Evolution of the Web

A client of mine has asked for a description of Web 3.0, which I have kept an eye on, but from a distance, as I didn’t want to be distracted too much by the media hype machine. As I dig deeper into it, I’ve created a Web3.0 tag on Delicious and will continue to add to this. So far I’ve found a couple of good resources. My initial distillation of “Web x.0 in a nutshell” follows.

Description: Web 1.0: Universal Content, Read Only

What it Did: Basic Infrastructure of the Web, which is still in use

Prototypical Technology: HyperTextMarkupLanguage, UniversalResourceIdentifier

Examples: Websites

Description: Web 2.0: Universal Participation, Read/Write

What it Does: Mostly social innovations, as we learn how to use the Web to communicate

Prototypical Technology: ReallySimpleSyndication, AsynchronousJavascriptAndXml

Examples: Blogs, social networks

Description: Web 3.0: Universal Meaning, Contextual

What it will do: Mostly technological innovations as the Web learns (AKA Semantic Web) but more human

Prototypical Technology: ResourceDescriptionFramework, OWL-WebOntologyLanguage

Examples: Wolfram Alpha, Augmented Reality

semantic web
Semantic Web Rubik’s Cube by Duncan Hill

Context and Community

Wayne Hodgins raises the issue that information can be both a product and a service.

Information is a noun/product when it is in the form of a report or document created on spec or in advance of a specific use or client. Whereas it is a verb/service when it is a collection of “just the right” information matched to a specific person/group and context. I would posit that information in and of itself has little to no value.  The value of information comes when it is Snowflaked or “just right” as in just the right information for just the right person(s) at just the right time in just the right context on just the right medium/device, etc.

Lee Lefever described this product/service aspect of information as Stocks & Flows:

Flows = Timely & Engaging (e.g. radio, speeches, email, blogs)

Stocks = Archived, Organized for Reference (e.g. web site, database, book, voice mail)

In my experience, I’ve seen that with ‘products’, price tends to zero; or that the same item will continue to get cheaper over time. Services, on the other hand, remain stable, and may even go up in price as they become more popular. Note how famous speakers and consultants charge more money.

For example, generic educational course content keeps getting cheaper, with many free options now available, like wiki-how. Content (information as a product) is no longer king in the online learning world.

For a successful business model, content needs to be combined with both Community and Context — two critical factors in supporting learning environments. For example:

  • Online Courses where Community = your cohort & Context = a relevant (to you) credential
  • Performance Support where Community = your co-workers & Context = current need
  • Knowledge Management (and PKM) where Community = those with shared interests & Context = sense of belonging to a community.

The Chinese Pod model gets this right by understanding the user/learner. Their three step model is a good one for Web learning businesses — Reward Attention, Support the Community, & Keep Tweaking the Business Model.

Taking Wayne’s advice could be the first step in creating a successful online learning business model, by providing “just the right information for just the right person(s) at just the right time in just the right context on just the right medium/device”.

Complexity and change

Interesting things I learned on Twitter this past week.

Complexity

The State of Social Learning Today & Some Thoughts for the Future of Learning & Development (L&D) in 2010 via @c4lpt

If it seems too complex for L&D to take on the “responsibility” for enabling learning across the organisation, then bear in mind that this role will probably be assumed by others, e.g. Bus Ops, IT or Internal Communications departments as their own interests widen. If this takes place, what is likely to happen to the L&D function? As the desire and need for formal training diminishes, L&D will probably become more and more marginalized. 2010 is therefore the year for L&D to take action! So who can help?

via @finiteattention “Seen on a colleague’s noticeboard: If everyone is doing it …” [Dilbert’s point hits the core of the “best practices” problem]

The Cynefin Framework Mindmap via @johnt

Classroom instruction is complex but do we treat it as such? Is “sensing” a priority of teacher education? How would an instructor who waits for “patterns to emerge” be viewed by their supervisor? As laid back? Aloof? And does outcome-based education (unintentionally) result in educators treating complex situations as complicated, or worse yet, simple in nature?

Networking reconsidered via @jonhusband

In a rapidly changing world, the knowledge that matters the most is tacit knowledge — the knowledge that we have all accumulated from our experiences that we have a hard time expressing to ourselves, much less to each other. The challenge is that this type of knowledge — in contrast to the explicit knowledge that can be written down and broadcast to the world — does not flow very easily. Accessing this kind of knowledge requires long-term trust based relationships and a deep understanding of context. Large contact databases don’t particularly help in this quest and, in fact, can subvert our efforts to build the kinds of relationships that matter the most.

