Social Media Teigland Nov09


Published on

A presentation that I have made at Ericsson Headquarters and Securitas Headquarters in Stockholm, Sweden on social media, networks, and virtual worlds in November 2009

Published in: Business, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

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

No notes for slide
  • Fischbowl 2007 ”Did you know? 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.
  • 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)
  • 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 Clay shirky – here comes everybody Previously – one to one but enable groups, and one to many but not enable two way communication, now have many to many conversations
  • Everybody is connected to everybody else by no more than six degrees of separation. “ Small World Phenomenon” by sociologist Stanley Milgram, 1967 Back ground Example who ever you take that average is six step
  • Ency picture from 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.
  • 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 "GoldCorp Challenge". 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.
  • I always like to put things into perspective. The theme of today’s event is that of seeing opportunities in the midst of the financial crisis and 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
  • CNRS – isabelle berrebi 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 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 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 americans, not to mention the internationals. 38 years old and younger – they are the gamers. 28 years old and younger – these are the net-generation, having grown up with the internet always being there. These are people for whom the technology has always been available to provide them with engaging experiences, connections beyond the realm of their home towns to people and information that otherwise would never have been available or accessible.
  • Thanks to Philippe Des Autels for picture. Impatience
  • Speaker notes: The exciting thing is that the younger people in the workforce have become skilled at using computers and the internet for all kinds of purposes – to build relationships, find information and knowledge, solve problems, and learn. An extensive study that was just completed by one of the gurus in this area, danah boyd, found that the digital world really is changing the way that young adults and youths socialize and learn. These younger generations are using these new media to explore their own interests and experiment with self-expression – while at the same time they are developing both technical skills and a new form of social skills – solving complex problems online in virtual teams. How many of you have children who play WoW? Have you thought about what they are really doing? They are developing skills for tomorrow’s work – creating and implementing strategies and making decisions while under pressure – all the time in self-organizing teams in virtual environments with people they might not ever have met face to face. As a result, these individuals are not only used to but expect more freedom and autonomy in their problem-solving activities at work Next slide Other notes creating new opportunities for youth to grapple with social norms, explore interests, develop technical skills, and experiment with new forms of self-expression. These activities have captured teens' attention because they provide avenues for extending social worlds, self-directed learning, and independence. Extending friendships online while some developing shared interest communities. Change way that youth socialize and learn - Youth engage in peer-based, self-directed learning online. – Youth respect one another's authority online, and they are often more motivated to learn from peers than from adults. Their efforts are also largely self-directed, and the outcome emerges through exploration, in contrast to classroom learning that is oriented by set, predefined goals. Increased degree of freedom and autonomy Not just receivers of knowledge but creators of knowledge as well danah boyd study ***** To join INSNA, visit ***** We are happy to announce the online release of the findings from our three-year Digital Youth project ( ). All of the researchers who have worked on this project will be writing up individual publications, but this report represents a synthesis of the findings across the 22 different case studies. It has been over three years in the making, and is the result of a truly collaborative effort with 28 researchers and research collaborators. This project is part of the MacArthur Foundation Digital Media and Learning initiative. You can find all the details in the documents linked below, and a summary of our report below. Two-page summary of report: White paper: Full report: Press release and video: -------- RESEARCH SUMMARY Over three years, Mimi Ito and her 28-person research team interviewed over 800 youth and young adults and conducted over 5000 hours of online observations as part of the most extensive U.S. study of youth media use to date. They found that social network sites, online games, video-sharing sites, and gadgets such as iPods and mobile phones are now fixtures of youth culture. The research finds today's youth may be coming of age and struggling for autonomy and identity amid new worlds for communication, friendship, play, and self-expression. Many adults worry that children are wasting time online, texting, or playing video games. The researchers explain why youth find these activities compelling and important. The digital world is creating new opportunities for youth to grapple with social norms, explore interests, develop technical skills, and experiment with new forms of self-expression. These activities have captured teens' attention because they provide avenues for extending social worlds, self-directed learning, and independence. MAJOR FINDINGS - Youth use online media to extend friendships and interests. - Most youth use online networks to extend the friendships that they navigate in the familiar contexts of school, religious organizations, sports, and other local activities. They can be always "on," in constant contact with their friends through private communications like instant messaging or mobile phones, as well as in public ways through social network sites such as MySpace and Facebook. With these "friendship-driven" practices, youth are almost always associating with people they already know in their offline lives. The majority of youth use new media to "hang out" and extend existing friendships in these ways. A smaller number of youth also use the online world to explore interests and find information that goes beyond what they have access to at school or in their local community. Online groups enable youth to connect to peers who share specialized and niche interests of various kinds, whether that is online gaming, creative writing, video editing, or other artistic endeavors. In these interest-driven networks, youth may find new peers outside the boundaries of their local community. They can also find opportunities to