How to Create More Value From Value Networks
Stewart
think we are on the edge of some ideas that are very important. In my
last post I said that
Imagine if more and more people dropped the artificial self
imposed barriers to effectiveness and productivity in many
spheres. We might even end up with a functional world!
That comment was inspired by the thought that if we could all get
beyond the "isms" and leaders and artificial organizational,
geographic and territorial boundaries of one kind or another we might
create value in ways beyond imagination. Years ago I asked a Lebanese
cab driver in San Francisco if he thought we would ever have peace in
the Middle East. He quickly responded that if we could get rid of the
politicians who separate and foment old divisions ordinary people who
are essentially concerned with providing for their families would
figure out ways to get along and create functional relationships and
institutions. I would say they would create "Value Networks!"
My work around "Agreements for Results" is grounded in and informed by
the work of Fernando Flores who I have no doubt many in this group are
familiar with. One premise of his work was that human beings thrive
when their conversations lead to some agreed upon action and that
conversations that do not result in action are bs. He even designed
(late 80's) communication software that was a private communication
network before the internet was popular. The software was called "The
Coordinator." The program structured communication toward creating
agreements for action. In my opinion it was not very effective because
it did not have enough structure but it was certainly on the right
track.
In the early 90's I was very excited when I began reading the work of
Meg Wheatley around self-organizing systems. Essentially I think this
is another way of saying that left to their own devices human beings
create value networks that produce/create what they want/need absent
imposed constraints that have little to do with the process of
creation. By then I had developed some conversational models for being
intentional around creating "agreements for results" between people
who had "self organized" to work together in some form of "value
network." Unfortunately that community was not ready to see the very
practical value of the structure I had created for creating the
functional understanding and framework for what people in a "value
network" would do together.
So once again I am ready to knock on the door of this emergent
community.
Essentially value networks are groups of people or organizations that
come togther because they see that together they can create and
provide value that contributes to some greater desired outcome. Verna
has elegantly described this threshold as follows:
...value networks is emerging as a next order of dynamic
modeling... people are moving away from the organizational
and institutional boxes to consider the work itself in terms
of roles and relationships...transition to consious purposeful
networks...people cannot make the leap without new tools and
behaviors to negotiate those relationships.
So the boundaries are shifting from institutional boxes such as
org charts and "the firm" or the "agency" to collaborative
networks... this does not mean there is no order at all.
There is the order of the network, which consists of roles
and value exchanges. This is new foundation of negotiations
and agreements for how we are going to work together.
Some more background: After practicing law for ten years and learning
a great deal about creating conflict I went to work for AT&T as they
went through divestiture in the early 80’s. I ran a sales team serving
large national and global law firms. As I observed internal and
external relationships it became clear that the reason ostensible
collaborations break down was that the agreements that structured the
working relationships were non-existant or woefully inadequate. Years
later when creating models for resolving conflict as part of my
experience as a divorce mediator I realized that a great deal of
conflict could be prevented with good agreements. More important,
powerful collaborations could be empowered with clear “Agreements for
Results” that create a shared vision and a road-map to them.
I have had many private and some public success (“The Book of
Agreement” documents many) with the model I developed for creating
these agreements. I have introduced them into this network and a few
people have been both curious and engaged enough to pursue off line
discussion. John invited me in to this network after being exposed to
the work; David Coleman asked me to co-author “Collaboration 2.0” and
David Meggatt gets the value of “Agreements for Results” in a Value
Network context. When Verna saw my last comment she asked me to begin
this thread and I am very pleased to do so.
“Agreements for Results” are not negotiations in the traditional
sense. They represent the shared vision and aspirations of two or more
people coming together to create value. They are addititive and
cumulative...”AND” not “OR” conceptions. They result from a dialogue
about the following 10 elements that both articulates their work and
solidifies their relationship.
Intent & Vision - what are they doing
Roles - who is responsible for what
Promises - commitments for action
Value - given and received
Measurtements of Satisfaction - metrics for results Concerns & Fears -
why they hesitate Renegotiation - capacity to change terms as they
learn more Consequences - of not achieving the vision for individuals,
organization, society Conflict Resolution -how to handle disagreements
Agreement? -yes/no-do they trust moving forward
I see these kinds of agreements as the perfect vehicle for
participants in value networks. They can provide the structure for
clarifying roles and value exchanges...the practical foundation of how
people in Value Networks will work together.
Of course I am somewhat biased, but always looking to learn. Let’s use
my model as a “straw man.” If you are interested in developing a
solid, intentional way to negotiating greater results within your
value networks I request that you read the attached article about my
model that defines the elements furthar. Then let’s dialogue about
what you think is good and what you think is missing. I encourage you
to digest and try the model.
What do you think?
Thanks for engaging!
Stewart
Stewart L. Levine, Esq., Resolutionary
Author: Getting to Resolution
The Book of Agreement
The Cycle of Resolution in The Change Handbook
Collaboration 2.0
www.ResolutionWorks.com 510-777-1166 510-814-1010 cell
If you knew the secret history of those you would like to punish you
would find a sorrow and suffering enough to disarm all your hostility
- HW
Longfellow
Stewart Levine
to begin a new thread and were obviously not too adept.
Here's the attachment promised in the original post. Thanks for your
parience.
Stewart
David Meggitt
It is appropriate that you have had an opportunity to articulate
further about your work.
As you noted, I see the value in it in the context of the value
network approach.
More specifically, an Exchange Analysis (within VNA - value networks
analysis) involves the scrutiny of role plays and I see the search for
agreement for results resonating admirably.
Best wishes,
David Meggitt
www.meggittbird.net
> 62KViewDownload
Laurence Lock Lee
I thought I would just add some of my own insights to the posts so far and
your document.
Firstly I see a lot of comment around value networks transcending formal
institutional organisational boundaries and therefore overcoming many of the
shortcomings that we are all too familiar with. Of course I agree with this
but in reality we can never replace one with the other. In our experience
when we introduce value networks and/or our partnership scorecard to an
organisation, we invariably have to do so in the context of a formal
organisation. In other words, we may facilitate an effective cross
divisional collaboration and partnership scorecard, however, at the end of
the day when the participants go back to their desks, they will have two
sets of accountabilities to worry about. Simplistically this is their
horizontal accountabilities to peer departments as determined by the VNA and
the top down accountabilities that have always existed ... so where will
their priorities lie when push comes to shove? This is a challenge.
Now with respect to Stewart's attachment the two parts that resonated most
with me was element 6. "Concerns and Fears" and Element 10. "trust to move
forward". In my view when faced with a trade-off we will tend to favour
those we trust. That said we have been thinking a lot about the trust
element. We have conducted some retrospective analyses of several of our
SNA/ONA projects looking at the character of the networks when only
reciprocal links are shown (inferring trust). Though not overly rigorous,
the results showed a large variance in the density of what I call the "trust
network". Basically the most dense trust networks existed in discipline
based networks where little or no risk existed for sharing knowledge
(Stewart's element 6). The worst was between departments in a formal
organisational structure.
So here is the dilemma. We may be able to facilitate a trustful relationship
via the application of a value networking approach, but when people go back
to their desk they are faced with the distrust and internal competition
which characterises the formal organisation. Should we therefore be trying
to apply value networks up and down the hierarchy? We regularly find that
people nominate their boss as an advisor, but it is rarely reciprocated i.e.
less trust between management layers (no surprises here).
We have recently loaded a paper on our web site we have entitled "Department
@ War" ... borrowing from Stephen Covey's book on "the Speed of trust". The
paper looks at trust networks and has a short case study of our use of value
networks and partnership scorecard for addressing a "departments @ war"
situation. http://www.optimice.com.au/documents/DepartmentsatWar-final.pdf
Looking forward to your comments.
rgds
Laurence Lock Lee PhD
Partner, Optimice Pty Ltd
Ph: +61 (0)407001628
www.optimice.com.au
Blog: http://governanceandnetworks.blogspot.com/
Learn to network, then network to learn
Stewart Levine
about
where accountability will lie - the traditional hierarachy or the VN? What
will be
needed is the explicit recognition by the organization that work is
accomplished /
value created by networks in today's world and there is a definitive need to
both
change minds and systems. People will respond to new systems for measuring
contribution although we all know change is slow especially when we are
confronting
entrenched traditional belief systems.
Thanks for the thoughts in your paper. Among other things it points to the
general
lack of trust in the traditional structure. In this context I am always
suggesting
the need for detailed agreements in all formal reporting relationships as a
vehicle
to build trust. The dialogue is much more important than the ever evolving
agreement
itself which forms the basis for an "on-going performance appraisal." The
dialogue
required by the agreement model if engaged and administered authentically
will produce
real relationship. Two years ago I did a webinar for the AMA and about 3,300
people
turned up to hear about how to use agreements as the basis for performance
reviews.
This is a clear sign of how much people are struggling with this traditional
ritual.
So yes, there is a definte need for agreements even though we have implicit
understandings within the hierarchy.
Your inclusion of cost of conflict is noteworthy. I am sure if someone dug
in and measured
the real cost organizations would realize how much profit is leaking from
the system.
Mentioning reciporocation shows how important the assessment of value is as
the motivator
for continued contribution and enagagement.
Given the critical references to trust you might want to review the work of
Michelle and
Dennis Reina if you are not familiar. www.reinatrustbuilding.com
Speaking "Concerns & Fears" is a key element in building real connection,
dispelling
what may not be true and preventing trips to "Abilene!"
Stewart
Stewart L. Levine, Esq., Resolutionary
Author: Getting to Resolution
The Book of Agreement
The Cycle of Resolution in The Change Handbook
Collaboration 2.0
www.ResolutionWorks.com 510-777-1166 510-814-1010 cell
If you knew the secret history of those you would like to punish
you would find a sorrow and suffering enough to disarm all your hostility
- HW
Longfellow
Laurence Lock Lee
use of 360 deg performance reviews the agreement is nearly always "what you
agree to do for the boss", rather than "what the boss agreed to do for you".
I wonder how many managers lost out on a pay rise for not delivering on a
commitment to one of their staff? We still have a way to go....
Graham Douglas
Thanks for drawing attention to the Reina work.
While useful, it seems to address symptoms while not addressing the
fundamental basis of trust - a common basis for communication. Based on my
experiences in the Army, government, business and community organisations I
think more lasting improvements in organisations could be achieved with
training in a science-based common basis for communication such as
Integrative Thinking. It covers the fundamentals of human behaviour and
planning, strategy, tactics, action, review and evaluation which are
relevant to all fields.
