Most of us who have been involved with implementing social technologies for clients have encountered concerns regarding the nature of conversations that may come about and what policies or guidelines they should use. Most concerns are universal in some sense. They mostly relate to improper conduct, using foul or offensive language, not being respectful, fomenting and causing trouble etc. Then there are concerns related to conversations that are critical of the organization itself, its policies, strategies, leadership etc.
One of the things that seems to be missing in all the conversations about Social Technologies is the notion of Open Social Systems (OSS). It is only when these technologies are applied to the service of these OSS, that they deliver the outcomes which we find so exciting. It is through the unfettered ability of individual agents communicating, sharing, cooperating and coordinating with one another that we obtain collective intelligence and wisdom, and spontaneous collective action for example. The 'open' aspect, which means without central control is critical to this phenomenon.
Organizations implementing Social Technologies, must as much buy into the reality of open participation as they do in the vision and promise of the technologies. For several, this is a radically different way of being, and to that extent, it goes beyond simple implementation and adoption of technology issues. Or rather, the adoption involves transformational change of some not insignificant order. The notion of Governance for example needs revisiting. The ideal ultimate state for OSS is perhaps self-governance. Getting there involves a journey involving guidance and interventions, the central organization gradually relinquishing control when self-governance becomes self-sustaining.
When on the other hand, there is no real commitment to such Open practices, we should be prepared for a less than optimal result.
No comments:
Post a Comment