publicize and distribute their work to online audiences, and to gain new forms of Visibility and reputation. - Youth engage in peer-based, self-directed learning online. - In both friendship-driven and interest-driven online activity, youth create and navigate new forms of expression and rules for social behavior. By exploring new interests, tinkering, and "messing around" with new forms of media, they acquire various forms of technical and media literacy. Through trial and error, youth add new media skills to their repertoire, such as how to create a video or game, or customize their MySpace page. Teens then share their creations and receive feedback from others online. By its immediacy and breadth of information, the digital world lowers barriers to self-directed learning. Some youth "geek out" and dive into a topic or talent. Contrary to popular images, geeking out is highly social and engaged, although usually not driven primarily by local friendships. Youth turn instead to specialized knowledge groups of both teens and adults from around the country or world, with the goal of improving their craft and gaining reputation among expert peers. While adults participate, they are not automatically the resident experts by virtue of their age. Geeking out in many respects erases the traditional markers of status and authority. New media allow for a degree of freedom and autonomy for youth that is less apparent in a classroom setting. Youth respect one another's authority online, and they are often more motivated to learn from peers than from adults. Their efforts are also largely self-directed, and the outcome emerges through exploration, in contrast to classroom learning that is oriented by set, predefined goals. IMPLICATIONS New media forms have altered how youth socialize and learn, and raise a new set of issues that educators, parents, and policymakers should consider. -Adults should facilitate young people's engagement with digital media. Contrary to adult perceptions, while hanging out online, youth are picking up basic social and technical skills they need to fully participate in contemporary society. Erecting barriers to participation deprives teens of access to these forms of learning. Participation in the digital age means more than being able to access serious online information and culture. Youth could benefit from educators being more open to forms of experimentation and social exploration that are generally not characteristic of educational institutions. Because of the diversity of digital media, it is problematic to develop a standardized set of benchmarks against which to measure young people's technical and new media literacy. Friendship-driven and interest-driven online participation have very different kinds of social connotations. For example, whereas friendship-driven activities centers upon peer culture, adult participation is more welcomed in the latter more "geeky" forms of learning. In addition, the content, behavior, and skills that youth value are highly variable depending on what kinds of social groups they associate with. In interest-driven participation, adults have an important role to play. Youth using new media often learn from their peers, not teachers or adults. Yet adults can still have tremendous influence in setting learning goals, particularly on the interest-driven side where adult hobbyists function as role models and more experienced peers. To stay relevant in the 21st century, education institutions need to keep pace with the rapid changes introduced by digital media. Youths' participation in this networked world suggests new ways of thinking about the role of education. What, the authors ask, would it mean to really exploit the potential of the learning opportunities available through online resources and networks? What would it mean to reach beyond traditional education and civic institutions and enlist the help of others in young people's learning? Rather than assuming that education is primarily about preparing for jobs and careers, they question what it would mean to think of it as a process guiding youths' participation in public life more generally. _____________________________________________________________________ SOCNET is a service of INSNA, the professional association for social network researchers ( To unsubscribe, send an email message to containing the line UNSUBSCRIBE SOCNET in the body of the message.
  • According to Alexa Site Rankings (US-based): 1.) Google 3.) Facebook 4.) YouTube 5.) MySpace 8.) Wikipedia 18.) Flickr 28.) Apple 43.) LinkedIn 57.) Dell 75.) Twitter According to Alexa Site Rankings (World Rankings): 1.) Google 3.) YouTube 5.) Facebook 7.) Wikipedia 9.) MySpace 33.) Flickr 62.) Apple 141.) LinkedIn 157.) Dell 235.) Twitter
  • Speaker notes As a result, we are seeing significant pressure being put on traditional forms of organizing. On the left is what we are used to thinking about when we speak about organizations. A formal organization - a hierarchy in which information and knowledge goes up and down through the formal lines of an organization. Work tasks are broken down and coordinated through formal processes. However, research has shown that the large majority of work is actually done through informal networks – some say even 80% in knowledge-intensive organizations which is what we see on the right hand side. Here we have mapped the informal or social organization within one organization we were researching - how many of you have seen one of these sociograms or network diagrams before? This is what my research focuses on – investigating knowledge flows through social networks. In this diagram you can see the dots or nodes are individuals and the lines are the knowledge flows between these individuals. Organizations, especially in the US, are increasingly conducting network analyses to better understand the knowledge flows in their organizations and with the help of these diagrams and network analyses, they are strategically developing the organization’s networks to improve the creation and transfer of knowledge within their organizations. And this is becoming of increasing importance to understand and leverage these informal or social networks as the digital natives continue to enter the workforce – bringing with them their way of solving problems, organizing and learning. Next slide Other notes Org on the left is Built around the expert – put the expert in the box But in this new social organization – Large majority of work done through informal networks, some even say approx 80%. Important to understand both these worlds and how relate to one another… Suggests that as much as 90% of information that people take action on comes from people in their own network – Cross dissertation experts are all over the place and you need to find where the expertise lies in the org and how to connect these individuals
  • 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
  • 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 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
  • Kenneth Lay delegated responsibility to those in his old boys network – failed to listen to someone outside the club – Sherron Watkins.