Regards,
Graham
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.392 / Virus Database: 270.13.20/2251 - Release Date: 07/20/09
18:29:00
Matt Moore
We tend to get a lot of idealism on this list - which is no bad thing but it does need to be tempered with some realism.
Lack of trust in organisations is often a rational response to imbalances in power. It cannot be removed simply by workshops & training courses. The power structures within the organisation actually have to be changed. A value network perspective can be helpful here but it ain't the cure for cancer.
Graham Douglas
Doubtful if anyone would disagree with your statement "The power structures
within the organisation actually have to be changed." The question is
"how?". Among other things, VNA helps by shining a light on the structure.
Changing it requires those with power to want to change. However, they have
all been trained to think a hierarchical structure is the only one possible
and those with power "know best". These attitudes reflect a view of the
world and of the human mind which is not in accordance with our current and
much-improved scientific understanding of the world and people.
As a result, and as you have no doubt observed, nobody with power is keen to
relinquish it. To have them want to change requires training everyone in the
organisation to think differently about power, themselves and their
relationships with others and their physical, social and cultural
environment. That is what such training as science-based Integrative
Thinking seeks to initiate. By having everyone in an organisation trained to
become integrative thinkers in the same way, all can develop a common basis
for communication for discussing and eventually changing the power
structure. It is probably fair to say everybody seeks a sense of meaning, a
sense of belonging and a sense of personal power wherever they are in the
hierarchy. When those with power in organisations understand that the chance
of changing existing power structures should improve markedly.
Regards,
Graham
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matt Moore" <laalg...@yahoo.co.uk>
To: <Value-N...@googlegroups.com>
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
18:02:00
Verna Allee
thinking in a conscious reflective way and others learn by simply
doing something in a new way. Value network mapping provides a
pragmatic way for people to learn a new language and approach to
organizing their work, negotiating new norms of interaction (including
power by influence and effective role execution rather than position)
and new relationships.
I disagree that people believe strongly in hierarchy and that those
with power know best. Quite the contrary: I find people very
frustrated with the old structures and very much wanting to
collaborate and work as peers. What is lacking are organizational
design tools to organize the work itself as a dynamic system. For
decades our tools to organize have been org charts, process
engineering (linear production lines, sans human interactions) and
spreadsheets. You cannot expect people to operate differently if they
have no tools to do so.
Companies that are implementing value networks extensively provide
grounding and and context by teaching modeling skills for VNA, system
dynamics, and coaching in certain behaviors. But abstract "training"
is kept at a minimum in favor of using tools like value network
analysis and other systems thinking tools applied directly to everyday
work problems.
Here are examples
Boeing http://www.openvaluenetworks.com/Articles/FOT&V.pdf.
Symantec http://valuenetworks.com/public/item/231401
We are in agreement for the need for integrative thinking but there
are many ways to support learning those skills other than traditional
training programs, which people have little time for these days.
Action learning is harder in many ways but it "sticks' better.
Verna
On Jul 21, 9:04 pm, "Graham Douglas" <integrat...@optusnet.com.au>
wrote:
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG -www.avg.com
> Version: 8.5.392 / Virus Database: 270.13.22/2253 - Release Date: 07/21/09
> 18:02:00
>
>
>
>
>
> Checked by AVG -www.avg.com
> Version: 8.5.392 / Virus Database: 270.13.22/2253 - Release Date: 07/21/09 18:02:00- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Matt Moore
We're going to have to disagree here Graham. I don't think an enterprise-wide roll-out of integrative thinking training will change much at all.
All that will happen is that post-training, everyone will use integrative language to justify the actions they would have taken anyway.
Charles Ehin
----- Original Message -----From: Matt MooreSent: Tuesday, July 21, 2009 7:18 PMSubject: Re: How to Create More Value From Value Networks
Charles Ehin
Charles Ehin
virus found in this outgoing message.
Stewart Levine
and
lost productivity that flows from that way of being. The real loss from tis
kind of
mis / non communication includes:
Direct Cost of professionals to help resolve
Productivity cost - missed time or diminished
capacity
Opportunity Cost
Replacement Cost - to find, recruit, hire, train
Emotional Cost
When these are measured the wake-up will occurr
Stewart Levine
model
you will see they cover:
" the fundamentals of human behaviour and planning, strategy, tactics,
action, review and evaluation which are relevant to all fields."
Stewart Levine
for change.
-----Original Message-----
From: Value-N...@googlegroups.com
[mailto:Value-N...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Graham Douglas
Stewart Levine
learning
is not necesssary...people are much smarter that hierarchy's give them
credit
for. What is essential is providing the context and permission in which
personal
power, unique skills, and desire to be proud of work product and enjoy
relationships
can happen. I agree VN provides that. The interesting thing is that VN
provides
labels for what is already so.
Charles Ehin
power, unique skills, and desire to be proud of work product and enjoy
Stewart Levine
So simple isn't it Charlie!
<BR
Graham Douglas
Thanks for the several responses to my suggestion about the need for
training in science-based Integrative Thinking as a first step in helping to
change organisational structures. The suggestion arose out of Navneet's
highlighting the need for "newer methods to deal with complexity" under the
thread "How to Create More Value from Value Networks" on 21 July 09.
The word "training" seems to have negative connotations for some, perhaps
brought on by sitting through many training sessions replete with
prescriptions and PowerPoint. I agree that much training deserves its bad
reputation. However, I use the word in its dictionary sense of bringing a
person to a desired state or standard of efficiency by instruction and
practice. The course in Integrative Thinking which I offer is action
learning in that it is a self-directed course in which the learner applies
to their own circumstances the techniques offered. It can be completed in
twelve hours. Practice is, of course, necessary and becomes the norm in the
workplace.
However, training in Integrative Thinking is only the first step to changing
organisational structures from the prevalent hierarchical structure to what
I call an Integrative Governance structure where the definition of
"governance" I use is a synthesis of those offered by others in the field
and is described as follows:-
"Governance is the process by which government, business and civil society
organisations gain, exercise and maintain power in relation to individual
end-users/citizens and their physical, social and cultural environments.
Modern means of transparent communication are making present governance
approaches obsolete. Since the Industrial Revolution, organisations have
developed top-down, hierarchical, command and control governance
arrangements in a climate of slow, uncertain, incomplete and often secretive
communications to meet mass markets of relatively uninformed individual
end-users/citizens in independent nation states. These governance
arrangements are dominated by managers so the situation is sometimes
referred to as the managerial economy. Bullying, corruption, poor
accountability, poor acceptance of responsibility in organisations, poor
stakeholder engagement and lack of transparency are possible in this sort of
economy and are tolerated as being competitive ways of gaining, exercising
and maintaining power over people and their physical, social and cultural
environments. The cooperative and creative potential of most human beings is
seen as inferior to the ultra-competitive nature of some people."
Integrative Governance provides a new organisational framework and may be
introduced by using the governance policy templates offered. Also,
Integrative Governance involves the use of tools which complement
Integrative Thinking including Value Network Analysis.
While it is gratifying to learn from Verna she is finding "people very
organisations around the world follow the old hierarchical model and show no
desire to change. Given the human, environmental and financial costs
incurred by following that unsound model it seems reasonable for all of us
who have recognised the problem and who offer various tools and techniques
for improving the situation to work together to accelerate the change
needed. As a contribution towards this end I offer the low-cost self-funding
Integrative Improvement Institutes Project as outlined in paragraphs 52-56
at http://www.integrative-thinking.com/ACEPaperGDouglas10Jan.pdf . Please
email me direct if you would like to participate in the project and help
create more value from value networks. It is certainly not a top-down
hierarchical project so there is ample scope for everyone to take it as far
as they wish.
Regards,
Graham
GRAHAM DOUGLAS
FOUNDER, INTEGRATIVE FEDERATION
Achieving Sustainable Development
http://www.integrative-thinking.com
integ...@optusnet.com.au
Topic Editor, Sustainable Development, Encyclopedia of Earth
http://www.eoearth.org/
David Meggitt
Very appropropriate if top management concedes the requisite
flexibility in *their* organisations.
David
On Jul 23, 12:32 am, "Stewart Levine" <resolutionwo...@msn.com> wrote:
> So simple isn't it Charlie!
>
> From: Value-N...@googlegroups.com
> [mailto:Value-N...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Charles Ehin
> Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2009 2:37 PM
> To: Value-N...@googlegroups.com
> Subject: Re: How to Create More Value From Value Networks
>
> "What is essential is providing the context and permission in which personal
> power, unique skills, and desire to be proud of work product and enjoy
> relationships can happen." So true, Stewart!
>
> Charlie
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> Symantechttp://valuenetworks.com/public/item/231401
David Meggitt
corporate governance community in the UK, once digested.
David
On Jul 23, 5:28 am, "Graham Douglas" <integrat...@optusnet.com.au>
wrote:
> create more value from value networks. It is certainly not a top-down
> hierarchical project so there is ample scope for everyone to take it as far
> as they wish.
>
> Regards,
>
> Graham
>
> GRAHAM DOUGLAS
>
> FOUNDER, INTEGRATIVE FEDERATION
> Achieving Sustainable Developmenthttp://www.integrative-thinking.com
> Topic Editor, Sustainable Development, Encyclopedia of Earthhttp://www.eoearth.org/
Charles Ehin
Graham,
As far as I'm concerned there are only two general categories that define organizational structures. I outlined both categories in Unleashing Intellectual Capital (www.UnManagement.com). In summary they are:
- Controlled-Access System: Where access to the resources of a group and its activities are controlled by one or a few select individuals.
- Shared-Access System: Where resources of a group and its activities are impartially dealt with by all members of the group.
Cheers,
Charlie
David Meggitt
Can you help? With respect to governance, we must assume that all
activities in a conventional managed organisation need to be audited.
Have ways been found to audit to the satisfaction of compliance
officials and auditors the activities within the informal network that
accompany the controlled access system?
Thanks
David
> As far as I'm concerned there are only two general categories that define organizational structures. I outlined both categories in Unleashing Intellectual Capital (www.UnManagement.com<http://www.unmanagement.com/>). In summary they are:
>
> a.. Controlled-Access System: Where access to the resources of a group and its activities are controlled by one or a few select individuals.