Changing Practice

Tom Gram: Instructional Design: Science, Art & Craft: in balanc:

Effective learning designs then,  happen most when that elusive combination of art, science and craft come together. Where the three approaches coexist, through a skillfully assembled learning team the result is usually effective, motivational learning grounded in the realities of the organization.

Evidence that change does not come from within, in this ASTD article via @JaneBozarth

Old favorites dominated in our study. E-learning today appears to be mostly about delivering assessments and designs, testing, personalization, scenarios, and tutorials. All these are familiar, and they all have deep roots in the training and development community. Should we lament that the habits identified in this study are not much different in 2009 than they were in 1989 (although, of course, enabled by technology)?

Group photo of some of the ASTD survey respondents:

changethesystem

Your product may no longer be your product

When I started this blog six years ago I knew that I would be “giving away” my thoughts for free. Some might say that’s all they’re worth. I’ve also kept the site ad free for a couple of reasons – ads don’t pay much, they get in the way of readers and I want people to focus on the conversations here or just get the information they need. No ads sets me apart from many other sites, so that’s a good thing in the long run. I make my money mainly by consulting and less from speaking and writing. Externally, this blog is one big business card. Internally, it’s my knowledge base that informs my work. In addition, it’s a way to communicate with my peers.

I would like to be paid for my writing on this blog but the economics of that are not really possible. On the internet, information wants to be free. That can be a good thing. Free has let me become much better known than I was seven years ago when I started this business. As Seth Godin says, on the internet, piracy is not your problem, obscurity is. The internet is changing a lot of business models. I’m interested in business models, especially since I’ve been personally affected by several failed ones.

Janet Clarey talks about the changes that have happened to her work as a researcher/analyst:

Now, I seem to work with hundreds [of people] and that brings me to a conflict I’ve had for the better part of a year: sharing. I share what I can and have taken some criticism for not making all knowledge available for free. Some seem to think that’s the way everything should be. Free. But research is our product. You might sell insurance. I’m not going to ask you for free insurance. So I’ve reconciled that in my mind. If anyone wants more than free, I’d be happy to be your analyst : )

I would surmise that ten years ago it was easier to sell a research report than it is now. There was less information available online for free. However, I think there is still a growing market for mass customization. That means a customized research report for me that’s different than one for somebody else. That’s pretty well what I sell: customized strategy & analysis for the specific context of each client. The challenge for Janet (and all of us in the custom information business) is figuring out the 90% that we should give away for free and the 10% that has market value and that we can charge for. The problem is that this sweet spot keeps changing so we need to keep tweaking and reinventing our business models. This is like determining what degree of centralization works best for market and technology conditions.

Business models looking back and forward

Everybody’s making predictions at this time of year, but I want to look back a bit. In 2004 Seth Godin made these predictions (and others) for 2009, and asked, and what then?

  1. Hard drive space is free
  2. Wifi like connections are everywhere
  3. Everyone has a digital camera & everyone carries a device that is sort of like a laptop, but cheap and tiny
  4. The retirement age will be five years higher than it is now
  5. Your current profession will either be gone or totally different

Given all those future predictions we read each year, it’s good to see that someone got it right.

In 2007 I examined these predictions from the perspective of business planning and made these recommendations:

  1. Don’t try to build another #$%* portal, because people have lots of places to put their stuff and they are getting information from a whole bunch of sources. Think small pieces, loosely joined.
  2. Anywhere can be a hotspot so adding wi-fi just might get some interesting people to gather around you and that’s what’s really important.
  3. All of those digital pictures are looking for a place to be shared. They might even improve your organisation’s learning about itself and its environment.
  4. Remember those folks that you thought would leave with all their knowledge? Well, they’re not leaving, or they’re probably interested in a new relationship, so get them while you can.
  5. Job? What’s a job?

In early 2010 it is pretty obvious that nobody needs an other Web portal. Even the project for the Pan-Canadian Online Learning Portal that I was working on in 2006 was finally canceled. Wireless is becoming ubiquitous though it’s still too expensive in too many places. Of course, almost everybody has a digital camera, usually combined with a phone or other smart mobile device. So, would your business have made different decisions five years ago if these predictions were heeded?