  • The uber- cause of this war is that Knowledge Management was conceived as a top-down Boomer (born 1946 - 62) management effort, created by this generation just as it was moving into leadership positions. Social Media, on the other hand, is a Millenial/Gen Y (born 1980 -) movement. This overall generational cultural divide has shaped the ongoing corporate cultural war. This leads to vast, and I mean truly VAST, differences in how the two movements approach enterprise social engineering (for background, try Generation Blend by Rob Salkowitz, which I reviewed and summarized on my blog). The salient points:
  • Basically, knowledge transfer can be oriented on an grid whose axes are Structured vs. Unstructured (X axis) and Personal vs. Impersonal. Printed documentation is the quintessential structured, impersonal (and static) type of knowledge repository. Search is unstructured/dynamic, but impersonal. Real-time communication is unstructured and personal, etc.   If you have a multi-generational workplace and the goal is to get the knowledge-bearers to share, and the knowledge-needers to consume, you need to cover as much of the spectrum as possible to accommodate the whole range of learning and capturing styles, bearing in mind that it will be very difficult to get Millennials to appreciate or accept the highly-structured and linear modes of communication (but it will be just as essential to have these options available for "Boomerang Boomers" who join the organization in lower-level roles).   In the long run, the triumph of social/unstructured knowledge transfer is inevitable, but the "long run" is going to be longer than is convenient for many of us. Boomers won't be past the tipping point of organizational influence for 10-15 years. In the meantime, organizations will need to keep a parallel, legacy knowledge infrastructure in place to support the Boomerang Boomers and laggard X-ers who require static, authoritative references, as well as more dynamic social media for the Digital Natives. One of the goals of reciprocal mentoring, which Dan and I talk a lot about, is to engage younger workers to help capture the knowledge of their older peers in social media repositories and channels, with the hope that some of the domain expertise of the elder will rub off on the mentee, while the facility with social media tools and practices will adhere to the mentor. Once the Boomers internalize and "own" the social media channels, the top-down pressure for a managed, KM-oriented strategy will probably start to die a natural death.
  • This because feels awkward to just call up someone don’t know or if called. Why should I help you?
  • Serena Software Adopts Facebook as Corporate Intranet "Facebook Fridays" Foster Fun and Community Spirit at Serena Software   SAN MATEO, Calif. — November 2, 2007 — Serena Software, Inc. is breaking out of the corporate mold by announcing today that its 800 employees around the globe will participate each week in a company-wide program called “Facebook Fridays,” which encourages employees to find fun and personal connections in the workplace. Each Friday, employees are granted one hour of personal time to spend on their Facebook profiles and connect with co-workers, customers, family and friends. This initiative will start on Friday November 2nd and will be rolled out in 18 countries where the company has offices. As Web 2.0 technologies such as instant messaging (IM), wikis, and texting make communication faster and more efficient, the “human” element of communication can feel increasingly removed. How can people bring that sense of personal interaction and community back into the workplace? Surprisingly, through one of the hottest technologies around—Facebook, a social utility that connects people with friends and others who work, study and live around them. Fanatic for Facebook Serena President and CEO Jeremy Burton is an avid user of Facebook, using it to keep in touch with employees, friends, and business partners from wherever he is in the world—in Japan visiting customers or racing cars at Laguna Seca. He wants to bring the benefits he gains from using Facebook to his company, and allow employees to have more fun combining their personal and professional lives. He is doing this by making Facebook his company’s intranet—a place where employees can find everything from a list of company holidays to the CEO’s favorite movie. Burton believes that colleagues who get to know one another on a more personal level will work together better. The company already has more than 30% of its global workforce on Facebook prior to the launch of Facebook Fridays. “ As our business continues to grow, the workplace becomes more and more distributed, which can make us feel disconnected from one another,” said Burton. “Social networking tools like Facebook can bring us back together, help us get to know each other as people, help us understand our business and our products, and help us better serve our customers—on demand. A corporate culture that fosters a sense of community and fun will ultimately help us get more done. Companies that do not embrace social networking are making a huge mistake.” Recent studies indicate there are roughly 70 million Gen Y’ers (born between the years 1980-2000), and Burton believes it’s critical to understand and embrace “their world,” including on-demand Internet applications and an “innovation without permission” mentality. Serena is using new methods of recruiting, like Facebook, to tune into this next generation of workers who are, ultimately, the corporate leaders of tomorrow. About Serena Software, Inc. Serena Software, Inc. is the leading global independent software company focused on Business Mashups and Application Lifecycle Management (ALM). More than 15,000 organizations around the world, including 96 of the Fortune 100, rely on Serena solutions to automate the application development process and effectively manage their IT portfolio. Serena is headquartered in San Mateo, California, and has offices throughout the U.S., Europe, and Asia Pacific. For more information on Serena solutions and services, visit . Serena is a registered trademarks of Serena Software, Inc. All other product or company names may be trademarks of their respective owners, and their use is intended for identification purposes only and not in association with or as sponsorship or endorsement by such owners Copyright © 2007 Serena Software, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
  • VOIP Chatrooms Wikis, blogs Social networking avatars
  • How to solve problems? Researcher – solve by him/herself Engineer – solve with help of others 80% of solution or 100% of solution
  • 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.