> b.. Shared-Access System: Where resources of a group and its activities are impartially dealt with by all members of the group.
> create more value from value networks. It is certainly not a top-down
> hierarchical project so there is ample scope for everyone to take it as far
> as they wish.
>
> Regards,
>
> Graham
>
> GRAHAM DOUGLAS
>
> FOUNDER, INTEGRATIVE FEDERATION
> Achieving Sustainable Development
> integrat...@optusnet.com.au<mailto:integrat...@optusnet.com.au>
> > Symantechttp://valuenetworks.com/public/item/231401<http://valuenetworks.com/public/item/231401>
> > We are in agreement for the need for integrative thinking but there
> > are many ways to support learning those skills other than traditional
> > training programs, which people have little time for these days.
> > Action learning is harder in many ways but it "sticks' better.
>
> > Verna
>
>
> read more »
Charles Ehin
"Have ways been found to audit to the satisfaction of compliance officials and auditors the activities within the informal network that accompany the controlled access system?" Not that I'm aware of, David.
Why would you want to "audit" the activities of emergent systems/networks? You can't nor do you want to "manage" them. They change like ameba when attempts are made to control or manage them. You can influence informal networks by way of different organizational contexts/ecologies but the informal side of an enterprise will always stay informal as a self-organizing system.
Best,
Charlie
Laurence Lock Lee
I agree Charlie … Compliance assumes that there is some pre-defined “best practice” that needs to be audited against to ensure best practice is being accomplished. For emergent situations and value networks I would suggest a simple audit would the degree to which “roles” are meeting their “promises” or actively re-negotiating them if required.
Laurence Lock Lee PhD
Partner, Optimice Pty Ltd
Ph: +61 (0)407001628
Blog: http://governanceandnetworks.blogspot.com/
Learn to network, then network to learn
> read more »<BR
Charles Ehin
Well put, Laurence. I cover this subject in considerable detail in my latest book published in June. Its title is, The Organizational Sweet Spot: Engaging the Innovative Dynamics of Your Social Networks (www.UnManagement.com). The book contains 21 models that help to explain my conceptual framework on the topic of individual and group innovation dynamics.
Cheers,
Charlie----- Original Message -----From: Laurence Lock LeeSent: Thursday, July 23, 2009 11:32 PMSubject: RE: How to Create More Value From Value NetworksI agree Charlie . Compliance assumes that there is some pre-defined "best practice" that needs to be audited against to ensure best practice is being accomplished. For emergent situations and value networks I would suggest a simple audit would the degree to which "roles" are meeting their "promises" or actively re-negotiating them if required.
Verna Allee
Hi Charlie, could we persuade you to share with us one of your favorite models from you new book?
Verna
<BR
David Coleman
I follow your posts pretty religiously as I do Verna. Since we wrote a book together and
now know you better, I am somewhat familiar with your work with agreements and your cycle
of resolution. I agree that things are shifting organizationally, and as you
know I have been doing a lot of research on social networks in the enterprise.
Some of our findings show that virtual teams or distance teams work best when
each members local context is understood by the other team members.
Another way of saying this is that there needs to be a common context
in which to collaborate and transfer value. Where most teams get fouled
up in not in the value transfer part, but the common context part.
In terms of social networks impacting the organization this is kind of a summary
of what I see (which I have also been blogging about at www.collaborate.com).
The social network revolution started with consumers, then spread to politics
and now is finally starting to enter the business realm. However, it is only over the
last year that we have seen a significant number of business start to adopt
these networks. Of course the high tech area has been ahead of most other
verticals and has adopted these technologies both more quickly and with
greater penetration (why that is, is a whole different post).
I am fond of saying that if you change the way you communicate and collaborate
you change the organizational structure (which can be a horrifying thing to hear
if you are an IT person). Old model organizations were set up in hierarchies to
aggregate and filter information each step of the way up the chain. These kind
of hierarchies work well in a stable environment, but we live in anything but a
stable environment. With today's collaboration and communication technologies
you don't need to aggregate and filter information at each level, everyone in a
social network does collaborative filtering. In addition, these technologies have
flattened the organization. Where there used to be 5 layers between the CEO
and the mail room guy, today there is only 1-2 layers. Organizations are
starting to form around constellations of expertise and constellations of
implementation, and a virtual team combines both to be successful.
One of the other factors we see driving these technologies into the organization
is the shifting of generations in the workforce. Gen Y is coming in and Baby
Boomers are leaving or retiring. I heard a talk recently from an executive at
Cisco who said that by June of next year there would be more Gen Ys working
at Cisco than Baby Boomers.
I apologize for the rambling post, and all I was trying to say is that these new
technologies and the new generation coming into the workplace are not only
more networked organizations (flattened hierarchy) which are better at adapting
to a shifting environment, but they are also social. Gen Y are Digital Natives,
they have had computers their whole lives and connected to their friends via
the computer for most of their lives. So the are used to making decisions as
a community or network. Baby Boomers are Digital Immigrants, we did not
have computers all of our lives and have had to learn these new technologies
and how they are changing everything from retail to how drugs are developed.
Another interesting finding that supports value networks, is the fact that in
about 25% of the cases (of business people we surveyed in a variety of
populations) social networks seem to rise organically. By that I mean
there is no management or IT champion for it, they just start at a grass
roots level and then spread.
As a matter of fact, in a recent interview with Hummana (Insurance company)
where this happened, their greatest fear was that someone in management
or IT would see the success of this social network and want to make it their project,
which they speculated would destroy it.
Today it is 17 people from all parts of the company that
meet informally about every 3 weeks. They have even gone so far as to
create the policy for the company around social networks. This is a group
with no charter, no management or IT support and no budget, yet what they
are doing is so powerful that a large, stogy, insurance company mired in
organizational hierarchies has seen the value of the social network and
let it proceed.
These 17 people that meet informally, I would call a value
network because none of them has any authority, they just meet to
discuss problems and exchange best practices. I suspect as time goes
by, and social networking technology becomes more accepted in the
enterprise and more Gen Ys work in the enterprise that we will see a
continued shift away from hierarchies and a move to more agile and
flexible organizational structures like a network. With a spontaneous
rate of 25% today for the organic rise of social networks, a year from
now that rate could be 50%. Penetration of these technologies today
is mostly in high tech, by next year: Higher education, health care,
government (military and non-military) and even manufacturing will
have started to use social networks, or as Verna calls them
"conscious purposeful networks."
Collaborative Strategies
(415) 282-9197
dav...@collaborate.com
Skype = ddcoleman
Twitter = dcoleman100
"The soft stuff is the hard stuff"
"Collaboration 2.0" Http://www.happyabout.info/collaboration2.0.php
New Book: http://www.happyabout.info/42rules/successful-collaboration.php
Stewart Levine
Thanks Graham. I think what is useful is to substitute the word learning for training. We train other animals,
we hope people will learn so let's call it learning.
In terms of breaking the barriers of hierarchy it's up to us to lead the way...slow kaizen at first and then
just when are ready to give up the tipping point of critical mass will give us what we were looking for and it will
seem easy. I just facilitated a program for the AMA and found myself speaking about value networks.
I will be in touch off line. Thanks for the offer.
Stewart
David Meggitt
activities of emergent systems/networks?" and acknowledging David
Coleman's post, I would respond that those with responsibility for
audit are asking that question. Also, those with accountability need
to have an assurance that activities within the informal network that
impact formal deliverables and formal workflow will not lead to
organisational unserviceability or collapse. However,I do appreciate
your sharing the reality of organisational life described in the
chapter you posted up. It was fully taken on board through your
earlier book "Hidden Assets." .
I ask the question now because it is one I have been addressing in the
UK, post financial collapse. To that end, I recently produced a note,
more akin to a stew of related ideas, really, that feature value
network thinking. Laurence's suggestion that "a simple audit would be
for to add to Table 1: "Accountability in formal and informal work
practices" in the Note.
If anyone cares to look and, even better, post up any comments, they
can read the Note on my web log here ...
http://davidmeggittlog.ning.com/forum/topics/a-super-auditor-role-with
An introductory "blog" is here ....
http://davidmeggittlog.ning.com/profiles/blogs/a-super-auditor-for
The audience consists of accountancy and governance authorities within
the UK, independent NEDs and a VP in a major ERP vendor with an
interest in the questions.
Thank you for your interest.
David
On Jul 24, 8:16 pm, "Charles Ehin" <kal...@msn.com> wrote:
> Sure, Verna. Thanks for asking. Please see the attached.
>
> Best,
> Charlie
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Verna Allee<mailto:verna.al...@valuenetworks.com>
> To: Value-N...@googlegroups.com<mailto:Value-N...@googlegroups.com>
> Sent: Friday, July 24, 2009 12:35 PM
> Subject: RE: How to Create More Value From Value Networks
>
> Hi Charlie, could we persuade you to share with us one of your favorite models from you new book?
>
> Verna
>
> Sent: Friday, July 24, 2009 10:06 AM
> To: Value-N...@googlegroups.com<mailto:Value-N...@googlegroups.com>
> Subject: Re: How to Create More Value From Value Networks
>
> Cheers,
>
> Charlie
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
>
> To: Value-N...@googlegroups.com<mailto:Value-N...@googlegroups.com>
>
>
> Subject: RE: How to Create More Value From Value Networks
>
> I agree Charlie . Compliance assumes that there is some pre-defined "best practice" that needs to be audited against to ensure best practice is being accomplished. For emergent situations and value networks I would suggest a simple audit would the degree to which "roles" are meeting their "promises" or actively re-negotiating them if required.
>
> Laurence Lock Lee PhD
>
> Partner, Optimice Pty Ltd
>
> Ph: +61 (0)407001628
>
>
> Blog:http://governanceandnetworks.blogspot.com/<http://governanceandnetworks.blogspot.com/>
> Learn to network, then network to learn
>
> From: Value-N...@googlegroups.com [mailto:Value-N...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Charles Ehin
> Sent: Friday, 24 July 2009 8:51 AM
> To: Value-N...@googlegroups.com
> Subject: Re: How to Create More Value From Value Networks
>
> "Have ways been found to audit to the satisfaction of compliance officials and auditors the activities within the informal network that accompany the controlled access system?" Not that I'm aware of, David.
>
> Why would you want to "audit" the activities of emergent systems/networks? You can't nor do you want to "manage" them. They change like ameba when attempts are made to control or manage them. You can influence informal networks by way of different organizational contexts/ecologies but the informal side of an enterprise will always stay informal as a self-organizing system.
