Though this study is informative and interesting, there are some serious limitations that should be taken into account if we are to generalize its results to all situations of collective action (like organizations). We may do a longer writeup some time in the future, but here are a few questions that it raises: Oh, and here is a link to the original paper: http://ow.ly/3VaS4 -----Is this a problem of the technology, or of fluency with the technology?---- "This is the danger with lean media, and is especially frustrating because it implies that if a willingness to cooperate can be effectively conveyed to other group members-perhaps an easier problem to fix than curing opportunistic intent-the problems of non-cooperation..they just did not know if they could rely on others to reciprocate." (p. 119) These conclusions suggest that fluency with a medium and the norms of communication through that medium may play a significant role in trust. In other words, if i am not good at communicating my intent to cooperate within the limitations of any medium (including face-to-face speech), i will have a hard time building trust. ----Are all digital media still as "lean" as email was in 2005?--- This study bases its concept of "media richness" on 1986 work by Daft and Lengel which suggested a continuum of media richness that contains face-to-face on the "rich" end and things like reports on the "lean" end. The assumption that social media, MMORPG's, digital collaboration platforms, etc are also at the lower end with email is very, very questionable.  ----Can we generalize the behavior of business students to all situations of collective action?---- The participants were all upper-level business students from the early 2000's, who are socialized and train to deal with colle

----Norms of anonymity may have changed since 2005---- There seems to have been an increase in people using digital technologies (especially social media) as a way to build their identity, rather than anonymize it. In fact, services have sprung up to provide people with personal landing pages (http://lifehacker.com/#!5534456/five-best-personal-landing-pages). If this is true, then there is likely a corresponding pressure to build and maintain trust in a world of digital trails and easy search.

In this post, we pick apart a conversation about the new PR skills to show how these relate to the six digital fluencies we have identified in our research. 

"Survey results revealed engineers' chief concern to be fear of exposing critical company intellectual property (IP), with 58.5 percent of respondents citing security as their primary hesitation. Loss of productivity was a worry for 40.1 percent of respondents, while 29.3 percent said company policy precluded them from frequenting social networking sites on the job."

Businesses who focus on numbers can easily end up privileging short-term profits over long-term sustainability, employee productivity over engagement, and exploitation rather than innovation. These actions can end undermine the organizational strategy, and even the overall mission. Rather than serving as the ends-what the business is all about-the numbers (and qualitative metrics as well) need to be used as a means to measure of how well the organization is achieving both its short-term and long-term strategic goals, and ultimately how well the mission is being accomplished.

"GIVEN the widespread adoption of smartphones, text messaging, video calling and social media, today's professionals mean it when they brag about staying connected to work 24/7." Too much connectivity can damage the quality of one's work, says Robert Sutton, author of "Good Boss, Bad Boss" and a professor at Stanford. Because of devices, he says, 'nobody seems to actually pay full attention; everybody is doing a worse job because they are doing more things." Mobile devices and social media, he says, "make us a little more oblivious, a little more incompetent." Just recall those pilots who overshot their destination two years ago because they were using computers, he adds.

This is worth reading and thinking about on both a governmental and at an organizational level. As elements in a system become more interdependent, and as the speed and scale of financial, informational, contractual, physical transactions between the elements of a system increase, the system can become more prone to big shocks from relatively small disruptions.  If Churchill said in the age of radio that "..A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on" what would he have said about organizations in the age of mobile devices, Twitter and YouTube?

The adoption of social software by organizations started with the tools, and has moved to focus on the purpose for the tools. The last piece of the puzzle with be the people: their skills with the technologies and the ways that those skills affect their relationships with each other.

I had written this a while ago, but i think it is worth revisiting. Many of the core reasons for the replacement of "Rule of Thumb" practice with "Scientific Management" in the early 1900's have now changed, ushering in an era where we need both. In case you're wondering, scientific management is still the basis for much of today's management practice and organizational structures. 

IBM has a vested interest in all organizations using digital technologies to "become social," but they are also an interesting case study in using these technologies (and practices) themselves. 

Interesting on many levels. First is the fact that this entire agency works on big projects in a sort of competition. Second is that a smaller group of employees used email to self-organize a critique (however sophomoric) of the teams of creatives. Third is the danger that one person's lack of digital fluency (he hit the wrong button), or perhaps the organization's lack of digital fluency (could they have been having these discussions on a less-private medium than email?) presented. The fourth is the fact that a powerful/dangerous/fortuitous sort of serendipity emerged. 

A few notable thoughts here:  "as rare as these shifts are, the early predictions about [their impact] are usually underappreciated." "the number one way that customers get information today is through "personal interaction with an employee of the firm" which trumps all traditional sources that most organizations are heavily invested in such as analyst opinion, the Press, and advertising, and that gap has widened."

The formal idea of co-creation as a business practice has been around for at least 8 or 9 years now, and has been written about extensively by the late CK Prahalad, Venkat Ramaswamy and Francis Goullart. I have had conversations with the last two, and i think that the effective marriage of new media, co-creation and the rise of participatory culture are important things for organizations to pay attention to.

Gartner's predictions include a very interesting statement, that "by 2013, 15% of BI deployments will combine BI, collaboration and social software into decision-making environments." What this means is that social media is starting to be integrated tightly with hard-core business intelligence functions in support of decision making.