Twitter for Faculty

Image by Matt Hamm

I’m giving a presentation on Twitter for Faculty in collaboration with the Learning Resources Network (LERN) on Wednesday 24 June at 3:00 PM EST (cost $35):

Discover new Twitter tips for faculty in research, networking, and professional development. Whether you are on Twitter or not, you’ll discover new ways of communicating with implications for the classroom and your work.

My presentation will focus on folks new to Twitter, so it’s introductory, and I will leave time for comments and discussion. Most of my resources have been tagged and are already published on my Delicious account and I’ll post the final presentation on SlideShare.

Friday’s Finds #5

From the Twitter files:

The big news this week was the Iranian election and almost all of the news was via social media, as the broadcast media were shown to be powerless against the Iranian state, but not the people:

“This feels like Tiananmen. They fight for democracy, we watch, they die, we change the channel;” via @rhh

Rob Paterson picked up on this theme and asked “Is empowerment a point of view avoided by mainstream media? ;” I added, “and is empowerment a point of view that is embraced by social media?” via @robpatrob

“This is change of media: German main news show uses YouTube and Twitter for their report of Iran election.” via @hnauheimer

“University’s security & personnel evacuated by police, there are only us students in here right now” [frightening post from a student in Iran] via @Change_for_Iran

and of course many of us turned our avatars green in support of free elections in Iran

The Real ROI of Social Media: “But maybe we’re looking at the wrong ROI to start with – instead of return on investment, perhaps we should be more worried about the Risk of Ignoring.” via @fdomon

Skepticism about the whole “Net Generation” concept via @jclarey and a link to @markbullen and his Net Gen Skeptic blog

Is it time to get rid of the Foreign Service designation?” This is a classic example of Tribal versus Network culture, and I’d wager that our foreign service needs a network culture in order to be effective today.

A Twitter-like policy on Twitter: “Our Twitter policy: Be professional, kind, discreet, authentic. Represent us well. Remember that you can’t control it once you hit “update.”“, via @kanter

I said that I’ve noticed Twitter is replacing comments and thus opening my blog posts up to a wider audience. “Is Twitter replacing blog comments? Possibly, says @judymartin8 and Twitter is driving my traffic up & more people are connecting inter-personally, not on blog.”

Excellent Friday viewing, YouTube video on educational reform, “Goodbye Butts in Chairs” via @jaycross

Friday’s Finds #4

This week marked six years as a free-agent. I announced it on Twitter and received many kind words – thank you. Once again, my weekly sense-making from the Twitter files:

@ellenfweber “Since brains integrate knowledge naturally, while humans falsely separate facts artificially, integration is central to great learning.”

via @1ernesto150 Ways to Use Twitter in the College Classroom

all our HR and org design theory is based on nothing but dogma“; which is why we badly need new organizational & management models

RT @zecoolNB Community College Fredericton relocates to the University of New Brunswick; expect more physical mergers in higher education as costs increase

via @charlesjennings – “When it’s just so obvious NOT to train it’s painful to watch it happen

via @Pistachio How to be Happy in Business (Venn diagram) – Reminded me of another Venn diagram (your purpose) by @DavePollard

College/university education at the undergraduate level is now merely credential farming

10 simple things (SlideShare) we can do to change our food system

via @gbrettmiller Theoria cum Praxi » Cynefin, concept work, and the role of deliberate practice

In chaos we are forced to develop novel practices, therefore we need chaos for innovation; then from  @nickcharney My favourite Nietzsche quote: “One must still have chaos in oneself to be able to give birth to a dancing star”.

Flow

Scott Leslie has put together a number of media resources on the concept of the educator as disc jockey (DJ), including:

Open Educator as DJ Wiki

OE as DJ on Prezi (cool)

Metamedia Links & Comments

I like Scott’s diagram that looks at the flow of being an open educator. Flow is the operative term, because like digital media, everything is in Beta, constantly changing.

As hyper-connectivity breaks down the walls between institutions and specialists, like universities and professional teachers, so too are the lines blurring between teaching and learning online. The components of Flow for Open Educators are not all that different from what I’ve described as the flow of personal knowledge management for individuals:

As learning and working get integrated in our networked lives, we not only become lifelong learners but lifelong educators. Teaching and learning are part of the same continuum. Previously separate fields like knowledge management and learning design are being put into one great online digital blender. As Mark Pesce says during his presentation on The Power of Sharing, the only thing that a network can do is share (and it’s happening in ALL directions).