>
> Best,
>
> Charlie
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
>
> To: Value Networks<mailto:Value-N...@googlegroups.com>
> Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2009 2:34 PM
>
> Subject: Re: How to Create More Value From Value Networks
>
> Charlie,
>
> Can you help? With respect to governance, we must assume that all
> activities in a conventional managed organisation need to be audited.
> Have ways been found to audit to the satisfaction of compliance
> officials and auditors the activities within the informal network that
> accompany the controlled access system?
> Thanks
> David
>
> > create more value from value networks. It is certainly not a top-down
> > hierarchical project so there is ample scope for everyone to take it as far
> > as they wish.
>
> > Regards,
>
> > Graham
>
> > GRAHAM DOUGLAS
>
> > FOUNDER, INTEGRATIVE FEDERATION
> > Achieving Sustainable Development
>
>
> read more »
>
> Organizational Realms.docx
> 159KViewDownload
Graham Douglas
----- Original Message -----From: Stewart Levine
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.392 / Virus Database: 270.13.26/2257 - Release Date: 07/23/09 18:00:00
Charles Ehin
David, we are dealing with a very “delicate” organizational/network issue here. I understand top management’s concerns in trying to find ways to assure that no person or informal network is undermining the day-to-day activities of an enterprise. That assurance, however, is impossible to attain in the “traditional sense” of management through top-down control and audit.
The reason for that is quite straightforward and partially answered by my last post in response to Verna’s request to introduce one of the models from The Organizational Sweet Spot. Simply put, you cannot (nor do you want to) manage the informal side of a business organization or network. As soon as you try to manage informal networks they are no longer informal. In the process these emergent networks change their configurations like an ameba and continue to operate without the consent of management.
The bottom line is that there is no known way to do away with informal networks even under the most stringent conditions like gulags, concentration camps or prisons. My advice is to develop organizational context (shared-access systems) where high levels of mutual trust and cooperation prevail. In such social contexts/ecologies informal networks tend to work more in the open than trying to conceal their activities in order to avoid management interference.
I realize that for most managers unfamiliar with group dynamics this can be quite unnerving. In order to resolve these “control” issues the focus needs to be on context, context, and context. Contexts are the only factors that can be managed. Informal networks remain informal no matter what efforts are undertaken to manage them. By the way, it’s within these emergent networks where most of the innovative ideas are generated.
Best,
Charlie
Stewart Levine
Charlie, as I was reading your fine example the challenge became so clear - shifting the
operating system of each individual from "fearing the power of the boss" to "engaging
and enjoying the power of the network." A few years ago it became clear to me that
in the realm of thinking about resolving conflicts it is not essential that it take multiple
generations to change if we educate kids on a new way of thinking about the context.
That I think is the real work here…and we have been dawdling for at least twenty years.
Stewart
<BR
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:black'>
Stewart Levine
Thanks David…your post is quite hopeful and validates the predictions of Wikinomics…yes, Gen Y
becoming dominant will be a big tipping point. The Humana story is a great one, in some ways as
networks become powerful because they are effective people will likely begin to ignore the
hierarchy or the hierarchy will realize they need to accommodate the network because
productivity is more important than power. The concern is that some business "regimes" will
value power more than effectiveness and push back against it.
The next few years should be quite "interesting."
I love the phrase "Digital Immigrants."
Stewart
From: Value-N...@googlegroups.com
[mailto:Value-N...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of David Coleman
Sent: Friday, July 24, 2009 1:49 PM
To: Value-N...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: How to Create More Value From Value Networks
Stewart,
Benoit Couture
Stewart,
For the sake of being relevant to your answer, I am bringing my personal situation in context with what you often write with your signature: |
|
"If you knew the secret history of those you would like to punish
you would find a sorrow and suffering enough to disarm all your hostility" |
I have made my way on the internet as a stay-at-home-dad who fits quite well the profile that you describe, as I live in exile from my birth place since Nov 1978. I was 16 when I gave up a promising hockey carrer, seemingly to the public, because of drug abuse and all the baggage that this carried in the mid 70s.
Along with that, it is important to point out that my formal education is 3 years away from high school graduate.
So the long story short, is the life of one who looses all basis for good reputation and who swims against the currents of peer pressured self-destrution toward to fundamental presonal-social renewal.
So in Feb. of 2002, there was a review of SUFA. This is the Social Union Framework Agreement of all Canadian governemtns, except for the province of Quebec.
I came across a tiny invitation to participate in the review, to the people at large, at the bottom of a page in a community paper.
That invitation seemed like an excellent starting point to use the internet in my bid to go from drop out to re-integrated participant of sociaty, from my new home position.
I sent to the SUFA review a package of ideas and one of them was Mutual Penetration with Histoy.
From |
|
""If you knew the secret history of those you would like to punish
you would find a sorrow and suffering enough to disarm all your hostility" |
to
"...shifting the operating system of each individual from "fearing the power of the boss" to "engaging and enjoying the power of the network"...:
is where I think that something like Mutual Penetration with History could be helpful:
My aim in contributing on the internet since the SUFA's review of 2002, is to find the elements of the catalyst needed for the healing of Canadian unity from personal reconciliation to communal assembling, from the micro to macro view of understanding, reaching the maturing integrity of humanities from the local sweet spot to the global groove that takes us to the shores of welbeing and of content satisfaction...that's why I had to quit hockey and to take on the long and winding road to here and now!
Hopefully, I did not trow anything out of context,
Benoit Couture
Edmonton, Canada
--- On Sat, 7/25/09, Stewart Levine <resolut...@msn.com> wrote:
|
|
|
Charles Ehin
and enjoying the power of the network.' Well put, Stewart, and thanks for the positive feedback!
Best,
Charlie
----- Original Message -----From: Stewart LevineSent: Saturday, July 25, 2009 4:26 PMSubject: RE: How to Create More Value From Value Networks
Charlie, as I was reading your fine example the challenge became so clear - shifting the
operating system of each individual from "fearing the power of the boss" to "engaging
and enjoying the power of the network." A few years ago it became clear to me that
in the realm of thinking about resolving conflicts it is not essential that it take multiple
generations to change if we educate kids on a new way of thinking about the context.
That I think is the real work here.and we have been dawdling for at least twenty years.
Charles Ehin
Benoit, you have quite a background. Your efforts to not only to pick yourself up literally by the boot straps and then continuing to help others with their lives are commendably!!!
Best,
CharlieGraham Douglas
Apropos "how to audit?" and other posts on how to create more value from
value networks, has anyone had any experience of the work of The
International Intangible Management Standards Institute at
http://www.standardsinstitute.org/nws/ ? If so would you care to comment
please?
Regards,
Graham
From: "David Meggitt" <ma...@davidmeggitt.com>
To: "Value Networks" <Value-N...@googlegroups.com>
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
18:24:00
resolutionworks Levine
Stewart
Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr!</A
Stewart Levine
Interesting thought Charlie that in the context of informal networks we bcome more high context operatives.
> 159KViewDownload<BR
Graham Douglas
| ||||
|
______________________________________________________________________ |
|
|
|||
| |||
----- Original Message -----From: Stewart Levine
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.392 / Virus Database: 270.13.33/2267 - Release Date: 07/27/09 17:59:00
Laurence Lock Lee
Several years ago we conducted a “knowledge audit” for a government agency. I happened to meet up with our client from that exercise last night and we recalled our bemoaning the fact that it was called an “audit” as this has a specific meaning in the public service …. meaning lots of numbered recommendations expecting a compliance response etc.. So having successfully completed the project and the executive “accepting” the recommendations we then had to spend a few weeks re-crafting the recommendations to fit an expected audit framework … all for the public record!
Hence I would agree on “evaluation” over “audit”.
Learn to network, then network to learn
David Meggitt
Let us specify the context as a commercial enterprise that is subject
to audit. The formal organisation will have work flow supported by IT
systems. We also *learn* from George Colony founder and CEO of
Forrester Research that "If we don’t get from IT to BT (Business
Technology) we’re going to have more disasters like our present
mortgage meltdown. Why? Because IT creates impenetrable systems that
human beings can’t manage. BT is about human beings back in control".
This implies that the informal organisation (networks) are
supplementing / bypassing /overriding the formal systems to get work
done. It's the real organisation at work - and VNA helps reveal that.
So, in order to attain what you call a "positive dynamic order" in
your "Hidden Assets," switched on management will allow variation
whilst still being in a position of being accountable for the
outcomes.
For this I envisage VNA identifying how work really gets done (both
formal and informal) and in the right context of support creates the
space for self organisation to use available tacit knowledge, fuelled
by the social capital surrounding it. Our formal workflow will contain
a hole, if you like (with no prescripted activities) but an outcome
and who was accountable for it. In project management terms, we would
have "fuzzy logic."
The audit would note the "hole" and its purpose and pass on!
Does this make sense?
In response to a later post by Laurence / Graham/, I would prefer to
stick with audit, rather than "evaluation" for the purpose of teasing
out this delicate issue. BTW, the World Bank used to (may still)
incorporate an Ex Post Evaluation of Projects for lessons to be
learned for future ones. It's not the same as a repeatable process,
really.
Best wishes,
David
> An introductory "blog" is here ....
> The audience consists of accountancy and governance authorities within
> the UK, independent NEDs and a VP in a major ERP vendor with an
> interest in the questions.
>
> Thank you for your interest.
>
> David
>
> > Sure, Verna. Thanks for asking. Please see the attached.
>
> > Best,
> > Charlie
>
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Verna Allee<mailto:verna.al...@valuenetworks.com<mailto:verna.al...@valuenetworks.com>>
> > To: Value-N...@googlegroups.com<mailto:Value-N...@googlegroups.com<mail to:Value-N...@googlegroups.com%3Cmailto:Value-N...@googlegroups.com >>
> > Sent: Friday, July 24, 2009 12:35 PM
> > Subject: RE: How to Create More Value From Value Networks
>
> > Hi Charlie, could we persuade you to share with us one of your favorite models from you new book?