I find the last two points most interesting today because we’re just starting to see their impact. The recession and financial crisis pushed many retirements back several years, if not decades. Mandatory retirement ages have been successfully challenged in courts in several countries. There is a real business opportunity in older adults who are not fully retired, still have money and have time. It’s also becoming evident that new jobs are being created just as older ones are obsolesced.

How’s your business model for the next five years? Which predictions and trends are you following? Of course, I’m staying out of the prediction business ;-)

Sharing tacit knowledge

H.L. Mencken, American satirist, wrote that, “For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.” That pretty much sums up the problems we are facing today in our organizations and institutions. We are using tools that assume simple, or at most complicated, problems when many are actually complex. A mechanistic approach to problem solving is inadequate in complex adaptive environments. Global networks have made all of our work, and all of our problems, interconnected. We live in one big, unfathomable complex adaptive system.

Managing in complex systems is more about influencing possibilities rather than trying to determine any predictability. This requires tacit knowledge, or ways of thinking that cannot be codified and written up as best practices. It’s a continuous process of trying things out, sensing what happens and developing emergent practices. This is the great potential of web social media. Social networking supports emergent work practices.  The true value of social networking is in sharing tacit knowledge.

What hinders the adoption of social media is that hierarchical leaders (those in power by virtue of their position, not their knowledge or ability) are not able to function when ideas and knowledge flow laterally as well as vertically. Hyperlinks subvert hierarchy. Social media bypass the organization’s information gatekeepers and render hierarchical leadership useless.

Over the past century, large organizations have simplified and codified their processes in order to get economies of scale. They have also centralized as many functions as possible, including anything related to learning and performance. This is the modern institution and corporation. The problem is that this will not work any more. Biological, technological, environmental and societal change are accelerating. Moore’s Law states that computational power doubles every 18 months while human knowledge doubles every year.

Our current models for managing people, training and knowledge-sharing are insufficient for a workplace that demands emergent practices just to keep up. Formal training has only ever addressed 20% of workplace learning and this was acceptable when the work environment was merely complicated. Knowledge workers today need to connect with others to co-solve problems. Sharing tacit knowledge through conversations (the only way to do this) is an essential component of knowledge work. Social media enable adaptation (the development of emergent practices) through conversations.

In the 21st century, conversation is learning and learning is work.

complexity

Social learning in the enterprise

This past year, my Internet Time Alliance colleague Jane Hart changed her title to Social Learning Consultant. Why?

Whereas early e-learning was all about delivering content, primarily in the form of online courses, produced by experts and managed via learning management systems, Social Learning is about creating and sharing information and knowledge with other people using (often free) social media tools that support a collaborative approach to learning.

Social Learning is fast becoming recognised as a valuable way of supporting formal learning and enabling informal learning within an organisation (something that has been overlooked for far too long). The use of online communities and networks, where employees are encouraged to co-create content, collaborate, share knowledge and fully participate in their own learning, is helping to create far more enduring learning experiences.

As Jon Husband says, “everyone in almost all enterprises is using the Internet all day long, participating in exchanges and flows of information”. This is networked business reality. If the learning/training department remains focused on content delivery it will miss the greatest opportunity for organizational performance – social learning.

I’ve put together a short slide presentation that covers some of the factors driving us towards social learning in the enterprise.

1. This is inspired by a year of discussions and conversations, especially with my Internet Time Alliance colleagues, with whom I’m grateful to collaborate and learn.

2. I start with McLuhan’s Laws of Media because this lens has proved useful over the years. For more information, read McLuhan for Managers.

3. We are only starting to see the enormous impact of the Internet on how we work. It is changing everything. I have yet to be swayed from this opinion.

4. We are seeing a shift in how we view knowledge, as Charles Jennings wrote on Social Learning:

We are moving to the world of the sons of Socrates, where dialogue and guidance are key competencies. It is a world where the capability to find information and turn it into knowledge at the point-of-need provides the key competitive advantage, where knowing the right people to ask the right questions of is more likely to lead to success than any amount of internally-held knowledge and skill.

5. Jay Cross has riffed on the changing nature of work, based on Thomas Malone’s The Future of Work.

6. Our current work structures are based on last century’s models of scientific management, sparked by F.W. Taylor.

7. Networks are draining the organizational pyramid, as the Cluetrain highlighted a decade ago.

8. We need to look at work differently and the nature of the job has fundamentally changed as passion & initiative replace diligence & obedience in the creative economy.  Wirearchy is a new framework for work in this economy.

9. None of this is new, it is part of our continuing need to adapt to change.

10. We need to look at learning as a core part of our work, and Jane Hart describes how workplace learning is more than just formal training.

