"When the number of committed opinion holders is below 10 percent, there is no visible progress in the spread of ideas. It would literally take the amount of time comparable to the age of the universe for this size group to reach the majority," said SCNARC Director Boleslaw Szymanski, the Claire and Roland Schmitt Distinguished Professor at Rensselaer. "Once that number grows above 10 percent, the idea spreads like flame."

The point is, it is the most interesting, attractive, high-margin work that spans boundaries and requires a network approach. Firms large and small can comfortably do process work internally, but to get the ground-breaking work they must learn to use open innovation and build external networks into the core of how they work.

Rather here's what I see: our institutions, far from evolving and improving, at the time we need to update them most, are actually moving backwards. We're taking tiny steps--and sometimes giant leaps--backwards in time, deconstructing the basic building blocks of civilization. Think I'm exaggerating? Then like most of our talking heads, pundits, and chatterati, you might need a tiny refresher course on what civilization and prosperity are yourself.

amplified individual Theme: the Amplified Individual Forecast Clusters: Highly - Collaborative, Social; Improvisational; Augmented Dilemma: Collective Creation vs Individual Recognition Signals: Co-working Arrangements; Teamwork in Virtual Environments; Social Filtering; Life Hacks; Visualization Tools Underlying Technologies: Sense Making & Visualization; Ubiquitous Displays; Amplified Collaboration Tools

The Gore model changes the traditional role of the leader. The leader's job is to make sure the culture is healthy: Is it working as a system? Are teams coming together? Are we getting diverse points of view? Are the best ideas rising to the surface? Our leaders have to be comfortable with not being at the center of all the action, with not trying to drive every decision, with not being the most strategic person on the team or the one with the most thoughtful ideas. Their contribution is to help the organization scale and be effective.

The general principles of this rapid-learning ecology are pretty clear. First, we probably have about the same number of smart people as we did twenty years ago, so what's making us all smarter is that we're on a network together. Second, the network has evolved a culture in which there's nothing wrong with not knowing. So we ask. In public. Third, we learn in public. Fourth, learning need not be private act that occurs between a book and a person, or between a teacher and a student in a classroom. Learning that is done in public also adds to that public. Fifth, show your work. Without the "show source" button on browsers, the ability to create HTML pages would have been left in the hands of HTML Professionals. Sixth, sharing is learning is sharing. Holy crap but the increased particularity of our ownership demands about our ideas gets in the way of learning! Knowledge once was developed among small networks of people. Now knowledge is the network.

We call such practices "mutualism." It involves measuring workers not against revenue or other numerical goals, which we have observed to be ineffective as motivational tools, but against qualitative values such as trust, responsibility, and innovation. And it implies that leaders don't dictate vision or strategy; instead, they enable employees to create a common vision through, for example, off-sites for discussion of strategic issues and regular feedback and education. Hitting numerical goals has been the natural outcome.

Google doesn't have business units! I knew there had to be something different and special about Google to make it the success story that it is. This is what the Googe  CFO had to say in a recent McKinsey interview: Patrick Pichette: We don't have business units. Once a company has business units, managers tend to take ownership of these units' resources. Managers have a plan, and the natural instinct is to say, "Those resources are mine and I have to fight to keep them." This is exactly the issue we regularly see in our organisational network analysis studies. We even wrote about it here in "The Tyranny of Top Down"

* Networks provide the underlying structure to a massive part of life and the universe * That network structure applies on many levels, including our brains, the internet (and the collective intelligence it is catalyzing), applications, organizations, and business ecosystems * We can usefully think of these networks as sometimes literally coming to life * The key factors that enable networks at the societal and organizational levels to come to life are Connectivity, Standards, Integration, and Structure * Organizations need to be balanced between structure and chaos to create the conditions for agility, responsiveness, and success * Business ecosystems are central to value creation today, yet require rich flows of information that are predicated on trust and effective strategies for spanning organizational boundaries * Applications are themselves networks, coming to life through modularity, distributed architecture and development, and integration with human processes, thus supporting the living networks of organizations and business ecosystems