants. It created an online framework for the interested community to deliberate on and winnow down the proposals The David and Lucile Packard Foundation is using a public wiki to gather insights from stakeholders to inform its grant-making strategy related to nitrogen pollution. Cf. https://nitrogen.packard.org .
In part this is an emergence of awareness around the power of networks, particularly informal ones in organizations. In part it’s through discovery of their power.through innovative experiments. And in part its because of the increasing ease of supporting and creating networks through Web technolocy. The prevalence and power of networks has been documented in a paper by LLC: “Leadership and Networks.” A couple of examples from our study will illustrate this point: One shows how the web is enabling the linking of individuals to form organizations Ushahidi emerged as a group of volunteers spread over two continents and several countries, interesting in pooling information relevant to solving social problems. It is now an organization that is mostly virtual Forming strategic alliances with other organizations through networks of communication/collaboration In 1990, Women’s World Banking served 50,000 women with microfinance services. Ten years later, it served 10 million by fostering a network of affiliates and associates that were themselves independent organizations. The founder, Nancy Barry, suggests that “instead of thinking about management challenges at the organizational level, leaders should think about how best to mobilize resources both within and outside organizational boundaries to achieve their social aims” (ibid.: 2).
Space: Spread of Arab spring (not just in middle east, but to New York—occupy wall street) Time haiti). Social networks enabled people concerned about the Haiti earthquake to generate an unprecedented amount of both money and expertise in a remarkably short period of time. As Bernholz et al. write: “Many used social networks to spread word of the disaster, round up funds and volunteers, and stay informed about developments in Port-au-Prince. To date , more than $1 billion has been collected for relief and reconstruction, with the average donation via the Internet at a mere $1 0” (Bernholz, Skloot and Varela 2010: 24). Case of Komens foundation and Planned Parenthood. Fueled by a firestorm of outrage on Twitter and Facebook, the people behind the Susan G. Komen For the Cure Friday backed off their decision to cut funding of Planned Parenthood programs. On Tuesday, Planned Parenthood alerted its twitter followers that the Komen organization had stopped funding for breast cancer screenings at its health centers around the country. After three days of protests by Planned Parenthood backers, Komen today reversed that decision and said it will continue its previous funding plans. The decision comes after thousands of people took took their fury to sites like Facebook, Twitter, Google+ and Komen's own message board. Supporters of Planned Parenthood this week relentlessly posted comments about the situation, along with links to news articles and retweeted messages. They essentially kept the discussion going and kept the pressure on Komen
From organization-centric For most of the past century, Organization-centric engagement has been the dominant mode whereby nonprofits have engaged the public--individuals working through social-sector and advocacy organizations with a governing board and centralized leadership. For many years, there has appeared to be a choice between getting things done by the state or by businesses, with foundations filling the gap in between. Almost exactly 100 years ago, Andrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller established centralized, vertically integrated foundations modeled on the big businesses that had given them their fortunes (steel and oil, respectively). This institutional structure has remained the predominant model for organized philanthropy for almost a century. The tacit assumption has been that people could not self-assemble. But electronic networks are enabling novel forms of collective action because they have made assembling so much easier. Now it is possible to have groups that “operate with a birthday party’s informality and a multi-national’s scope” and that emerge through “ridiculously easy group forming” (Shirky 2008: 54, quoting Seb Paque). As a result, we are beginning to see other models of civic engagement. From organizations “ We are living in the middle of a remarkable increase in our ability to share, to cooperate with one another, and to take collective action, all outside the framework of traditional institutions and organizations. “ Shirky p. 21 Institutional dilemma : they exist to take advantage of group effort, but some of its resources are consumer by directing that effort. Institutions are now vulnerable to becoming uneconomical in comparison to networks that organize without an institutional infrastructure.