  • IBM uses wikis to create SOPs, Swedbank – put down everything learned when started at Swedbank Wiki for new people at Swedbank
  • Poole on slideshare from IBM Driving innovation into products faster Enabling employees to be more productive, more knowledgeable, faster Harnessing the knowledge of the wise , before they retire Being more responsive to customers, with knowledge from subject experts you may or may not know
  • Currently, there are over 200 ideas preparing for release, representing a wide variety of innovations for both internal use and the marketplace. There are over 4,000 comments on these ideas. One of the new products is ViewMyPaycCheck which allows the employees of small businesses to view the details behind their pay check in the same detailed manner often offered by large organizations with comprehensive HR systems. This new product was developed in three months through Brainstorm. Within Brainstorm there is an auto-generated activity stream where anyone can see comments on ideas in the pipeline in a real time manner. You start the process by adding you idea by adding your idea through a lightweight submission form. Brainstorm will instantly show related ideas to your idea upon submission. So you can connect with those team members. Team members can edit the details of a registered idea and others can provide comments. These comments can start a threaded conversation. Contributors take these comments seriously and Brainstorm added the ability to edit comments at the request of users. You can recruit people and people can also request to join a team. The system also makes recommendations on who might be a best fit for the team based on their activity and tags within the system. You can place help wanted ads asking for help. You can also get updates on the tags you follow. They added Outlook integration to allow you to reach out to other employees and bring them into the Intuit Brainstorm network. The system also indentifies top contributors to provide recognition. You can see the most active, top commentors, and top taggers over the last week, last month or all time. Adding this “leaderboard” increased comments by thirty percent. Brainstorm increased participation in innovation by 500% and increased ideation by 1,000% at Intuit. Here is a sample leaderboard.
  • Different attitudes towards the potential benefits of Web 2.0. The under investigation are at different levels in the process of experimenting with this tools. d Management’s concerns Poor top management support and understanding of Web 2.0’s benefits Leakage of organizational knowledge Degree of control Difficult to measure and validate the business value of Web 2.0 Employee concerns Difficult to get commitment and resources to deploy social networking and related Web 2.0 applications in organization Exposing one’s personal life and personal knowledge Social overload
  • Three steps Prepare Implement Manage
  • Interesting question as well. Who really owns the kn? More seen as organization info seen as owned by organization, but more inds saw that expertise that had built up during work at company then owned by ind and can take with them or give to others. No non-competes in Silicon Valley
  • 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.
  • For example, at IBM, the blogging policy was created on an internal wiki, vetted by the employees, then given a quick review, edit and approval from legal. Process that usually took months, took 2-3 weeks.
  • Speaker notes So, in closing, what does all this mean? Been a very short presentation, but in the midst of this financial crisis, my belief that those organizations that are able to strategically develop their networks - both inside and outside of the organization as well as that learn to leverage the new social media will be those that are able to win the war for talent as well as to innovate for competitive advantage. However, I think the real key to this lies in one’s mindset related to knowledge. In order to really reap the opportunities provided, companies must cultivate an open knowledge sharing culture in which those that live by the old adage, Knowledge is power, are not rewarded. Knowledge cannot be used up – rather it grows as others learn about it and contribute to it. One must think about how to create awareness of one’s efforts. Rather better to live by this saying, if you love knowledge, then set it free. Has to do with networks that in order to receive knowledge, one must create value and give in relationships Next slide Other notes N etworking – player in space of new technology as well – SSE for adventure into SL “ Knowledge is power” “ Birds of a feather, flock together” (“Lika barn leka bäst”) “ Not-invented-here”
  • Ken Olsen was replaced by Robert Palmer as the company's president. Digital's board of directors also granted Palmer the title of chief executive officer ("CEO"), a title that had never been used during Digital's 35-year existence. Palmer had joined DEC in 1985 to run Semiconductor Engineering and Manufacturing. His relentless campaign to be CEO, and success with the Alpha microprocessor family, made him a candidate to succeed Olsen. At the same time a more modern logo was designed[5]. However, Palmer was unable to stem the tide of red ink. More rounds of layoffs ensued and many of DEC's assets were spun off:Worldwide training was spun off to form an independent/new company called Global Knowledge Network.[6]Their database product, Rdb, was sold to Oracle.The DLT tape technology was sold to Quantum Corporation in 1994.Text terminal business (VT100 and its successors) was sold in August 1995 to Boundless Technologies.In March 1997, DEC's CORBA-based product, ObjectBroker, and its messaging software, MessageQ, was sold to BEA Systems, Inc.In May 1997, DEC sued Intel for allegedly infringing on its Alpha patents in designing the Pentium chips. As part of a settlement, DEC's chip business was sold to Intel. This included DEC's StrongARM implementation of the ARM computer architecture, which Intel sold as the XScale processors commonly used in Pocket PCs.In 1997, the printer business was sold to GENICOM (now TallyGenicom), which then produced models bearing the Digital logo.At about the same time, the networking business was sold to Cabletron Systems, and subsequently spun off as Digital Network Products Group.The DECtalk and DECvoice voice products were spun off, and eventually arrived at Fonix.The rights to the PDP-11 line and several PDP-11 operating systems were sold to Mentec in 1994.[7]Eventually, on January 26, 1998, what remained of the company (including Digital's multivendor global services organization and customer support centers) was sold to Compaq, which was acquired by Hewlett-Packard in 2002. Hewlett-Packard now sells what were formerly Digital's StorageWorks disk/tape products,[8] as a result of the Compaq acquisition.The Digital logo survived for a while after the company ceased to exist, as the logo of Digital GlobalSoft, an IT services company in India (which was a 51 percent subsidiary of DEC). Digital GlobalSoft was later renamed "HP GlobalSoft" (also known as the "HP Global Delivery India Center" or HP GDIC) and no longer uses the Digital logo.The and domain names are now owned by Hewlett-Packard and redirect to their US website.[9]The Digital Federal Credit Union (DCU), which was chartered in 1979 for employees of DEC, is now open to essentially everyone, with over 700 different sponsors, including the companies that acquired pieces of DEC.