Manage what matters — collaboration

Knowledge is personal and it cannot really be managed, though we continue to try. Artifacts of knowledge can be managed and in many cases they can be helpful to others. Learning is the same, I can’t directly transfer my learning to you, but I can try to teach or even train you, based on some good practices. We each have to learn for ourselves, though we can take advantage of the knowledge artifacts passed on by generations of people. It’s also getting easier to take advantage of what other people know as we get more connected online.

My own focus has been on personal knowledge mastery because managing how each of us makes sense seems to be the required foundation of anything resembling organizational knowledge management. The same goes for organizational learning – it cannot even be conceived to exist without individual learning. When it comes to learning and knowledge, we may be going down the wrong path when we try to put these into organizational buckets and manage them.

As Dave Jonassen has said many times:

Every amateur epistemologist knows that knowledge cannot be managed. Education has always assumed that knowledge can be transferred and that we can carefully control the process through education. That is a grand illusion.

We need people in organizations who can learn and gain knowledge themselves, though not necessarily by themselves. At the organizational level we need people who can work together or in concert on solving problems. Organizations should focus their efforts on helping people work together. It’s about work, or performance, not learning and not knowledge. “How can we help you work?” should be the mantra of all workplace support departments.

Learning and becoming knowledge-able are now basic requirements for every worker. These are basic requirements for life, as much as food and water. We don’t manage what or how our employees eat and we don’t need to manage their knowledge or learning. We can make it easier for them to learn and share knowledge though, just like putting in a cafeteria or a water fountain. Workers need support and tools to develop these personal processes but the organization should stay out of the business of knowledge and learning and instead focus on collaboration.

As Stephen Downes wrote on one of my previous posts:

collaboration means ‘working together’. That’s why you see it in market economies. markets are based on quantity and mass.

cooperation means ’sharing’. That’s why you see it in networks. In networks, the nature of the connection is important; it is not simply about quantity and mass …

You and I are in a network – but we do not collaborate (we do not align ourselves to the same goal, subscribe to the same vision statement, etc), we *cooperate*

In a networked society, we are re-learning how to co-operate as we take our networks with us, wherever we go. Once inside an organization it is necessary to focus our group work on a task or mission and that requires collaboration. Collaboration is what organizations should primarily focus on. Successful collaborative efforts are the measure of a successful organization. All of that focus and energy on managing knowledge and learning is wasted because it can’t really be managed anyway.

Academic disruption

Jon Husband referred me to The Impending Demise of the University, an interesting post but similar to many others on the subject.

Enter Don Tapscott, who is looking at the challenges the digital revolution poses to the fundamental aspects of the University.
“Universities are finally losing their monopoly on higher learning”, he writes. “There is fundamental challenge to the foundational modus operandi of the University — the model of pedagogy. Specifically, there is a widening gap between the model of learning offered by many big universities and the natural way that young people who have grown up digital best learn.”

My major take-away from this article is that larger institutions will have a greater challenge in the near future than smaller ones. This would put academia back to where it was for the 500 years prior to the post-war boom – a niche market for the rich and intellectuals.

The loss of monopoly creates new openings for new academic business models, especially disruptive ones.

Friday’s Finds #3

From the Twitter files;

Some thoughts, ideas & comments that caught my attention this week:

Canadians are being set up by music/movie lobby groups & our politicians in a rather cozy relationship it seems … Is there a connection between crappy broadband and minimal use of open source in Canada? via Michael Geist

It seems that our economy may transition from Markets, back to Tribes & bypass Networks completely: The End of Business [related to my post on networks & complexity]

via @skap5 Powerful reminder of the shift from an industrial era. GM employed 395,000 building cars in the 1970’s. After latest closings it’s 40,000. GM’s US market share declined from 45 to 19% from 1980 to today. Meanwhile via @techberry The only way to save GM is to kill GM – we must convert auto factories to mass transit: Michael Moore.

Quote from @swoodruff “Writing a social media consulting proposal for a potential biotech client. Contact came via Twitter. Return On Networking!” [who says Twitter is useless?]

via @VMaryAbraham “What produces results? Knowledge. Got it? No, then get it!”  Content Management Connection

via @nineshift The rise of public places in Canada, and @scottstonehouse replies: “Right on. Just started telecommuting and I expect to be spending more time than ever at the public library.”

via @c4lpt The future is people, not technology – Jay Cross

via @derkdegeus The end of Intellectual Property

“Alan Kay shares a powerful idea about ideas” on TED Talks

Grains of sand

Though she calls it micro-planning, in my view Beth Kanter describes one way of developing emergent practices for complex environments or situations, which more workplaces are facing each day. When faced with complexity, I propose that we should organize as networks, continuously develop emergent practices, practice open cooperation, and collaborate around common goals. Micro-planning is a process that could enable the development of emergent practices.

