Group items tagged

Ron Ashkenas, April 20, 2015, HBR distinguishes between cooperation and collaboration, but not in the way we have come to understand it online. In this case, cooperation is what some managers do when a larger collaboration is underway, but they aren't really committing to true end-to-end product development.

wonderful article on differences between networking, coordinating, cooperating, and collaborating drawn from work of Arthur Himmelman.  They add up:  exchange information, alter activities, share resources, enhance capacity for each player. 

article by Ron Ashkenas on difference between cooperation and collaboration and how to set up and negotiate successful collaborations, April 20, 2015

blog post by Stephen Downes, April 12, 2010 on differences between collaboration and cooperation, group collaborates, network cooperates with much greater freedom for the individual

In this blog Jarche combines his work, David Ronfeldt's work, Stephen Downes work, and Dee Hock's work to look at how work gets done in various traditional, and also new networked ways. Good diagram of collaboration and cooperation from Goal-oriented to opportunity-driven (serendipitous)

Clear blog on cooperation trumps collaboration in networked working and learning

matrix explaining the differences between networking, coordinating, cooperating, and collaborating, inspired in part by Rheingold's course on Literacy of Cooperation

matrix showing differences between coordination, cooperation, and collaboration, Trinity P3 firm, Darren Woolley, August 27, 2012

Jesse Lyn Stoner on differences between cooperation and teamwork with collaboration

Once again, Jarche comes through for me. Tuesday, January 14, 2014 "The keys to motivation at work are for each person to have a sense of Autonomy, Mastery and Purpose. This is a network management responsibility." Could we do a play on RAMP-R-----Autonomy, Mastery, Purpose in the Studio? Another excerpt that I buy to a point--I don't think networks are the new companies but short of that, I agree with his premise: Most management practices today still focus on 20th century models, such as Henry Fayol's six functions of management [look familiar?]. forecasting planning organizing commanding coordinating controlling I heard these same functions discussed by a workplace issues consultant on the radio as recently as yesterday morning. Notice that there is no function for enhancing serendipity, or increasing innovation, or inspiring people. The core of management practice today has not changed since the days of Fayol, who died ninety years ago. "But the new reality is that networks are the new companies. The company no longer offers the stability it once did as innovative disruption comes from all corners. Economic value is getting redistributed to creative workers and then diffused through networks. Knowledge networks differ from company hierarchies. One major difference is that cooperation, not collaboration, is the optimal behaviour in a knowledge network. In networks, cooperation trumps collaboration."

Arthur T. Himmelman's Collaborating for a Change model with matrix and narrative, 26 page document, revised January 2002. Networking, coordinating, cooperating are three steps to reach collaborating, starting with most informal to the formal, institutionalized arrangements that characterize collaborations.

Great talk by Stephen Downes about personal learning in a networked world: what it is, what it is not, the difference between collaboration and cooperation, and how trends by younger students are driving change. He poses that there is no one model that is successful - it is up to the learner to devise their own purpose and methods.

blog post by Dean Hawkinson, July 31, 2011 on coordinating, cooperating, and collaborating inspired by Steven Covey webinar.

article on coordination, cooperation, and collaboration by Misty D. Goosen, Fall 2009, Kansas Inservice Training, Early Childhood Development

blog by Harold Jarche on the Connected Workplace, 4.15.2013 Excerpts: "Implicit knowledge is best developed through conversations and social relationships. It requires trust before people willingly share their know-how. Social networks can enable better and faster knowledge feedback for people who trust each and share their knowledge. But hierarchies and work control structures constrain conversations. Few people want to share their ignorance with the boss who controls their paycheck. But if we agree that complex and creative work are where long-term business value lies, then learning amongst ourselves is the real work in organizations today. In this emerging network era, social learning is how work gets done." ..."Personal knowledge management (PKM) skills can help to make sense of, and learn from, the constant stream of information that workers encounter from social channels both inside and outside the organization." ..."Collaboration skills can help workers to share knowledge so that people work and learn cooperatively in teams, communities of practice, and social networks." ..."Leaders need to understand the importance of organizational architecture. Working smarter in the future workplace starts by organizing to embrace networks, manage complexity, and build trust."

Scientists have discovered proof that the evolution of intelligence and larger brain sizes can be driven by cooperation and teamwork, shedding new light on the origins of what it means to be human. The study appears online in the journal Proceedings of the Royal Society B and was led by scientists at Trinity College Dublin: PhD student, Luke McNally and Assistant Professor Dr Andrew Jackson at the School of Natural Sciences in collaboration with Dr Sam Brown of the University of Edinburgh.

There really is an advantage to working together!

Blog by Harold Jarche on Leadership is an emergent property of balanced networks, May 29, 2012 Like this assessment of leadership skills in networks: "As networked, distributed workplaces become the norm, trust will emerge from environments that are open, transparent and diverse. As a result of improved trust, leadership will be seen for what it is; an emergent property of a balanced network ["in-balance" may be a better term for this changing state] and not some special property available to only the select few. And this one: Networked contributors (full-time, part-time, contractors) need to work together in a networked environment that facilitates cooperation and collaboration. This is why the narration of work and PKM will become critical skills, as work teams ebb and flow according to need, but the network must remain connected and resilient

The Blog of Tim Ferriss with guest post by Peter Diamandis about crowdsourcing problems and going to capital sources for funding. Reviews the changes in communication and cooperation and what is now possible with ICTs.

I was looking for a tool that allowed the "crowd" to create a database, which I think is ultimately what we would want. None of the ten listed seemed to fit that description. Did either of you see one that we may want to consider, or do we try to find something else? Does one of these seem like a good fit for us in other ways?

I haven't determined that any of these is the preferred channel for doing the W.W. database, Lyn. But the idea of incentivizing the creation and maintenance of a crowdsourced 'database' (for lack of a better term) is offered by these groups. A wiki that is set up for a Learning W.W. could be the beginning app until we find someone to do it or a tool to do it better. Even using Diigo in a paid account could work to gather tagged contributions with better organization to follow when we enlist someone to help us.

This 'manifesto' was offered in response by Paolo Bruttini to Jarche's adherence to networks for organizations operating today with different type of leadership. October 2014 Jarche concluded in his post: Networked leaders foster deeper connections, developed through ongoing and meaningful conversations. They understand the importance of tacit knowledge in solving complex problems. Networked leaders know they are just nodes in the knowledge network and not a special position in a hierarchy. What does a post-hierarchical organization look like? It will be one that provides a sense of belonging like a tribe, but with more diversity and room for personal growth. It will have the institutional structure to manage the basic systems so people can focus on customers and community, not merely running the organization. It will have market type competition, but without a winner-take-all approach. Finally, it will promote cooperative actions that add to the long-term value of the ecosystem and community, not just short-term collaboration to get the next project done or achieve some arbitrary quarterly results. Making the networked organization more resilient will help everyone in it, not just a few central nodes. The networked organization takes the long view.

nice summary of what it takes to create a networked learning organization. Harold Jarche, May 6, 2015

Article from NYT Blogs by Claire Cain Miller, 2012, on $22.5m fine levied by Consumer Protection, FTC, against Google for collecting data on where Safari browser users visit online to construct ads to market to them.