>
> > Verna
>
> > Sent: Friday, July 24, 2009 10:06 AM
> > To: Value-N...@googlegroups.com<mailto:Value-N...@googlegroups.com<mail to:Value-N...@googlegroups.com%3Cmailto:Value-N...@googlegroups.com >>
> > Subject: Re: How to Create More Value From Value Networks
>
> > Cheers,
>
> > Charlie
>
> > ----- Original Message -----
>
>
> > To: Value-N...@googlegroups.com<mailto:Value-N...@googlegroups.com<mail to:Value-N...@googlegroups.com%3Cmailto:Value-N...@googlegroups.com >>
> > Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2009 11:32 PM
>
> > Subject: RE: How to Create More Value From Value Networks
>
> > I agree Charlie . Compliance assumes that there is some pre-defined "best practice" that needs to be audited against to ensure best practice is being accomplished. For emergent situations and value networks I would suggest a simple audit would the degree to which "roles" are meeting their "promises" or actively re-negotiating them if required.
>
> > Laurence Lock Lee PhD
>
> > Partner, Optimice Pty Ltd
>
> > Ph: +61 (0)407001628
>
>
> > Blog:http://governanceandnetworks.blogspot.com/<http://governanceandnetworks.blogspot.com/<http://governanceandnetworks.blogspot.com/>>
> > Learn to network, then network to learn
>
> > Sent: Friday, 24 July 2009 8:51 AM
> > To: Value-N...@googlegroups.com<mailto:Value-N...@googlegroups.com>
> > Subject: Re: How to Create More Value From Value Networks
>
>
> > Why would you want to "audit" the activities of emergent systems/networks? You can't nor do you want to "manage" them. They change like ameba when attempts are made to control or manage them. You can influence informal networks by way of different organizational contexts/ecologies but the informal side of an enterprise will always stay informal as a self-organizing system.
>
> > Best,
>
> > Charlie
>
> > ----- Original Message -----
>
>
> > To: Value Networks<mailto:Value-N...@googlegroups.com<mailto:Value-Networks@googl egroups.com>>
> > Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2009 2:34 PM
>
> > Subject: Re: How to Create More Value From Value Networks
>
> > Charlie,
>
> > Can you help? With respect to governance, we must assume that all
> > activities in a conventional managed organisation need to be audited.
> > Have ways been found to audit to the satisfaction of compliance
> > officials and auditors the activities within the informal network that
> > accompany the controlled access system?
> > Thanks
> > David
>
> > > Graham,
>
> > > a.. Controlled-Access System: Where access to the resources of a group and its activities are controlled by one or a few select individuals.
> > > b.. Shared-Access System: Where resources of a group and its activities are impartially dealt with by all members of the group.
> > > Cheers,
>
> > > Charlie
>
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Graham Douglas<mailto:integrat...@optusnet.com.au<mailto:integrat...@optusnet.com.au<mailto:integrat...@optusnet.com.au%3Cmailto:integrat...@optusnet.com.au>>>
> > > To: Value-N...@googlegroups.com<mailto:Value-N...@googlegroups.com<mail <mailto:Value-N...@googlegroups.com%3Cmailto:Value-Networks@googlegroup s.com%3Cmail> to:Value-N...@googlegroups.com%3cmailto:Value-N...@googlegroups.com >>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2009 10:28 PM
> > > Subject: Re: How to
>
>
> read more »
Stewart Levine
"Assessment" might even be a better word…for me it has no connotation of "judgement."
Stewart
Stewart L. Levine, Esq., Resolutionary
Author: Getting to Resolution
The Book of Agreement
The Cycle of Resolution in The Change Handbook
Collaboration 2.0
www.ResolutionWorks.com 510-777-1166 510-814-1010 cell
If you knew the secret history of those you would like to punish
you would find a sorrow and suffering enough to disarm all your hostility
- HW Longfellow
Charles Ehin
David,
I think you're right on target with fuzzy logic and all. The "hole" you mention in the formal work flow, I suggest, is filled by The Organizational Sweet Spot. It is here where the formal and informal systems overlap and self-organization reigns.
Essentially, both sides come to a meeting of the minds without imposed supervision. There is leadership involved but that leadership is situational (not assigned) or what I call in The Organizational Sweet Spot, Catalytic Leadership.
Cheers,
Charlie
----- Original Message -----From: David MeggittTo: Value Networks
Van Wave, Timothy W. (CDC/OD/OCPHP)
Greetings,
Just joined the group and have started my learning process. Something I hope someone can help with is a commonly agreed to definition of and distinction between a network and a system. My interest area is health services and much of the literature I read in that arena seems to use the two words as synonyms. In general conversation that may be OK . I have read of open and closed systems, systems infrastructure, networks that are open, networks as connected systems, and health sectors containing both.
If I can get a handle on the differences/ similarities between networks and systems that would be a great anchor point.
Tim
Verna Allee
Hi Tim and welcome. This should evoke a lively discussion. I refer to network modeling as a system level tool, but would never confuse the network with the system. Networks always operate within a larger system of conditions, enablers, influences and multiple variables. They certainly are not synonymous. Network modeling supports systemic ways of thinking of course, but models – like metaphors - can only be extended so far. J
Verna
Graham Douglas
Version: 8.5.392 / Virus Database: 270.13.35/2269 - Release Date: 07/28/09 17:58:00
Sergej van Middendorp | Miles Ahead
I agree with Verna that a system is a broader concept than a network. Taking an integral perspective, I would say that a network is a holon that we can see from different perspectives. For example, a network has an individual inside perspective: my personal conscious experience of a network being present and my relation to it. From a collective internal perspective I would say that a network could be distinguished as having its own cultural values, ethics, art, language etc. which distinguishes it and which defines the relationship the group of people associated with it experience. From an external perspective we can observe and model the network and we could say that modeling networks has become part of our organizational toolkit first through social networks analysis and later through value network analysis. In that sense representing a systemic nested evolution of systems designed to make sense of networks.
I would summarize systems as a partial perspective that you can take on networks, which includes network models and network systems, but which is not limited to networks only.
Cheers, Sergej
Hi Tim and welcome. This should evoke a lively discussion. I refer to network modeling as a system level tool, but would never confuse the network with the system. Networks always operate within a larger system of conditions, enablers, influences and multiple variables. They certainly are not synonymous. Network modeling supports systemic ways of thinking of course, but models – like metaphors - can only be extended so far. J
Verna
From: Value-N...@googlegroups.com [mailto:Value-N...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Van Wave, Timothy W. (CDC/OD/OCPHP)
Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2009 1:59 PM
To: Value-N...@googlegroups.com
Subject: network vs. system
Greetings,
Van Wave, Timothy W. (CDC/OD/OCPHP)
Verna,
Thank you for your response. I agree, intuitively, that a system and a network are not the same thing but struggle to differentiate between the two and at the same time show the relationship they have. Systems research in the field of public health is a relatively new application for this established science. Over the last 10 years, there have been an array of approaches used to describe the boundaries of the public health (PH) system, its functional components, processes, effects, and improvement strategies. More recently, social network analysis has been used to examine the pattern of relationships among PH system partners and estimate the relevant contributions each makes to improving health in a population. I am beginning to believe that the PH system is really a PH network comprised of systems as nodes in that network. I have included, below, two paragraphs that describe the current and common definition of the PH system and basis for PH systems research. I hope this helps the group understand a little about he forest I am in.
Major elements comprising the public health system include private non-profit associations, educational institutions, personal health services industry, private industry, community-based organizations, other public sector agencies, and official governmental public health agencies. Public health infrastructure is but one part of the public health system. Definitions vary but, in practical terms, public health system infrastructure consists of federal, state, and local governmental public health agencies and the resources they need to operate effectively (1). These governmental organizations form the backbone of the public health system and interact with a wide array of other community partners to ensure the public’s health. To accomplish these tasks, the public health system and its infrastructure relies on common operating assets (COA) such as adequate workforce, finance, data and technology, organization, and governance (standards, policy and law), each of which are interdependent and interacting constructs that encompass all levels of government, as well as both the public and private sectors (1-4).
Wikipedia offers this definition of systems thinking: Systems thinking is a mental model that promotes the belief that the component parts of a system will act differently when isolated from its environment or other parts of the system, and argues against Descartes's reductionist view. It includes viewing systems in a holistic manner, rather than through purely reductionist techniques. It promotes gaining insights into the whole by understanding the linkages and interactions between the elements that comprise the whole "system", consistent with systems philosophy. Systems thinking recognizes that all human activity systems are open systems; therefore, they are affected by the environment in which they exist. Systems thinking recognizes that in complex systems events are separated by distance and time; therefore, small catalytic events can cause large changes in the system. Systems thinking acknowledges that a change in one area of a system can adversely affect another area of the system; thus, it promotes organizational communication at all levels in order to avoid the silo effect.
1. Baker EL, Jr., Koplan JP. 2002. Strengthening the nation's public health infrastructure: historic challenge, unprecedented opportunity. Health Aff (Millwood) 21: 15-27
2. Baker EL, Potter MA, Jones DL, Mercer SL, Cioffi JP, et al. 2005. The public health infrastructure and our nation's health. Annu Rev Public Health 26: 303-18
3. Handler A, Issel M, Turnock B. 2001. A conceptual framework to measure performance of the public health system. Am J Public Health 91: 1235-9
4. Scutchfield FD, Knight EA, Kelly AV, Bhandari MW, Vasilescu IP. 2004. Local public health agency capacity and its relationship to public health system performance. J Public Health Manag Pract 10: 204-15
Tim
________________________________________
From: Value-N...@googlegroups.com [mailto:Value-N...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Verna Allee
Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2009 10:36 PM
To: Value-N...@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: network vs. system
Hi Tim and welcome. This should evoke a lively discussion. I refer to network modeling as a system level tool, but would never confuse the network with the system. Networks always operate within a larger system of conditions, enablers, influences and multiple variables. They certainly are not synonymous. Network modeling supports systemic ways of thinking of course, but models – like metaphors - can only be extended so far. ☺
David Meggitt
transition period as we move to new management principles, whilst
still grounded in those invented by our forefathers born in the 19th
century (viz: Gary Hamel, The Future of Management) I would feel more
comfortable with slightly different language.
Speaking of self-organization implies a more individualistic
perspective than what we may want to create. Whilst totally
subscribing to the power of self-organization outside the organization
with Linux or Wikipedia as primary examples, maybe the current reality
of organization is that work gets done through networks that are
intertwined within the formal hierarchy.
Hubert Saint-Onge has suggested to me that all current organizations
have organizational structures with two dimensions: the formal
hierarchy for accountability and resource allocation and the networked
dimension for exchanging knowledge and collaborating across
capabilities and disciplines. These two dimensions need to be
maintained as complementary to one another. They are rarely
alternatives.