As a result of this pattern in the social sector, and parallel distinctive patterns in other sectors, I believe evidence of a new leadership paradigm. This quote comes from a white paper from the Center for Creative Leadership ................. I need to confess I‘m having a bit of fun in offering this quote. Petrie is quoting the study that I did that was the basis for my book. So I‘m quoting someone quoting me. But I feel justified in doing so because the white paper quotes the study 4 times, 3 times in sidebars. There are many indicators of this new paradigm. The study identified 7. Let me name just a few [next slide]
From „machine“ to „complex adaptive organism“ If the organizatoin is a machine, it‘s appropriate to take an approach of „command and control“. But if the organixzation is a complex adaptive organism, it‘s more appropriate to „sense and respond“ From control to letting go One of the books that we found very helpful is called „The Art of Letting Go.“ Those who are able to take the risk of letting go may discover that they gain enormous opportunities to learn and extend their influence—while losing little more than the illusion of being in control.
Interpersonal/Influence skills. Influence is more lateral than hierarchical, continuing a trend that‘s been evident for some time. But there‘s a new dimension: Network leadership Coaching. If anything the need for coaching expands as the result of the need for more leadership development Team/group facilitation. Remains important but needs to be supplemented by Virtual Team Leadership Systems thinking is increasingly important as the web breaks down boundaries. But to act on this systemic perspective requires Cross-boundary leadership Information/knowledge management Information filtering Knowledge management—files? Advanced search skills
Leaders must have personal knowledge and experience with Web 2.0, so that they understand the power and potential of tools such as Wikis, blogs, Text messages, Tweets, and social media websites such as Facebook If you were to take away one thing from this webinar, I would want it to be the realization that Web Literacy is both essential to leadership and potentially transforming personally to become comfortable in this new world. Joining and participating in several major social networks, such as Facebook , Twitter , LinkedIn and YouTube I got great value from taking several Web-based courses in social media. The courses were offered by Blue Oxen Associates and Get Storied.com . If you lead a team or department you can encourage others to engage in similar learning, acting as scouts and reporting back. “
The age of the individual “heroic” leader is coming to a close. As James Surowiecki has documented in The Wisdom of the Crowd, t here is evidence that under many conditions groups make better decisions than individuals. The Leadership paradigm has been moving in the direction of shared leadership for some time. The Web is simply accelerating that trend Grantmakers for Effective Organizations generated a very helpful 2-volume study by Kathleen Enright and Barbara Hubbard on Investing in Leadership Development, which documents the trend away from leader development and toward leader ship development. This reflects a recognition that leadership is increasing shared or even collective. But even when it makes sense for an individual decide, collective input and participation is increasingly necessary in a complex world that is changing at an accelerated pace. There is probably a range within this group of the value of heroic leadership, and the ease and appropriateness of shared or collective leadership. But it’s worth asking yourself what steps you might take to explore the new paradigm. Whether it has come to your organization or not, it’s on it’s way. There are advantages to getting out in front by being proactive, rather than being forced to adopt.
The move from command and control to Effective “ Sensing and Responding“ requires cultures that are more learning oriented --Learning from experience, and from mistakes. Cultures that have a hi gher tolerance for mistakes. In a world of constant flux, survival means adaptation, and no person or organization can adapt without making mistakes. A model here comes from the „patch“ culture of software development , in which it is expected that there will be errors, or bugs. Software developers need others in the community to find and correct those errors. So too, anyone exercising leadership depends on s others finding and pointing out their errors, contributing to a better result. As a leader you can enourage such cultures by conducting after-action-reviews and communicating a tolerance for error so long as it is accompanied by learning.