  • Speaker notes Just to give you an example, I try to practice what I preach and I put all my presentations on a site called and make them downloadable. I have one presentation based on my research on networks that has received almost 18 000 hits and it has been downloaded several thousand times by people all over the world. It has been used as course material in France and in articles and I have been contacted by people from places as far away as South Africa, Canada, Dubai, and India for interviews and for teaching opportunities. Also, through Second Life I have met some fascinating people and one of my closest colleagues now is Steve Mahaley, aka Ace Carson, who is the Director of Learning Technology at Duke Corporate Education. Steve is in the audience here…. So, in closing, I would like to say that I am now in your networks, and it would be fantastic if some of you were interested in participating in a research project or if you were just curious about learning more about virtual worlds. SSE has an island here and the idea was to create a playing ground where companies could experiment and play with virtual worlds. So, feel free to contact me online or inworld! Thank you! End
  • Social Media Teigland Nov09

    1. 1. <ul><li>Leveraging Networks and Social Media for Improved Performance </li></ul><ul><li>Dr. Robin Teigland, aka </li></ul><ul><li>Karinda Rhode in SL </li></ul><ul><li>Stockholm School of Economics </li></ul><ul><li>Associate Professor </li></ul><ul><li> </li></ul><ul><li> </li></ul>Photo: Lundholm, Metro November 2009
    2. 2. <ul><li>Introduction to social media and networks </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Why the interest? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>What are networks? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>What about performance? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Leveraging social media and networks </li></ul><ul><ul><li>How can they create value? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Are there any benefits or is it all hype? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>What are some challenges? </li></ul></ul>Today’s discussion
    3. 3. &quot;...when the rate of change outside an organization is greater than the rate of change inside, the end is near....&quot; Jack Welch…
    4. 4. A world of rapidly growing knowledge …. > A person’s lifetime in 18th century One week 2009 Fischbowl 2007
    5. 5. … that becomes quickly outdated …. 50% knowledge relevant 50% knowledge outdated First year of technical-based education Third year of education
    6. 6. <ul><li>Did You Know: Shift Happens </li></ul><ul><li> </li></ul><ul><li>How are these trends affecting you and your organization? </li></ul>
    7. 7. Human capacity cannot keep up… Cohen & Levinthal 1989 Growth Time Information and knowledge Human absorptive capacity
    8. 8. <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 Adapted from Lévy 1997
    9. 9. 6 degrees of separation <ul><li>Everybody is connected to everybody else by no more than six degrees of separation. </li></ul><ul><li>“ Small World Phenomenon” </li></ul><ul><li>by sociologist Stanley Milgram, 1967 </li></ul>
    10. 10. The wisdom of the crowd Closed Expensive Complex Accurate Open Inexpensive Simple Close enough Hinton 2007
    11. 11. Leveraging external resources to find solutions and solve unsolved problems A shift from being problem solvers to solution finders
    12. 12. 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?
    13. 13. A new workforce is appearing… Mahaley 2008, Merrill Lynch 1999, Beck and Wade, Prensky “ Digital Immigrants” “ Digital Natives” Company loyalty Work ≠ Personal Learning=Behind the desk Professional loyalty Work = Personal Learning=Fun and games
    14. 14. Digital natives <ul><li> </li></ul><ul><li>Control </li></ul><ul><li>Community </li></ul><ul><li>Collaboration </li></ul><ul><li>Challenge </li></ul><ul><li>Creation </li></ul>
    15. 15. Using the social web to build relationships, find information and knowledge, solve problems, and learn
    16. 16. Building skills in virtual environments <ul><li>My CV </li></ul><ul><li>Leading a virtual team of 30 individuals from across the globe </li></ul><ul><li>Creating and successfully executing strategies under pressure </li></ul><ul><li>Managing cross-cultural conflict without face-to-face communication </li></ul>
    17. 17. 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.