Since reference to knowledge management has also been made in this
complete thread, I would add that both he and Charles Savage
appreciate, too, that ‘knowledge management’ has really become an
expression frozen in time. I’ll leave others to ponder on that.
David
> > An introductory "blog" is here ....
> > The audience consists of accountancy and governance authorities within
> > the UK, independent NEDs and a VP in a major ERP vendor with an
> > interest in the questions.
>
> > Thank you for your interest.
>
> > David
>
> > > Sure, Verna. Thanks for asking. Please see the attached.
>
> > > Best,
> > > Charlie
>
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Verna Allee<mailto:verna.al...@valuenetworks.com<mailto:verna.al...@valuenetworks.com<mailto:verna.al...@valuenetworks.com%3Cmailto:verna.al...@valuenetworks.com>>>
> > > To: Value-N...@googlegroups.com<mailto:Value-N...@googlegroups.com<mail <mailto:Value-N...@googlegroups.com%3Cmailto:Value-Networks@googlegroup s.com%3Cmail> to:Value-N...@googlegroups.com%3Cmailto:Value-N...@googlegroups.com >>
> > > Sent: Friday, July 24, 2009 12:35 PM
> > > Subject: RE: How to Create More Value From Value Networks
>
> > > Hi Charlie, could we persuade you to share with us one of your favorite models from you new book?
>
> > > Verna
>
> > > Sent: Friday, July 24, 2009 10:06 AM
> > > To: Value-N...@googlegroups.com<mailto:Value-N...@googlegroups.com<mail <mailto:Value-N...@googlegroups.com%3Cmailto:Value-Networks@googlegroup s.com%3Cmail> to:Value-N...@googlegroups.com%3Cmailto:Value-N...@googlegroups.com >>
> > > Subject: Re: How to Create More Value From Value Networks
>
> > > Cheers,
>
> > > Charlie
>
> > > ----- Original Message -----
>
>
> > > To: Value-N...@googlegroups.com<mailto:Value-N...@googlegroups.com<mail <mailto:Value-N...@googlegroups.com%3Cmailto:Value-Networks@googlegroup s.com%3Cmail> to:Value-N...@googlegroups.com%3Cmailto:Value-N...@googlegroups.com >>
> > > Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2009 11:32
>
>
> read more »
Laurence Lock Lee
I got this table from Dupont over a decade ago and still use it when I talk about the responsibilities of communities of practice. While I still believe this is relevant for CoPs I think managing horizontally needs to be more than one side of the matrix offering a helping had to the other vertical dimension. I personally would not reserve the word “accountability” for the vertical/formal organisation. I believe that commitments made to peers across a network should receive at least equal billing when it comes to accountability, otherwise we will always be at the mercy of “Master-Slave” relationships which basically kills trust within organisations.
|
Knowledge Centre Responsibilities |
Line Management Responsibilities |
|
Effectiveness |
Efficiency |
|
“Possibility seeking” arm |
“Implementing” arm |
|
“Doing the right thing” |
“Doing it right” |
|
To tell the line management the possibilities |
To tell the network its needs |
|
Understand operational needs, look for the right members, facilitate, be an agent for discovery |
Provide direction and optimal resource allocation |
|
Assist with paradigm shifts, systems, processes and capabilities (like a trusted consultant) |
Be open to collaborative decision making with a wider group |
Rgds
Learn to network, then network to learn
Laurence Lock Lee
I don’t know if this helps but I can describe a project I am working on that draws on all that has been mentioned here. We have been contracted to undertake a social network analysis of a local government authority (in the UK) to analyse how their partnership programmes were operating. We selected one program to analyse. The sponsor suspected that the traditional approach of creating a project team/program office may not be the best way to achieve the partnering objectives. The SNA showed predictably that the community started to rely on the central resource for everything i.e. the project office became both the sole co-ordinator but also a major and unintended bottleneck. By the way we found exactly the same result when we did this for a health authority a few years ago. The SNA basically shows that once the project personnel are removed (say end of project) the network goes back to what it was i.e. no sustainable result. The interventions we suggest to change the way they run programs is to move from a “co-ordinate” model to a “facilitate” model where more sustainable communities of workers can be established. Now this isn’t that easy to appreciate when the style of operation has been ingrained for so long. To help describe simply what was going on I used some systems thinking archetypes (specifically “tragedy of the commons” and “limits to growth”) to convince them that what is needed is more than incremental improvement … but this is still work in progress.
I would expect if the argument and evidence provided by the SNA (which is essentially a diagnostic) is accepted, then there will be a need to facilitate some peer to peer partnerships with the government agency and NGOs, for which value network analysis is ideally placed … but we are not there yet. What I have described here is I believe “systemic” across most government led programs looking to engage with NGOs in delivering a service. SNA can show in some detail as to what is occurring in a specific context. Systems thinking can generalise this to a more generic need. Value networks provides tools for the negotiating peer to peer co-operation either at a generic level but also down to specific contexts e.g. your specific public health situation.
rgds
Learn to network, then network to learn
David Meggitt
I would still distinguish between (possibly) two types /
manifestations of "accountability."
The vertical/formal we associate directly with the accountancy / audit
disciplines and roles.
The second is more of a peer to peer thing in the collaborative
spaces / informal networks. Just to add to and amplify my previous
post, if the informal networks are purposeful, we may end up with
"self-managed work teams" or similar which does sound more user
friendly to top management than, perhaps, self organisation does. We
can still apply, I would have thought, practices to seek and nurture
the sweet spots that Charlie has articulated.
In their formulation, such self-managed work teams would be "fuzzy"
and in the "hole" previously referred to. At some point, the process
that Dupont, for example, could come into play. Presumably, they were
providing a support platform / technology for people to use via some
architecture of the networked dimension. Possibly, too, in this
formally supported environment, they would request a Charter from
proposed community members to suggest what existing communities they
may like to join first so as to avoid the chaos of an unlimited number
of communities arising. If however, some budget was then allocated to
that community (for cost of platform etc) then that dynamic and
management involvement would tend to destroy the "self management"
they need as "shared access." Auditing would need to be sensitive to
that.
Maybe we need a new vocabulary to capture the essence of freedom
within constraints (otherwise we would have chaos, even
mathematically!) that triggers the appropriate behaviours in
"management" for facilitating agile, adaptable and innovative
organisations that ultimately serve the common good. Stewart!
David
www.meggittbird.net
On Jul 30, 11:56 pm, "Laurence Lock Lee" <llock...@optimice.com.au>
wrote:
>
> read more »
Benoit Couture
Very good gymnastic of the mind! |
|
David, you wrote:
"Maybe we need a new vocabulary to capture the essence of freedom
within constraints (otherwise we would have chaos, even mathematically!) that triggers the appropriate behaviours in "management" for facilitating agile, adaptable and innovative organisations that ultimately serve the common good." |
When we speak of "new" such as a new vocabulary, we need to accept the constrain of renewal.
The global context that is faced by governments, systems and networks, is one that calls for the ability to get along at the most simple levels of being, thinking and living. As a result of past neglect, chaos is already settling in, in such a way that systems and networks need to adapt with the fluidity of common sense.
One way to launch the renewing vocabulary in such a context as our living under the stress of the entity of global terror-anti-terror is by:
" Building the Recovery Road from self-destruction to self-control and community self-government".
That seems to fit the fear of too much self organisation as self-control is the basis for adaptation and integration while community self-government define the trust to inspire each one into freely accepting the constrains of assembling in love and truth, which are the ultimate intangible values.
Constant evolution of Health-Education-Correction services form the building materials of the Recovery Road.
Then the process from home to school to work to play and back home becomes one of "Healing the Meaning" deploying the renewal into "The Faculty of Living", answering the call "to capture the essence of freedom within constraints" by growing away from mindless consumerism and into intelligent spending-investing systems that service universal welbeing and content satisfaction such as clean water, nutritiuos food, justice-fairness and so on...
The corporate agenda needs to shed the superiority complex of being the agent of the "new" and to tune in with the renewing nature of networks. That will remove much of the "master-slave" residues of the 19th century that are lingering. Doing so will go a long way to defeat the hold of stress that the entity of terror-anti-terror maintains at all level of humanity's existance.
Renewal offers the peaceful and intelligent possibility of processing manure into fertilizers and-or energy.
Benoit
|
|
David Meggitt
wrote!!
To help reveal how your suggestion looks on paper, I suggest that
sometime we home in on how groups of households, community and
business esablishments and other participants at that (spatial) level
interact, both formally and informally and contribute relevant
deliverables. In other words, we create a community model using a
value network perspective. My own capacity is limited right now on a
pro bono basis, but maybe someone else can help. If funds are
available, get back to me!
The search for appropriate language follows from a stakeholder
analysis (part of official VNA process). People buy on emotion,
ultimately. So, IMHO, technique is just background. As all
contributors here are passionately ahead of their time (anyone
challenge that?) one dilemma is finding a way to bring people to the
vision of sweet spot search (Thanks to Charlie) and capacity to
"glow." (Thanks, as well to Lynda Gratton).
Text for today: The Future of Knowledge, Verna Allee, P 153, line 9.
"Warning: you are approaching the point of no return. Once you go down
the path of intangibles, you will not want to go back to your old ways
of thinking about value."
David
On Jul 31, 1:33 pm, Benoit Couture <benoit...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Very good gymnastic of the mind!
> David, you wrote:
>
> "Maybe we need a new vocabulary to capture the essence of freedom
> within constraints (otherwise we would have chaos, even
> mathematically!) that triggers the appropriate behaviours in
> "management" for facilitating agile, adaptable and innovative
> organisations that ultimately serve the common good."
>
> When we speak of "new" such as a new vocabulary, we need to accept the constrain of renewal.
> The global context that is faced by governments, systems and networks, is one that calls for the ability to get along at the most simple levels of being, thinking and living. As a result of past neglect, chaos is already settling in, in such a way that systems and networks need to adapt with the fluidity of common sense.
> One way to launch the renewing vocabulary in such a context as our living under the stress of the entity of global terror-anti-terror is by:
> " Building the Recovery Road from self-destruction to self-control and community self-government".
> That seems to fit the fear of too much self organisation as self-control is the basis for adaptation and integration while community self-government define the trust to inspire each one into freely accepting the constrains of assembling in love and truth, which are the ultimate intangible values.