Most organizations probably have some kind of policy governing web practices by this point, but if yours doesn’t, being proactive is helpful. important. It’s easy for a Web strategy to get decided by default, and by the wrong people. A lesson I learned the hard way in doing this study is that “there is a world of difference between the experience and mindsets of “IT people” and “Internet people.” What you don’t want to have happen is to let IT people claim ownership of Web policies and strategies. Make sure that these policies are shaped at the highest levels of your organization, as part of a long-term thinking process. Ideally, internal policies on Web use by employees should be grounded in an overall strategy for use of the Web in achieving organizational goals. Such goals will help you determine how open it makes sense to be. In the corporate world, a surprisingly high percentage of web policies forbid use of social media of any kind at work. Don’t know about the nonprofit world, but I regard that as a mistake. If you don’t have a social media policy there are plenty of examples (where else?!) online, some of which articulate the organization’s overall strategy, like Bread for the world, and some of which offer guidance on how to use Web tools, such as the Open Society Foundations. http://socialmediagovernance.com/policies.php?f=5
Though it depends on your organization’s goals, it will probably make sense to be more open, both internally and externally, than has traditionally been the case. So the first step I recommend is to consider ways of opening up communication, both internally and externally, Internally, it makes sense to look for ways to r educe silos Silos prevent the internal communication and collaboration required for to good ideas to finid their way into effective action. Similarly, it makes sense to look forways to reduce hierarchy. The Web can help reduce the self-insulation of leadership positions, and can motivate staff by engaging them. Particularly those who grew up digital. An example of an organization that has taken steps to do this is The Open Society Institute , Founded by the Hungarian investment guru George Soros. In recognition of the need to create better communication among different program areas in OSI, and to improve better communication among different offices, it created a web-based platform playfully called KARL, in honor of the philosopher Karl Popper, a teacher of Soros’s who was an advocate of open society. uses wikis, blogs, tagging and other Web 2.0 tools to enable communication and collaboration among employees separated by culture, geography and program boundaries. KARL also facilitates communication between the organization and its grantees and partners.
Loosen boundaries around your organization. I mentioned earlier that some nonprofits are making their boundaries more porous by tapping external expertise: One way to do this is to try out crowdsourcing Example from Innocentive: (org is anonymous) Given the reality of stock market ups and downs, create a simple and compelling message to explain why it is so important for people to have a reliable, regular paycheck in retirement, which will give them a steady income stream for the rest of their life. We will present a $500 Award for the best idea, and also a $250 Award for the next best - as determined by our judges .
I take the metaphor of embracing networks from the LLC paper of Leadership and Networks, which encourages non-profits to “Embrace a network mindset” Independent of the Web, it’s useful my experience for people in to become aware of informal networks within their organization. Mapping internal networks—for which there are now many tools—is a way of understand how influence takes place. The Web just makes it much easier to create and maintain networks, internally and externally. A useful exercise, looking outward, is to inventory the networks your organization is a part of, and how you might exercise network leadership by convening or promoting a dialog or an action using the web.
A final suggestion, which can be applied to Numbers 1-5 above, is to experiment. Review what’s been tried elsewhere and see whether you can imagine something like that working in your situation [make copy of study available]
It’s easy to find advocates of either answer. And it’s probably too soon to tell. It’s clear that you don’t get transformation of this magnitude without disruptions that bring with them a heavy cost to some. And Is WikiLeaks a boon or a bane? Or, more likely, both? I come out on the side of the optimists. With respect to the Web as a whole, and as regards the implications for leadership. The first thing that shaped that view was all the remarkable things that are happening in organizations in every sector. I’d like to look at those patterns of change first, then at the implications for leadership.
Observers differ as to whether they see the glass half full or half empty. No one can be sure And it’s clear there are downsides to the Web: many risks and potential threats But we side with the optimists. This is a remarkable era, of tremendous opportunity
There are new examples every day of Web 2.0 use in the social sector, which radically alters the landscape for leadership in this sector, as in others They range from new ways to attract resources, to social sector examples of ecosystems, I’d like to give some examples in the context of implications for leadership, where I next turn. But rather than go through this list I’d like to open up for questions, which could guide what I say. I won’t be able to cover all the examples that might be useful. But what I can do is send all of you a copy of the book manuscript in PDF form.