    18. 18. From organization-generated content (OGC) to user-generated content (UGC) Content created by a user to be used by a user Content created by an organization to sell to a user Di Gangi 2008
    19. 19. What came first – the community or the company?
    20. 20. Increasing pressure on “traditional” organizations Formal organization/ Hierarchy Teigland et al. 2005 Social organization / Heterarchy
    21. 21. Some leadership challenges! <ul><li>Continuous innovation requires extensive knowledge flows between diverse networks (internal and external). </li></ul><ul><li>When employees are more than 50 feet apart, the likelihood of them collaborating more than once a week is less than 10%. </li></ul><ul><li>Our networks tend to be homogeneous – we tend to develop relations with people like ourselves. </li></ul><ul><li>The higher the diversity of team members, the higher the potential for conflict and poor results. </li></ul><ul><li>Knowledge is sticky within the firm, but flows easily across organizational boundaries through social media. </li></ul><ul><li>Attracting and retaining talent is challenging due to high professional loyalty. </li></ul>Allen 1984, Burt 1992, Brown & Duguid 2002, Marsden 1987, Ruuska & Teigland 2009, Teigland 2003
    22. 22. 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
    23. 23. Two individuals/organizations with the same number of contacts… B A
    24. 24. … but with very different access to resources B A
    25. 25. Network dynamics impact creativity and innovation…. Firm A Low on-time High Creative High on-time Low creative Teigland 2003 High creative Virtual community Firm B
    26. 26. … as well as organizational learning.. Division 1 Division 2 Improved efficiency over time Stagnant performance over time Schenkel & Teigland 2008 Two divisions within Sundlink (Öresund Bridge)
    27. 27. ..and organizational failure
    28. 28. Social media enable value creation in networks <ul><li>Finding and connecting with people internally and externally </li></ul><ul><li>Building communities </li></ul><ul><li>Sharing information & knowledge </li></ul><ul><li>Solving problems & finding solutions </li></ul><ul><li>Learning informally </li></ul><ul><li>Overcoming diversity challenges </li></ul><ul><ul><li>through creating collective </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>competence </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Shared understanding </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Shared language and norms </li></ul></ul>
    29. 29. <ul><li>Corporate </li></ul><ul><li>Top down </li></ul><ul><li>Centralized </li></ul><ul><li>Command & control </li></ul><ul><li>Monolithic systems </li></ul><ul><li>Explicit knowledge - reuse </li></ul><ul><li>Knowledge objects </li></ul><ul><li>Taxonomies </li></ul><ul><li>People finders </li></ul><ul><li>Databases </li></ul><ul><li>E-mail </li></ul><ul><li>Newsletters </li></ul><ul><li>Discussion forums </li></ul><ul><li>Personal </li></ul><ul><li>Bottom up </li></ul><ul><li>Decentralized, distributed </li></ul><ul><li>Facilitate, collaborate </li></ul><ul><li>Ecosystems </li></ul><ul><li>Tacit knowledge - mobilize </li></ul><ul><li>Knowledge flow </li></ul><ul><li>Social tagging </li></ul><ul><li>Social networking </li></ul><ul><li>Blogs & wikis </li></ul><ul><li>Instant messaging </li></ul><ul><li>RSS feeds & readers </li></ul><ul><li>Blogs </li></ul>Social media tools facilitate KM 2.0 KM 1.0 – Repository model KM 2.0 – Networking model Gurteen 2008, Alavi, 2000 Comparison of KM tools
    30. 30. From KM 1.0 to KM 2.0 – Social KM Gurteen 2008 KM 1.0 KM 2.0 KM is extra work KM is part of my everyday work Work is behind closed doors Work is open and transparent People directories provide contact information Social Networking platforms reflect who is doing what with whom Content is centralised, protected and controlled Content is distributed freely and uncontrolled IT chooses the tools I use I have a choice & select my own tools Knowledge sharing is database centric Knowledge sharing is people centric Knowledge is captured just in case Knowledge is naturally captured as part of one’s work Best Practices Stories Efficiency and productivity Improved decision making & innovation
    31. 31. Covering the landscape Salkowitz 2009
    32. 32. Wenger 1998, Hinton 2007 Social media enable true communities of practice
    33. 33. Usage of Web 2.0 McKinsey Quarterly, Sep 2009 1088 respon
    34. 34. Building connections through twitter at Zappos
    35. 35. eZ Wire enables global conversations…
    36. 36. ..and creates value! Flåten et al, 2009 eZ Software development team Who are the company employees? Jack Rob Jim Jill Jane Mary Jason George Alex Bob Bill Lisa Doug Sarah
    37. 37. Trust & reciprocity are essential for knowledge exchange in networks
    38. 38. IBM’s Atlas shows the social network of a topic and how to get to someone Poole 2008
    39. 39. 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>
    40. 40. Creating new and strengthening existing relationships through Facebook <ul><li>#1 Applications Lifecycle Management (ALM) & business mashup </li></ul><ul><li>96 of Fortune 100 as customers </li></ul><ul><li>800 employees in 18 countries across globe </li></ul><ul><li>Facebook Fridays: One hour every Friday on Facebook to find fun and connect with co-workers, customers, family, and friends </li></ul><ul><li>Average employee age: 46 </li></ul><ul><li>27 year old Silicon Valley company </li></ul><ul><li>>90% of employees on FB </li></ul>
    41. 41. Proximal collaboration <ul><li>When people are more than 50 feet apart, the likelihood of them collaborating more than once a week is less than 10%. </li></ul>Allen 1984
    42. 42. Facilitating boundaryless collaboration
