Group items tagged

"a guide for selecting and assembling a technological platform to support communities of practice across a large organization. To this end, the report addresses four questions: What makes communities of practice different from garden-variety online communities? Every group that shares interest on a website is called a community today, but communities of practice are a specific kind of community. They are focused on a domain of knowledge and over time accumulate expertise in this domain. They develop their shared practice by interacting around problems, solutions, and insights, and building a common store of knowledge. What categories of community-oriented products exist and what are they trying to accomplish? The ideal system at the right price does not exist yet, though a few come really close. But there are eight neighboring categories of products that have something to contribute and include good candidates to start with. Analyzing these categories of products yields not only a scan of products, but also a way of understanding the various aspects of a knowledge strategy based on communities of practice. What are the characteristics of communities of practice that lend themselves to support by technology? Technology platform are often described in terms of features, but in order to really evaluate candidates for a technology platform, it is useful to start with the success factors of communities of practice that can be affected by technology. The third section of this report provides a table of thirteen such factors with examples of how a technology platform can affect the success of a community in each area. How to use the answer to these questions to develop a strategy for building a platform for communities of practice? Most of the product categories can be a starting point for building a general platform. In fact, this analysis of the field suggests a strategy for approach the task. Decide what kinds of activities are most

"Established companies are "held captive by their customers," in Christensen's phrase, and so routinely ignore emerging markets of buyers who are not their customers. Dominant companies prosper by making a good product and keeping their customer base by using sustaining technologies to continue improving it. The products get ever better-but at some point their quality overshoots the level of performance that even the high end of the market needs. Typically, this is when a disruptive innovation lands in the marketplace at a lower price and relatively poor level of performance-but it's a level adequate for what the lower end of the market seeks. The disruptive technology starts to attract customers, and is on its way to staggering the industry's giants. "Sustaining innovation makes good products better-but then you don't buy the old product. They're replacements. They do not create growth." To bring these powerful ideas into the real world, Christensen in 2001 founded the consulting firm Innosight (www.innosight.com) with Mark Johnson, M.B.A. '96. Now employing about 100, the company works mostly with Fortune 100 companies that are seeking to defend their core businesses and adapt to disruptive environments. It also coaches them on how to disrupt markets proactively, harnessing disruption's engine of growth for themselves. "It's hard to do both," says David Duncan, a senior partner at Innosight who earned a Harvard Ph.D. in physics in 2000. "As successful companies get bigger, their growth trajectories flatten out, and they need to find new ways to expand. But that will look different from what they did in the past. Most are so focused on maintaining their core business that when push comes to shove, the core will almost always kill off the disruptive innovation-the new thing. "The two goals conflict for resources," he continues. "CEOs are accountable to shareholders and feel Wall Street pressure to meet earnings targe

"I choose the term "conviviality" to designate the opposite of industrial productivity. I intend it to mean autonomous and creative intercourse among persons, and the intercourse of persons with their environment; and this in contrast with the conditioned response of persons to the demands made upon them by others, and by a man-made environment. I consider conviviality to be individual freedom realized in personal interdependence and, as such, an intrinsic ethical value. I believe that, in any society, as conviviality is reduced below a certain level, no amount of industrial productivity can effectively satisfy the needs it creates among society's members. "

Finish Agent is used by coaching organizations, such as the National Center for Faculty Development & Diversity. Putting aside the plug for making money, this promo video presents a structure for peer supported, self-monitoring productivity.

re: the psychologist Jonathan Haidt: In Haidt's view, the philosophers' dream of reason isn't just naïve, it is radically unfounded, the product of what he calls "the rationalist delusion." As he puts it, "Anyone who values truth should stop worshiping reason. We all need to take a cold, hard look at the evidence and see reasoning for what it is." Haidt sees two points about reasoning to be particularly important: the first concerns the efficacy (or lack thereof) of reasoning; the second concerns the point of doing so publicly: of exchanging reasons.

"Supposedly upgraded to take into consideration new ways of learning using digital tools, the revised model remains firmly rooted in the old behaviourist paradigm, and is just as reliant on the production of observable (and therefore) measurable behaviour as the original model."

" The SusHouse methodology is in essence a combination of creativity workshops and scenario building together with stakeholders. The methodology has been inspired to a large extend by the methodology developed in the Sustainable Technological Development (STD) Programme of the Netherlands (1992-1997), and in this Programme by the project Sustainable Washing. An important element of the methodology is called 'Back-casting' (think backwards from a desirable or unavoidable future situation). Like in the STD Programme the premise of the project is that in the long term (50 years) a drastic reduction of environmental burden is necessary (factor 20). This reduction will not be reached by just incremental technological innovations. More drastic technological as well as socio-cultural and organisational changes will be necessary. The hypothesis in the project is that there are interesting opportunities for instance in the concepts of sharing, leasing and service-products. The project consists of the following steps: 1. Investigation of functions in countries (Jan 98-Aug 98) 2. Expert interviews and stakeholder enrolling (Jan 98 - Dec 98) 3. Creativity and backcasting workshops with experts and stakeholders (Nov 98-Jan 99) 4. Scenario-building (Jan 99 - Feb 99) 5. Assessment of the scenario's (Feb 99 - Sep 99) 6. Follow Up workshops with experts and stakeholders (Oct 99 - Dec 99) 7. Reporting and spinn-off (Jan 2000 - June 2000) The scenario assessments are threefold: 1. Analysis of environmental gains and impacts (contact information) 2. Assessment of economic consequences and viability (contact information) 3. Assessment of consumer acceptance (contact information) Each of the three SusHouse household functions (Shopping, Cooking and Eating; Clothing Care; Shelter) is being researched in three countries: SCE Clothing Care Shelter Italy X X UK X X Netherlands X X Hungary X Germany X X

"How Being "