Fundraising Social networks enabled people concerned about the Haiti earthquake to generate an unprecedented amount of both money and expertise in a remarkably short period of time. As Bernholz et al. write: “Many used social networks to spread word of the disaster, round up funds and volunteers, and stay informed about developments in Port-au-Prince. To date, more than $1 billion has been collected for relief and reconstruction, with the average donation via the Internet at a mere $10” (Bernholz, Skloot and Varela 2010: 24). Similarly, volunteer-driven “flash” causes can create tremendous impact by drawing attention to an issue for a very brief period of time. “Some can even move a fair amount of money. In February 2009, “ charity: water ” raised hundreds of thousands of dollars through parties in more than 100 cities, all organized by volunteers via Twitter . These dispersed, crowd-organized events are common tools of community organizing and political fundraising and are increasingly present in campaigns for charitable support” (ibid.: 38). Creating individualized ways to donate Kiva.org , a microlending site, allows people to easily lend money to the working poor. So far, according to Kiva's reports, some 520,000 people have loaned more than $80 million to people in 184 countries. Using PayPal or a credit card, a visitor to the Kiva website can loan a struggling entrepreneur in a developing country $25 or more. The site says the money is usually paid back within a year. Other microlending sites include DonorsChoose and GlobalGiving .
As we saw in the private sector, non profits orgs are using social media to open up internal communication Improving internal communication and knowledge management Paul Levy, CEO of Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center , created a public blog to “share thoughts with people about my experience here and their experiences in the hospital world.” Through an internal blog, staff members at ZeroDivide document lessons learned as the foundation implements a new grant-making program to support social enterprises (Luckey, O'Kane and Nee 2008: 3). “ The Open Society Institute’s KARL” uses wikis, blogs, tagging and other Web 2.0 tools to enable communication and collaboration among employees separated by culture, geography and program boundaries. KARL also facilitates communication between the organization and its grantees and partners. Alternative forms of organization and governance Ushahidi “was started by an unincorporated group of colleagues spread over two continents and several countries. Even though the informal, networked structure proved capable of building an effective platform for the advancement of social good, that same structure proved to be a stumbling block for raising foundation funds. It didn’t conform to the organizational model funders understood and were comfortable with” (Bernholz, Skloot and Varela 2010: 26). Levy’s first blog post, quoted in Li 2010: 27. Personal communication from Thomas Moroz, co-director of KARL, August 2009.
Reflecting a pattern in the private sector…you see lots of examples of Crowdsourcing The David and Lucile Packard Foundation is using a public wiki to gather insights from stakeholders to inform its grant-making strategy related to nitrogen pollution. Cf. https://nitrogen.packard.org . Opening up goal-setting and strategy formulation The Smithsonian Institution used a wiki to crowdsource its strategic plan (Kanter 2009c).
Encourage your org. leadership to use social media. Several years ago Beth’s Blog featured 8 nonprofit CEOs who used Twitter. It included the CEOs or Presidents of the Sierra Club, the Environmental Defense Fund , and Planned Parenthood. The styles range from describing activities, offering opinions about issues, and sharing personal stories. Can use web tools to open up communication and collaboration The Open Society Institute created an online collaborative platform in response to the realization that different programs and geographic locations operate in silos. There has been great interest in Microsoft’s Sharepoint
Connecting grantees with peers and experts The MacArthur Foundation hosted online discussions between clusters of grantees and issue experts (Luckey, O'Kane and Nee 2008: 3). . Sharing knowledge and interacting with the wider community The Natural Capital Institute created WiserEarth.org in 2005 to “identify and connect the hundreds of thousands of organizations and individuals throughout the world working in the fields of environmental sustainability and social justice.”
In the aftermath of the major devastation in Haiti due to an earthquake, “we have seen how quickly and on how large a scale individuals and organizations can collaborate on behalf of others. In a matter of days, three platforms—text donations, Twitter and Facebook —moved from the philanthropic margins to the center of both fundraising and volunteer activity. Mobilizing people rapidly “ Smart mobs”—large groups of people linked by cell phones, text messages, emails or other technologies—can assemble suddenly in a public place to perform some collective action in support of a cause. This was demonstrated for the first time in the Philippines in 2001 to protest government corruption and help oust then-President Joseph Estrada (Rheingold 2003, as reported in Shirky 2008: 174–175). Sounding crisis alerts and providing support The Katrina PeopleFinder Project evolved to engage volunteer programmers in developing a single site that allowed people to search dozens of separate databases and message forums to find lost relatives after Hurricane Katrina (Tapscott and Williams, 2006: 186–188).