Beth describes micro-planning as it could be used for non-profits, especially in campaigns:

“We are trying to illustrate a real-time, lighter assessment process that activists can use to engage their community and make real-time improvements and adjustments.   Because social media can lend itself to low-cost experimentation, this process doesn’t not necessarily require the “grand campaign plan” that takes a year and lots of resources to implement.”

The same activities can be used while working for profit, namely engaging our community (including customers), making real-time improvements and then adjusting our work processes (requires a devolution of power & authority). This is not a one-shot deal and then we move on, but a way of working and doing business. It sounds very much like wirearchy: a dynamic two-way flow of power and authority based on information, knowledge, trust and credibility, enabled by interconnected people and technology.

To support work in Perpetual Beta we should be looking at more micro processes that could in the aggregate make a significant difference due to network effects. A little extra influence distributed among many people in a network can have an impact. Much as the 140 character limitation of Twitter forces people to jettison extraneous words, it also enables a larger network because we can scan more tweets than blog posts. Each tweet is like a grain of sand, but thousands can form patterns and be a source of information, knowledge and connections. We need more ways to add individual grains to the constantly growing and moving sand dune that our work now rests upon. An industrial dump-truck would only disturb the harmony of that dune.

Social tools for networks

Effective knowledge sharing is what many organizations do not do well, or as Lew Platt past-CEO of Hewlett-Packard said, “if only HP knew what HP knows, we would be three times more productive”. But HP will never know what the employees of HP know, so wouldn’t it be better to let the workers share what they know in the best way possible? That’s the key benefit of personal knowledge management, in my opinion. If each person can better manage knowledge creation and capture, then it becomes easier to share it.

For example:

Social bookmarks let me tag and search a wide array of bookmarks and by making them public they are shared with others, but through no extra effort on my part.

Writing this blog gives me a knowledge-base of my thoughts which become articles and presentations but in being public I find others who can add to my knowledge. I also make available information and perhaps knowledge that is useful to others.

By posting on Twitter I answer questions, share links and opinions and get to know others with similar interests, with the same effort as chatting in the office but with a much broader reach. On the Net, chance favours the prepared mind.

Just providing access to knowledge creation and capture tools is a relatively easy first step in moving the organization to Enterprise 2.0; an essential step in working in complex networks versus complicated markets. During the initial implementation of these tools, there is no need to talk about collaboration. Many Web 2.0 tools can be sold on their value to the individual. Let collaboration emerge from the individual practices of workers, most of whom want to do a better job anyway.

The powerful aspect of most Web 2.0 tools is that they are designed for knowledge-sharing as well. However, collaboration is difficult with the imposed barriers to communication created by Enterprise 1.0 IT policies. The major obstacle to social learning (and working) today is the IT department and it’s time that management takes back control of information sharing. This post was inspired by Dave Pollard’s practical guide to implementing Web 2.0 which gives more information on how to accomplish this.

The transition to networked accountability

At the expense of being repetitive, I keep seeing this same pattern that Tom Haskins got me started on and which he summarized in reading situational responses:

Then I read Charles Jennings’ post on accountability for business results and saw a similar four part process, but Charles shows how the transition from one structure to the next is not linear at all when viewed from the perspective of the two axes of Autonomy & Strategic Alignment.

Charles’ C-Curve is a model in practice, based on his experience as CLO of Reuters. I see a parallel between this migration of the learning and development (L&D) department and the social order necessary to do certain types of group work:

  1. L&D Autonomous = taking action as a Tribe of its own
  2. L&D aligned with organization = coordinated with the Institution
  3. L&D with governance structure = able to work in a cooperative collaborative Market
  4. L&D strategically aligned = a collaborative co-operative member of (a) Network(s)

Note: I’ve re-thought my use of the terms co-operation & collaboration here.

I wonder if this curve describes other departments in different organizations. It is evident that there is greater freedom either as a tribe or in a network, while institutions and markets restrict freedom. Could it also hold that previously tribal organizations (1) may thrive best in networks (because they are used to more freedom) if they can successfully make the transition between the other two stages? I have noticed that it is difficult to convince organizations steeped in the institutional model (2) that the networked model may be better. Those who already have to respond to markets (3) understand the value of networks (4) much better, in my experience.