    43. 43. Companies are turning to virtual worlds to facilitate the virtual workforce – “Immernets” <ul><li>Completely private virtual business worlds offering tools to conduct business and collaborate </li></ul><ul><li>Fortune 500: IBM, Intel, Johnson & Johnson, Motorola, Novartis, Sun, Unilever </li></ul><ul><li>Intel saved USD 265,000 through virtual conference </li></ul>
    44. 44. Diversity presents additional challenges to achieving high performance <ul><li>Surface diversity </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Ethnic background, age, gender </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Structural diversity ( difficult to see ) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Different training/educational and occupational backgrounds </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Learning histories, i.e., own patterns of information acquisition and use </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Perspectives on analyzing and solving problems </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Example: Basic researcher vs politician vs salesperson </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Technological diversity </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Different platforms </li></ul></ul>Ruuska & Teigland 2008
    45. 45. Improving virtual teaming and cross-cultural skills in virtual worlds Designed together with Duke CE Task: To build a bridge in your virtual team
    46. 46. IBM and Schneider: Virtual or real?
    47. 47. Promoting 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
    48. 48. Innovation workshops bring together users from across the globe
    49. 49. CapGemini uses NetVibes to organize
    50. 50. Match the tool to the purpose Tool Purpose Example Blogs/Microblogs Conversation Relationship building Information sharing Getting customer and employee feedback Sun Microsystems Ericsson GE Healthcare Discussion forums Self-support Solution finding Customer engagement Dell Wikis Collaboration Mutual problem solving Engagement Motorola Swedbank Social networking sites Community development Relationship building Loyalty building Solution finding Serena Software Victoria’s Secret Jeep Virtual worlds Collaboration Innovation Engagement Knowledge accidents Nokia Philips IBM
    51. 51. Are there any b enefits from social media, or is it all hype? Poole 2008: IBM Global Technical Services Knowledge Community of Practice Business Impact Survey 2007, completed by approximately 2,300 respondents
    52. 52. What about business results? <ul><li>Survey of 1700 execs worldwide by McKinsey </li></ul><ul><li>Value from Web 2.0 internal use (% respondents) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Increased speed of knowledge access – 68% </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Reduced communication costs – 54% </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Improved access to knowledge experts – 43% </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Reduced travel costs – 40% </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Improved employee satisfaction – 35% </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Decreased time to market for products/services and increased innovation – 25% </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Increased revenue – 14% </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Increased impact if web 2.0 integrated into employees daily work activities </li></ul>McKinsey Quarterly, Sep 2009
    53. 53. Are there any numbers to back this? <ul><li>Among the clients surveyed by Select Minds, corporate social networking resulted in: </li></ul><ul><li>Productivity Contributions: Increase in productivity by an average of 10% </li></ul><ul><li>Retention Contributions: Increase in retention by an average of 9% </li></ul><ul><li>Increases in New Business: Increase new business by an average of 12% </li></ul><ul><li>Rehiring Former Employees: On average, rehires made through their Corporate Social Networking program…. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>become fully productive 49% faster than all experienced hires </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>became Star Performers (66%), versus 26% of experienced hires </li></ul></ul>Select Minds 2008: &quot;Corporate Social Networking: Increasing the Density of Workplace Connections to Power Business Performance&quot;
    54. 54. Intuit’s Brainstorm
    55. 55. Why do people participate in a community? Wasko & Faraj 2000 <ul><ul><li>Useful information </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Specific answer </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Personal gain </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Enjoyment </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Learning </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Reputation </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Pro-social behavior </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Reciprocity </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Advancing the community </li></ul></ul>Tangible returns 26% Intangible returns 24% Community interest 50%
    56. 56. Intuit’s Brainstorm enables grassroots innovation <ul><li>Focus on ideas and collaborative innovation instead of on people and tracking innovation </li></ul><ul><li>Ideas are profiled and tagged enabling search for potential helpers and relevant projects </li></ul><ul><li>Helpers from anywhere in the organization can search for ideas seeking help </li></ul><ul><li>Collaboration through discussion boards </li></ul><ul><li>“ Leaderboard” enables recognition of top contributors </li></ul><ul><li>Results </li></ul><ul><ul><li>1000% increase in Ideation and increased idea quality </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Decreased time to market (3 mos for ViewMyPaycheck) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Increased employee satisfaction </li></ul></ul>
    57. 57.