Extending services through affiliated organizations In 1990, Women’s World Banking served 50,000 women with microfinance services. Ten years later, it served 10 million by fostering a network of affiliates and associates that were themselves independent organizations. The founder, Nancy Barry, suggests that “instead of thinking about management challenges at the organizational level, leaders should think about how best to mobilize resources both within and outside organizational boundaries to achieve their social aims” (ibid.: 2). Providing citizen access to useful information Safe2Pee.org helps people find public toilets. Couchsurfing.com helps people make connections with people living in places they travel to and find a place to stay.
Enhancing measurement of performance Success Measures has created a variety of web-based evaluation framework designs. As Bernholz et al. write: “Groups can aggregate data, download them to Excel to create spreadsheets and graphs, and contribute to the further refinement of Success Measures frameworks, tools and indicators by sharing what they learned.” (ibid.: 27–28). Improved data gathering YouthTruth (a partnership between the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the Center for Effective Philanthropy )) “distributed a survey online (via MySpace and Facebook , via email and with the help of MTV ) to high school students attending schools receiving funding from the Gates Foundation. The data collected are used to inform the schools, the funders, and the evaluators” (ibid.: 28). Enabling transparency of communication with grantees and easing grant-making transactions DonorsChoose.org is an online marketplace for connecting donors with opportunities to support public schools (Monitor Institute and David and Lucile Packard Foundation 2007: 9)
It’s now possible to barter for or donate goods simply by posting on FreeCycle or Craigslist (Bernholz, Skloot and Varela 2010: 14). Timebanks.org has created a system that “connects unmet needs with untapped resources.” It does so by using the soft currency of contributed time to reward participants who volunteer their skills by enabling them to trade their accumulated credit for access to skills contributed by others. The Extraordinaries is a pioneer in the new field of “microvolunteering,” linking volunteers with a mobile phone and a few minutes to spare to organizations in need of assistance. (See the more detailed case description in Section 3.2.3 below.)
And we offer 5 examples of theories that are consistent with a new paradigm, which I will also not comment on. Those with a more theoretical interest can read about this in the study. Criteria: Supportive of emergence Cognizant of complexity Adaptive Integral Outcome-oriented [
Culture is hard to change. It’s based on what has worked in the past. One way to chip away at existing culture is to demonstrate the effectiveness of a new way of working. That’s what happened at the American Red Cross. Wendy Harman was actually hired to develop a web strategy, after the Red Cross’s embarrassment at its response to Katrina. But existing IT and other policies tied her hands. She decided to do an end run.. She used her own resources to create a domain name began generating a network presences. Over a period of a couple of years she had developed a network capacity that enabled the Red Cross to raise $10 million dollars in 3 days in response to the Haiti earthquake.
Overcoming barriers of geography and language . Nortel uses advanced video and data-networking technologies to offer a Virtual Leadership Academy monthly in 47 countries, with simultaneous translation from English into Spanish and Portuguese. The technology enables real-time response to questions and concerns (Day & Halpin, 2001, p. 21). Virtual access to conferences . Conference presentations are beginning to be available virtually. The Shambhala Institute for Authentic Leadership now offers virtual access to its current leadership workshop to graduates of previous programs. And blogging and texting of conferences has begun to offer enhanced information sharing among attendees as well as enable outside access to a broader audience. More powerful and individualized means of keeping informed . It is now possible to track areas of interest easily by subscribing to an RSS feed, enrolling in Twine, or using Google Alerts. Web 3.0, which is predicted to make the internet “more intelligent” in anticipating and meeting individual needs and interests, will sharply increase this trend (MacManus, 2009). User-friendly access to personal development opportunities. People who could never find time to attend time-intensive workshops such as meditation retreats can now learn at home in manageable time chunks, not just through books and CDs, but on web-advertised and supported teleconferences, webinars, blog radio, and the like. For example, the Buddhist meditation teacher Shinzen Young offers telephone retreats to supplement face-to-face retreats, www.BasicMindfulness.org ).