> Constant evolution of Health-Education-Correction services form the building materials of the Recovery Road.
> Then the process from home to school to work to play and back home becomes one of "Healing the Meaning" deploying the renewal into "The Faculty of Living", answering the call "to capture the essence of freedom within constraints" by growing away from mindless consumerism and into intelligent spending-investing systems that service universal welbeing and content satisfaction such as clean water, nutritiuos food, justice-fairness and so on...
> The corporate agenda needs to shed the superiority complex of being the agent of the "new" and to tune in with the renewing nature of networks. That will remove much of the "master-slave" residues of the 19th century that are lingering. Doing so will go a long way to defeat the hold of stress that the entity of terror-anti-terror maintains at all level of humanity's existance.
> Renewal offers the peaceful and intelligent possibility of processing manure into fertilizers and-or energy.
>
> Benoit
>
>
> read more »
Stewart Levine
A reminder: I started this thread with the idea that individuals / groups have the freedom
to create unique agreements within existing structures which I think is a more apt word
than constraints.
Benoit, as a read your comments, which I know come with a great sense of passion and commitment,
I am concerned with the us / them and prescriptive admonitions I hear. I think the best chance we have
for real change is with real dialogue, understaning and jointly developing ways of being that honor all
concerns and competing interests in any situation.
Please note the Longfellow quote below…
Stewart
Stewart L. Levine, Esq., Resolutionary
Author: Getting to Resolution
The Book of Agreement
Collaboration 2.0
The Cycle of Resolution in The Change Handbook
If you knew the secret history
of those you would like to punish
you would see a sorrow and suffering
enough to disarm all your hostility
Longfellow
|
Benoit Couture
David,
I just finished answering Stweart with:
"Stewart,
The "us / them and prescriptive admonitions" is the state of complexity that reality imposes on us all, which I concentrate as the entity of terror-anti-terror, as the starting point to change from. The removal of that which prevent wellbeing and content satisfaction. (Such is what we are told that we are doing in Afghanistan--- I forgot that line in my answer to Stewart)
... "real change is with real dialogue, understaning and jointly developing ways of being that honor all concerns and competing interests in any situation" is the process aimed for as the inspirational invitation. A case in point of great concern to me is the renewal of relations between Aboriginal Nations and European governing bodies in Canada. At the core of the problem there must be the people who are inspired to build the recovery road from self-destruction to self-control and community self-government..
The us/them has ruled people on both sides with the blindness of ignorance and indifference consolidated into superior-inferior treatments for 4 centuries.
Now, children, teens and entire families of all nationalities are enslaved in life styles that reflect the wide spread blindness that fails to adjust over long periods of time.
One way to implement a uniformed social policy of health-education-correction is to carry on with the idea of life long learning. If we wish to put numbers to the learning curve needed, then we need to go from minus 40 to plus 40.
It allows for an all inclusion invitation to deploy value upon value, while protecting it where and how it is healthy. "
David, you wrote:
|
" I suggest that sometime we home in on how groups of households, community and business esablishments and other participants at that (spatial) level interact, both formally and informally and contribute relevant deliverables. In other words, we create a community model using a |
value network perspective... If funds are available, get back to me!"
The Aboriginal Nations have elected just last week end, a new Grand Chief who speaks on behalf of all Aboriginal peoples of Canada. He is a business man from Vancouver.
I have a strong feeling that your idea could get the kind of attention from him and all concerned along with him, that can unlock massive funding.
The right vision and approach is being awaited for... Being on my way toward zero from my own minus 40, I certainly volunteer to take on the recovery road's building from such a context, as I am in the middle of it anyway.
For some further attempts to express such vision, see:
|
|
|
|
|
Benoit Couture
Stewart,
The "us / them and prescriptive admonitions" is the state of complexity that reality imposes on us all, which I concentrate as the entity of terror-anti-terro, as the starting point to change from. The removal of that which prevent wellbeing and content satisfaction. |
... "real change is with real dialogue, understaning and jointly developing ways of being that honor all concerns and competing interests in any situation" is the process aimed for as the inspirational invitation. |
|
A case in point of great concern to me is the renewal of relations between Aboriginal Nations and European governing bodies in Canada. At the core of the problem there must be the people who are inspired to build the recovery road from self-destruction to self-control and community self-government..
The us/them has ruled people on both sides with the blindness of ignorance and indifference consolidated into superior-inferior treatments for 4 centuries.
Now, children, teens and entire families of all nationalities are enslaved in life styles that reflect the wide spread blindness that fails to adjust over long periods of time.
One way to implement a uniformed social policy of health-education-correction is to carry on with the idea of life long learning. If we wish to put numbers to the learning curve needed, then we need to go from minus 40 to plus 40.
It allows for an all inclusion invitation to deploy value upon value, while protecting it where and how it is healthy.
|
Benoit |
|
---On Fri, 7/31/09, Stewart Levine <resolut...@msn.com> wrote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
David Meggitt
is too much synchronicity et al to ignore :-)
I agree with Stewart. Also, you have lived through the situation, are
at its centre, and, presumably, speak the language of the moment. To
take on the "recovery road" however, will require absorbing Stewart's
suggestion, I feel.
Usefully, (IMHO) when we get down to exploring roles in VNA, the
technique / analysis can allow real dialogue to emerge in a
"generative" way of learning. (Check out http://www.vernaallee.com/value_networks/meggitt.htm
for more - wisdom, renewal, ethical, integrity being key words.)
Again, usefully, and somewhat amazingly, the project you have
identfied involves Aboriginal wisdom. This has a tradition of
"unmanagement" (to use Charlie's word), particularly, prior to the
appointment of chieftain, when, I gather, elements of a hierarchy
emerge. (Refer "Treading Lightly" Karl-Eric Sveiby and Tex Skuthorpe,
2006.
To prepare for the next step in formulating the project and your
approach to the new Grand Chief, may I suggest we collate appropriate
material (I can liaise with you off line as well, as some diplomatic
connections could be usefully revisited) and also craft a powerful
question to encourage out-of-the-box-thinking? For example: "How can
the Aboriginal Wisdom and the art of "unmanagement" guide us in
increasing the capabilities of the European style government members
in the renewal of relationships between Canada's people?" Bit of a
mouthful, but it needs to incorporate some of the complexity:- Refer:
http://www.theworldcafe.com/articles/aopq.pdf
http://www.javeriana.edu.co/decisiones/PowerfulQuestions.PDF
Hope that helps.
David
On Jul 31, 7:02 pm, Benoit Couture <benoit...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> David,
>
> I just finished answering Stweart with:
>
> "Stewart,
>
> The "us / them and prescriptive admonitions" is the state of complexity that reality imposes on us all, which I concentrate as the entity of terror-anti-terror, as the starting point to change from. The removal of that which prevent wellbeing and content satisfaction. (Such is what we are told that we are doing in Afghanistan--- I forgot that line in my answer to Stewart)
> ... "real change is with real dialogue, understaning and jointly developing ways of being that honor all concerns and competing interests in any situation" is the process aimed for as the inspirational invitation.
> A case in point of great concern to me is the renewal of relations between Aboriginal Nations and European governing bodies in Canada. At the core of the problem there must be the people who are inspired to build the recovery road from self-destruction to self-control and community self-government..
> The us/them has ruled people on both sides with the blindness of ignorance and indifference consolidated into superior-inferior treatments for 4 centuries.
> Now, children, teens and entire families of all nationalities are enslaved in life styles that reflect the wide spread blindness that fails to adjust over long periods of time.
> One way to implement a uniformed social policy of health-education-correction is to carry on with the idea of life long learning. If we wish to put numbers to the learning curve needed, then we need to go from minus 40 to plus 40.
> It allows for an all inclusion invitation to deploy value upon value, while protecting it where and how it is healthy. "
> David, you wrote:
>
> " I suggest that sometime we home in on how groups of households, community and
> business esablishments and other participants at that (spatial) level
> interact, both formally and informally and contribute relevant
> deliverables. In other words, we create a community model using a
> value network perspective... If funds are available, get back to me!"
>
> The Aboriginal Nations have elected just last week end, a new Grand Chief who speaks on behalf of all Aboriginal peoples of Canada. He is a business man from Vancouver.
> I have a strong feeling that your idea could get the kind of attention from him and all concerned along with him, that can unlock massive funding.
>
> The right vision and approach is being awaited for... Being on my way toward zero from my own minus 40, I certainly volunteer to take on the recovery road's building from such a context, as I am in the middle of it anyway.
>
> For some further attempts to express such vision, see:http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lovingGod/message/128
>
>
> Benoit
>
>
> read more »
Charles Ehin
David,
Here is some additional data from our hunter-gatherer past, quoted from The Organizational Sweet Spot, that should help this part of the discussion.
“From my years of study and analysis of anthropological data, I have identified five fundamental organizational success factors our hunter-gatherer ancestors relied on for roughly 200,000 years. They are “immediate consumption” factors because high mobility and limited storage capabilities dictated that they consume what they gathered within 48 hours. Our ancestors were successful largely because:
· They lived in relatively small, very interdependent groups composed of kin and close friends.
· They maintained high sustained levels of reciprocity, egalitarianism, and practiced consensus decision-making.
· Members owned their own means of production.
· They respected individual autonomy and self-reliance tempered with high levels of social responsibility and accountability.
· They practiced situational, or what I have labeled catalytic leadership, based on expertise (social attention holding power) rather than rank or position power (resource holding power). They also did not base status differences on gender.”
Best,
Charlie
----- Original Message -----From: David Meggitt
David Meggitt
best
David
On Aug 1, 5:18 pm, "Charles Ehin" <kal...@msn.com> wrote:
> David,
>
> Here is some additional data from our hunter-gatherer past, quoted from The Organizational Sweet Spot, that should help this part of the discussion.
>
> "From my years of study and analysis of anthropological data, I have identified five fundamental organizational success factors our hunter-gatherer ancestors relied on for roughly 200,000 years. They are "immediate consumption" factors because high mobility and limited storage capabilities dictated that they consume what they gathered within 48 hours. Our ancestors were successful largely because:
>
> · They lived in relatively small, very interdependent groups composed of kin and close friends.
>
> · They maintained high sustained levels of reciprocity, egalitarianism, and practiced consensus decision-making.
>
> · Members owned their own means of production.