    58. 58. However, there are challenges…. <ul><li>Resistance from top management </li></ul><ul><li>Difficulty to measure and validate value of web 2.0 </li></ul><ul><li>Knowledge trading and leakage outside of firm </li></ul><ul><li>Social overload and role conflict </li></ul><ul><li>Poor organizational stewardship </li></ul>Web 2.0 and social networking are typically of a more grassroots nature – their implementation in more traditional hierarchical organizations may result in tension between employees and management Hustad & Teigland 2008
    59. 59. Fortune 100 CEOs study by ÜBERCEO <ul><li>As of June 2009 </li></ul><ul><li>Only 2 CEOs have Twitter accounts but no activity </li></ul><ul><li>13 CEOs have LinkedIn profiles and of those only 3 have more than 10 connections </li></ul><ul><li>19% of CEOs have a personal Facebook page but less than 15 friends </li></ul><ul><li>75% of CEOs have some kind of Wikipedia entry, but nearly 33% of those have limited or outdated information </li></ul><ul><li>0% have a blog </li></ul>
    60. 60. Treat like any change project Kotter 1996 2. Form a powerful guiding coalition 1. Establish a sense of urgency 3. Create a vision 8. Anchor new approaches 4. Communicate the vision 5. Empower others to act on the vision 6. Plan for and create short-term wins 7. Consolidate improvements and produce more change
    61. 61. Who owns the knowledge? Organizational information vs. Personal expertise Teigland 2003
    62. 62. Social overload and role conflict Loyalty Loyalty Organization Professional network Teigland 2003
    63. 63. Do employees know how to represent the company when using external social media? Statoil-Hydro Love at 150 m below sea level! Hustad & Teigland 2008
    64. 64. Develop company guidelines for using social media internally and externally <ul><li>Trust your employees, and don’t ban social media </li></ul><ul><li>Use wikis to enable employees to create company guidelines, eg IBM </li></ul><ul><li>Yahoo’s best practice guidelines for blogging ( </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Be respectful of your colleagues </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Get your facts straight </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Provide context to your argument </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Engage in private feedback </li></ul></ul>When trusted, employees feel empowered to do the right thing!
    65. 65. IBM’s blogging policy & guidance, created by the employees on a wiki Policies based on IBM’s Business Conduct Guidelines Apply internally and externally Available on “ blogging guidelines” Adapted from Poole 2008
    66. 66. So, what does all this mean? <ul><li>Organizations have to develop their networks globally - both inside and out </li></ul><ul><li>Organizations have to leverage social media </li></ul><ul><ul><li>To win the war for talent </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>To innovate for competitive advantage </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Organizations have to develop their employees’ network leadership skills </li></ul><ul><li>Organizations have to cultivate an open, knowledge sharing culture </li></ul>I f you love knowledge, set it free …
    67. 67. Changing the mindset A new opportunity???
    68. 68. All the things right, but not the right thing!
    69. 69. Thanks and see you in world! Karinda Rhode aka Robin Teigland [email_address] Photo by H. Lindholm, Metro
    70. 70. Sources 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>Burt, Structural Holes, 1992 </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 . American Management Assoc., 2007 </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Homepages </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Wayne Baker, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Stephen Bird, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Steve Borgatti, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Rob Cross, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>International Network for Social Network Analysis </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>David Krackhardt, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Valdis Krebs, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Fredrik Liljeros, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Steve Mahaley, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>James Moody, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Giancarlo Oriani, (In Italian) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Barry Wellman, </li></ul></ul>
    71. 71. Sources and acknowledgements (cont’d) <ul><li>Articles and Research Papers </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Cross, Baker, & Parker, “What creates energy in organizations?”, Sloan Management Review , Summer 2003. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Cross, Parise, & Weiss, “Driving Strategic Change with a Network Perspective”, Network Roundtable working paper, 2006. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Kleinbaum, Stuart, Tushman, Communication (and Coordination?) in a Modern, Complex Organization, HBS working paper, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Ibarra & Hunter, “How Leaders Create and Use Networks”, HBR, 2007. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Coleman, D. Virtual Team Spaces, 2006. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Connaughton, SL & Daly, JA, “Leading from Afar: Strategies for Effectively Leading Virtual Teams” in Virtual Collaborative Teams: Process, Technologies, & Practice (S. H. Godar & S. P. Ferris, Eds.). </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Lipnack, J. & Stamps, Virtual Teams: Reaching Across Space, Time, and Organizations with Technology . John Wiley & Sons, Inc.: New York, 1997. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Maznevski, M. High performance from global virtual teams, 2001. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Ruuska, I. & Teigland, R. 2009 (Forthcoming). “Ensuring Project Success through Collective Competence and Conflict Management in Public-private Partnerships: A Case Study of a Swedish Triple Helix e-government Initiative”. International Journal of Project Management . </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Schermerhorn, Jr., J., Management , 2004. </li></ul></ul>
    72. 72. Sources and acknowledgements (cont’d) <ul><li>Presentations and blogs </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Gurteen, Online Information 2007: KM goes Social, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Poole, IBM: Web 2.0 goes to work,’ </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li> </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li> </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li> </li></ul></ul>