Laying the groundwork for formal programs. Organizations that sponsor learning of various kinds have begun using web technology prior to seminars or meetings in order to prepare participants to take greater advantage of face-to-face time (Hannum, Center for Creative Leadership., & Martineau, 2008). Following up formal programs. Since 2005, CCL’s flagship Leadership Development Program has featured Friday5s (a web technology developed by the Fort Hill Company) to accelerate post-program application of learning and sustain commitment to goals (Whyman, Santana, & Allen, 2005). CCL evaluations show that such reinforcement leads to significant increases in goal achievement (Pollock & Santana, 2007). Facilitating support networks among workshop/program participants. Many workshops now support participants in signing up for an email list or listserv that enables participants to keep in touch, reinforcing the workshop experience. Such groups tend to peter out after a while, but do tend to reinforce and extend the period of active engagement with the learning. Forming communities around workshops. Some workshops have gone so far as to create support for online communities that connect participants from any previous workshop. For example, the Shambhala Institute for Authentic Leadership, which sponsors an annual week-long workshop in Halifax, Nova Scotia, has used the new web tool Ning to create such a site.
Internet forums. Web 2.0 adds power to electronic bulletin boards, enabling more interactive discussions on areas of common interest to leaders. Many of the social media and other Web 2.0 tools enable such interactive communication. Virtual learning environments. Online role-playing games enable players to practice leadership skills in situations that pose challenges typical of the requirements of future leaders: speed, risk taking, and acceptance of leadership roles as temporary (Reeves, Malone, & O’Driscoll, 2008) Web-supported communities of practice . Web support for learning networks creates new opportunities for information sharing and problem solving. “Just-in-time” learning is now accessible in ways never before possible, as illustrated by CompanyCommand, the U.S. Army community of practice described in section 3.1.2. An example is the ALIA Institute’s Social Network: http://community.aliainstitute.org/ .
Overcoming barriers of geography and language . Nortel uses advanced video and data-networking technologies to offer a Virtual Leadership Academy monthly in 47 countries, with simultaneous translation from English into Spanish and Portuguese. The technology enables real-time response to questions and concerns (Day & Halpin, 2001, p. 21). Virtual access to conferences . Conference presentations are beginning to be available virtually. The Shambhala Institute for Authentic Leadership now offers virtual access to its current leadership workshop to graduates of previous programs. And blogging and texting of conferences has begun to offer enhanced information sharing among attendees as well as enable outside access to a broader audience. More powerful and individualized means of keeping informed . It is now possible to track areas of interest easily by subscribing to an RSS feed, enrolling in Twine, or using Google Alerts. Web 3.0, which is predicted to make the internet “more intelligent” in anticipating and meeting individual needs and interests, will sharply increase this trend (MacManus, 2009). User-friendly access to personal development opportunities. People who could never find time to attend time-intensive workshops such as meditation retreats can now learn at home in manageable time chunks, not just through books and CDs, but on web-advertised and supported teleconferences, webinars, blog radio, and the like. For example, the Buddhist meditation teacher Shinzen Young offers telephone retreats to supplement face-to-face retreats, www.BasicMindfulness.org ).
Protecting Resources Case of Komens foundation and Planned Parenthood Fueled by a firestorm of outrage on Twitter and Facebook, the people behind the Susan G. Komen For the Cure Friday backed off their decision to cut funding of Planned Parenthood programs. On Tuesday, Planned Parenthood alerted its twitter followers that the Komen organization had stopped funding for breast cancer screenings at its health centers around the country. After three days of protests by Planned Parenthood backers, Komen today reversed that decision and said it will continue its previous funding plans. The decision comes after thousands of people took took their fury to sites like Facebook, Twitter, Google+ and Komen's own message board. Supporters of Planned Parenthood this week relentlessly posted comments about the situation, along with links to news articles and retweeted messages. They essentially kept the discussion going and kept the pressure on Komen. Kony video documentary, went viral. Millions of people watched it Illustrates the power and the dangers of Web communication. Turns out the video was misleading in some ways.