11. When we need help at work, we turn to our friends and trusted colleagues with whom we’ve shared experiences. However, our closest friends may not be our best source of knowledge. We need to grow our trusted networks by sharing our work experiences so that we have more people to learn from when the need arises.

12. Social learning is critical for networked organizational effectiveness.

Choose with care in 2010

This is the first Friday’s Finds post of 2010, highlighting some of the things I learned on Twitter this past week. It follows 32 continuous weeks of Twitter summaries for 2009. I’ve decided to stop numbering these posts and will provide a title that highlights each week. Friday’s Finds posts will remain in the same category and I’ll keep on trying to post something each week.

Thanks to all of the readers who have added to the conversations here, either by writing their own blog posts, commenting, or tweeting. I now get as many visitors from Twitter as I do from Google searches. Friday’s finds have become part of my personal knowledge management system and this week I even found something on PKM:

60+ resources for Personal Knowledge Management. via @SteveBarth [add that to my PKM Bookmarks and you have a comprehensive resource list]

Dr. Brian Arthur, in the book, The Nature of Technology, says that “… everything emerges out of technology. It’s technology that gives rise to both modern science and the economy, and we tend to think of it in reverse — that science gives rise to technology and the economy gives rise to technology. But technology is more fundamental than either one.” via @jaycross

My next job in HR explains:

I could spend my time building an HR empire or I could do meaningful work so that an organization could function without me and without a bloated HR infrastructure. I don’t do bloat.

via @punkrockHR [This is the same approach I’ve recommended for learning & development professionals. You should constantly be trying to put yourself out of work. Maintaining a steady state in a complex environment is the same as going backwards. Teaching self-sufficiency in one area and then finding the next area that needs to be addressed is the only way to really support the organization].

Isn’t the preceeding approach better than this? “Just got e-mail advertisement for audio conference for HR/managers on “enforcing dress codes”. And y’all want to know what’s wrong with training?” @JaneBozarth

(How) Would you use this critical thinking video? – “I’d suggest there is an inability of many teachers to reject the bias of their culture and upbringing in their own thinking, let alone to help students. In short, producing critical thinkers from classrooms is an impossible challenge with so many teachers lacking critical thinking.” @courosa in conversation with @cburell

Aviation security: “Once a society starts circumventing its own laws, the risks to its future stability are much greater than terrorism”. via @afroginthevalley

From “Inherit The Wind“, the loneliest feeling in the world. via @nomad411

Reminds me of this GapingVoid cartoon:

wolves sheep

2010: year of the CM

Community Managers by Luc Legay
Community Managers by Luc Legay

I’ve watched the demand for online community managers (CM) build tempo this past year. Perhaps it follows last year’s frequent request from clients and others for “facebook in a box” for their organization. Now they need someone to make it work. I wonder if those 16,000 social media specialists on Twitter will re-brand as community management specialists?

Of course I’m not the only one to call 2010: The Year of the Community Manager. I have collated several community manager bookmarks over the year, based on client demand for examples and guidelines. I also summarized what I’ve learned about community management and work.

Traci Armstrong thinks that journalists and copywriters could make good community managers. While good writing skills are necessary, community managers need to be engaged, empathetic and willing to live in perpetual Beta. Online communities don’t seem to stabilize. These comments, given by active community managers, provide a good snapshot of what it’s really like:

  • CM is not a 9-5 job – Using twitter a lot, commenting on blogs, using back-channels for private communications takes a lot of time & the role changes as the needs of the community change.
  • CM is a very time-consuming job and the results are not always tangible and visible.
  • CM can bridge the gap between inside & outside the organization, such as explaining what is happening in online communities to other members of the organization. This type of communication is more often face-to-face.
  • Communities often don’t grow the way they are planned and may be taken over by a sub-group (hence the need for an active manager who can try to influence by example).
  • CM doesn’t fit into any single departmental silo and the role can be similar to an ombudsman.
  • A CM should not take oneself too seriously.
  • Communities don’t want to be “managed” – they want to be nurtured.
  • Building community means giving up control.
  • How do you get executive buy-in?
    • find someone with an existing community mindset
    • get executives into a real network experience in order to understand
  • The launch phase requires a small group that is passionate and “transacting” (communicating) a lot.
  • Building community is not about collecting as many people as possible.
  • There is a constant dynamic tension in communities over control versus member empowerment (experienced CM’s seem to be at ease with this loss of control).