>
> · They respected individual autonomy and self-reliance tempered with high levels of social responsibility and accountability.
>
> · They practiced situational, or what I have labeled catalytic leadership, based on expertise (social attention holding power) rather than rank or position power (resource holding power). They also did not base status differences on gender."
>
> Best,
>
> Charlie
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> To: Value Networks<mailto:Value-N...@googlegroups.com>
> Subject: Re: How to Create More Value From Value Networks
>
> Benoit, clearly, we must collectively move forward with this - there
> is too much synchronicity et al to ignore :-)
>
> I agree with Stewart. Also, you have lived through the situation, are
> at its centre, and, presumably, speak the language of the moment. To
> take on the "recovery road" however, will require absorbing Stewart's
> suggestion, I feel.
>
> Usefully, (IMHO) when we get down to exploring roles in VNA, the
> technique / analysis can allow real dialogue to emerge in a
>
> Again, usefully, and somewhat amazingly, the project you have
> identfied involves Aboriginal wisdom. This has a tradition of
> "unmanagement" (to use Charlie's word), particularly, prior to the
> appointment of chieftain, when, I gather, elements of a hierarchy
> emerge. (Refer "Treading Lightly" Karl-Eric Sveiby and Tex Skuthorpe,
> 2006.
>
> To prepare for the next step in formulating the project and your
> approach to the new Grand Chief, may I suggest we collate appropriate
> material (I can liaise with you off line as well, as some diplomatic
> connections could be usefully revisited) and also craft a powerful
> question to encourage out-of-the-box-thinking? For example: "How can
> the Aboriginal Wisdom and the art of "unmanagement" guide us in
> increasing the capabilities of the European style government members
> in the renewal of relationships between Canada's people?" Bit of a
> mouthful, but it needs to incorporate some of the complexity:- Refer:
>
> http://www.javeriana.edu.co/decisiones/PowerfulQuestions.PDF<http://www.javeriana.edu.co/decisiones/PowerfulQuestions.PDF>
>
> Hope that helps.
>
> David
> On Jul 31, 7:02 pm, Benoit Couture <benoit...@yahoo.com<mailto:benoit...@yahoo.com>> wrote:
> > David,
>
> > I just finished answering Stweart with:
>
> > "Stewart,
>
> > The "us / them and prescriptive admonitions" is the state of complexity that reality imposes on us all, which I concentrate as the entity of terror-anti-terror, as the starting point to change from. The removal of that which prevent wellbeing and content satisfaction. (Such is what we are told that we are doing in Afghanistan--- I forgot that line in my answer to Stewart)
> > ... "real change is with real dialogue, understaning and jointly developing ways of being that honor all concerns and competing interests in any situation" is the process aimed for as the inspirational invitation.
> > A case in point of great concern to me is the renewal of relations between Aboriginal Nations and European governing bodies in Canada. At the core of the problem there must be the people who are inspired to build the recovery road from self-destruction to self-control and community self-government..
> > The us/them has ruled people on both sides with the blindness of ignorance and indifference consolidated into superior-inferior treatments for 4 centuries.
> > Now, children, teens and entire families of all nationalities are enslaved in life styles that reflect the wide spread blindness that fails to adjust over long periods of time.
> > One way to implement a uniformed social policy of health-education-correction is to carry on with the idea of life long learning. If we wish to put numbers to the learning curve needed, then we need to go from minus 40 to plus 40.
> > It allows for an all inclusion invitation to deploy value upon value, while protecting it where and how it is healthy. "
> > David, you wrote:
>
> > " I suggest that sometime we home in on how groups of households, community and
> > business esablishments and other participants at that (spatial) level
> > interact, both formally and informally and contribute relevant
> > deliverables. In other words, we create a community model using a
> > value network perspective... If funds are available, get back to me!"
>
> > The Aboriginal Nations have elected just last week end, a new Grand Chief who speaks on behalf of all Aboriginal peoples of Canada. He is a business man from Vancouver.
> > I have a strong feeling that your idea could get the kind of attention from him and all concerned along with him, that can unlock massive funding.
>
> > The right vision and approach is being awaited for... Being on my way toward zero from my own minus 40, I certainly volunteer to take on the recovery road's building from such a context, as I am in the middle of it anyway.
>
> > For some further attempts to express such vision, see:http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lovingGod/message/128
>
> > Benoit
>
>
> > > Very good gymnastic of the mind!
> > > David, you wrote:
>
> > > "Maybe we need a new vocabulary to capture the essence of freedom
> > > within constraints (otherwise we would have chaos, even
> > > mathematically!) that triggers the appropriate behaviours in
> > > "management" for facilitating agile, adaptable and innovative
> > > organisations that ultimately serve the common good."
>
> > > When we speak of "new" such as a new vocabulary, we need to accept the constrain of renewal.
> > > The global context that is faced by governments, systems and networks, is one that calls for the ability to get along at the most simple levels of being, thinking and living. As a result of past neglect, chaos is already settling in, in such a way that systems and networks need to adapt with the fluidity of common sense.
> > > One way to launch the renewing vocabulary in such a context as our living under the stress of the entity of global terror-anti-terror is by:
> > > " Building the Recovery Road from self-destruction to self-control and community self-government".
> > > That seems to fit the fear of too much self organisation as self-control is the basis for adaptation and integration while community self-government define the trust to inspire each one into freely accepting the constrains of assembling in love and truth, which are the ultimate intangible values.
> > > Constant evolution of Health-Education-Correction services form the building materials of the Recovery Road.
> > > Then the process from home to school to work to play and back home becomes one of "Healing the Meaning" deploying the renewal into "The Faculty of Living",
>
>
> read more »
Stewart Levine
Thanks for everyone's comments. I now have some more insight into where the
dialogue has gone. I hear the history Benoit, although without doubt it is
impossible to fully step into and understand the context of the long oppressed.
That said we do not have to look very far for a model to move through to the
other side. The courage of all who took part in South Africa's Truth and
Reconciliation is extraordinary. Many amazing stories have been told. Of course
it has not proved a panacea for everyone and everything but from an aspirational
perspective it has been extraordinary. I have many times said that for the US
to be fully whole we need to deal with slavery and native american genocide
in a similar way.
The operative definition I use for resolution is "healed and without scars." Yes,
it's aspirational at times but why not.
Let's all keep learning and aspiring.
Stewart
-----Original Message-----
From: Value-N...@googlegroups.com [mailto:Value-N...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of David Meggitt
Benoit Couture
Salut Stewart, David, Charlie and all, |
|
Stewart, you wrote:
"I hear the history Benoit, although without doubt it is
impossible to fully step into and understand the context of the long oppressed." |
That sentence is filled with the need for much answering but I will try to confine myself to the essential.
Truth and reconciliation calls for love minimums such as understanding from empathy.
David, your enthusiastic response according to "too much synchronicity to ignore" and Charlie's offering demonstrate how moch VNA is made of followers of the renewal lead's deployment, allowing teaching from past mistakes and bright future.
VNA uses "visualization" at the core of the movement's contribution. This, in itself makes VNA and Aboriginal people natural allies, making it easier to plan a possible alliance with the new business oriented grand Chief of Canada's First Nations. Here's what I mean:
THE TONGUE of VISION
I once heard an Aboriginal Chief from Canada describing how their language is different in the sense that when they speak, they describe images in order to convey meaning. It got me to start practicing when I talk, in either French or English. I figured if a picture is worth a thousand words and that I learn to use 20, 50 or 100 words to describe a picture that's worth a thousand words, then it means that with every 100 hundred words or so, I end up speaking a thousand white man's words... Isn't that economy at its best?" Also, the greatest ally of the Aboriginal people of Canada is the Queen of the Commonwealth, who maintains direct contact with them.
Like it or not, politics and business have to find the shared vision to move forward.
A starting point of such a shared vision that can set the tone of renewal is a renewed definition of sovereignty. My suggestion is that:
"Sovereignty is the ability to make decisions in serene maturity and knowledge, equiped with the capacity to implement these decisions with complete wisdom and responsability."
This is a starting point that can accomodate all of the Americas and their founding European counter parts, not to mention getting ready for the largest Aboriginal nation of the world, namely, China, while drawing all peoples in the invitation.
The vision moves from personal to communal, from micro to macro and from local to global...
Benoit |
|
Stewart Levine
Thank you Benoit. I hear the picture of the possibility of a new vision moving forward.
That is my dream…that when what exists is not working on the macro or micro people
could come together and create a shared vision that would work for everyone without
regard for fault / blame / right / wrong in the past…part of the premise being that as long
as the dissonance persists everyone pays a price. In my experience most people are
unwilling to let go so easily witout some way of clearing the past.
That said, we are all on the same track! Best thoughts,
Stewart
|
Van Wave, Timothy W. (CDC/OD/OCPHP)
Laurence,
Thank you for your response. The scenarios you describe are very interesting – are any of the results available in a publication or report? Your points are especially relevant to translation of research to practice in a community setting because one of the first steps agencies take is to form a coalition with the expectation it will add to the effectiveness and longevity of the effort. How far are we from having the evidence accepted per your 2nd paragraph?
Tim
lang=EN-AU>
Laurence Lock Lee
Too early to tell yet but I expect to be presenting on the results at an open conference being organised of by our client on October 6th in London. I suspect the senior management will take it on though I suspect there will be resistance at the lower levels (who are obviously impacted by the change the most)
Van Wave, Timothy W. (CDC/OD/OCPHP)
Can anyone in the group point me to work done that describes measurements of decay in a value network? Value networks like any human endeavor have some type of life cycle, one stage of which may be decay in the network or the value it produces. Decay may be followed by regeneration or further decay and then the loss of value or the network altogether. I am also interested in measures of lag in effects of improvements in a value network. I’m new to the field and am guessing some of this has already been written about.
Tim
Verna Allee
network
You might start with a look at the Value Network Maturity Model
http://valuenetworks.com/public/item/235905
You might also want to consider a number of indicators that we use in
the autogenerated reports
http://valuenetworks.com/public/blog/207585
Of special relevance to your question are the indicators on
Reciprocity
Perceived Value
Agility
Stability
Value Creation
Structure and Value
Role Dependence
Resilience
Measures of lag would be very similar but you would need to get a
baseline measure of the network at a moment in time and then track it
over time.
Hope this is helpful,
Verna
On Sep 24, 8:52 am, "Van Wave, Timothy W. (CDC/OD/OCPHP)"