<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Collective Intelligence of the (Connected) Organizational Crowd</title>
	<atom:link href="http://kmworldblog.com/2009/11/the-collective-intelligence-of-the-connected-organizational-crowd/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://kmworldblog.com/2009/11/the-collective-intelligence-of-the-connected-organizational-crowd/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 06 Mar 2011 19:28:49 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Tropea</title>
		<link>http://kmworldblog.com/2009/11/the-collective-intelligence-of-the-connected-organizational-crowd/comment-page-1/#comment-2587</link>
		<dc:creator>John Tropea</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Nov 2009 04:47:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kmworldblog.com/?p=498#comment-2587</guid>
		<description>Great post.

I like how David Snowden puts it, where he covers social computing, evolution, and leadership in the org within the naturalistic framework of complexity

http://www.cognitive-edge.com/blogs/dave/2006/10/a_return_to_manege_rather_than.php

&quot;In the idealistic approach, the leaders of an organization set out an ideal future state that they wish to achieve, identify the gap between the ideal and their perception of the present, and seek to close it. This is common not only to process-based theory but also to practice that follows the general heading of the “learning organization”. Naturalistic approaches, by contrast, seek to understand a sufficiency of the present in order to act to stimulate evolution of the system. Once such stimulation is made, monitoring of emergent patterns becomes a critical activity so that desired patterns can be supported and undesired patterns disrupted. The organization thus evolves to a future that was unknowable in advance, but is more contextually appropriate when discovered.

One essential point here is that both idealistic approaches (process &amp; presence) however well motivated (and that is not in question) rely on what Paterson calls a fake intervention: the top down determination of what is right.

One of the characteristics of an evangelical approach is the focus on a redemptive conversion of the individual to some form of higher understanding. This can easily lead to a form of isolation from engagement with the world. It is also heavily top down and, as Paterson points out, is over focused on working with leaders, seeking to change them as individuals so that they can direct their organisations to said higher purpose. With that comes a belief in the Guru led, wisdom enlightened Leader: an all too common theme in much management literature.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great post.</p>
<p>I like how David Snowden puts it, where he covers social computing, evolution, and leadership in the org within the naturalistic framework of complexity</p>
<p><a href="http://www.cognitive-edge.com/blogs/dave/2006/10/a_return_to_manege_rather_than.php" rel="nofollow">http://www.cognitive-edge.com/blogs/dave/2006/10/a_return_to_manege_rather_than.php</a></p>
<p>&#8220;In the idealistic approach, the leaders of an organization set out an ideal future state that they wish to achieve, identify the gap between the ideal and their perception of the present, and seek to close it. This is common not only to process-based theory but also to practice that follows the general heading of the “learning organization”. Naturalistic approaches, by contrast, seek to understand a sufficiency of the present in order to act to stimulate evolution of the system. Once such stimulation is made, monitoring of emergent patterns becomes a critical activity so that desired patterns can be supported and undesired patterns disrupted. The organization thus evolves to a future that was unknowable in advance, but is more contextually appropriate when discovered.</p>
<p>One essential point here is that both idealistic approaches (process &amp; presence) however well motivated (and that is not in question) rely on what Paterson calls a fake intervention: the top down determination of what is right.</p>
<p>One of the characteristics of an evangelical approach is the focus on a redemptive conversion of the individual to some form of higher understanding. This can easily lead to a form of isolation from engagement with the world. It is also heavily top down and, as Paterson points out, is over focused on working with leaders, seeking to change them as individuals so that they can direct their organisations to said higher purpose. With that comes a belief in the Guru led, wisdom enlightened Leader: an all too common theme in much management literature.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jon Husband</title>
		<link>http://kmworldblog.com/2009/11/the-collective-intelligence-of-the-connected-organizational-crowd/comment-page-1/#comment-2536</link>
		<dc:creator>Jon Husband</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 23:32:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kmworldblog.com/?p=498#comment-2536</guid>
		<description>Thanks for stopping by and leaving your encouraging comment, Andrew.  I enjoyed your presentation, thought it was very clear and coherent, and I&#039;m sure that the rest of the KMWorld audience appreciated it as well.

Stuart, thanks.  I&#039;ll see you on Friday.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for stopping by and leaving your encouraging comment, Andrew.  I enjoyed your presentation, thought it was very clear and coherent, and I&#8217;m sure that the rest of the KMWorld audience appreciated it as well.</p>
<p>Stuart, thanks.  I&#8217;ll see you on Friday.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew McAfee</title>
		<link>http://kmworldblog.com/2009/11/the-collective-intelligence-of-the-connected-organizational-crowd/comment-page-1/#comment-2535</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew McAfee</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 23:12:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kmworldblog.com/?p=498#comment-2535</guid>
		<description>Jon,

Great post, and thanks for the mention. I blogged a while back about Google&#039;s Eric Schmidt and his admonition to other execs to LISTEN to their people. As you say, it&#039;s an incredibly powerful message, and one that&#039;s still not widely enough understood. Post is here:  http://andrewmcafee.org/2008/06/eric_schmidt_reveals_googles_secret/

Keep up the great work!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jon,</p>
<p>Great post, and thanks for the mention. I blogged a while back about Google&#8217;s Eric Schmidt and his admonition to other execs to LISTEN to their people. As you say, it&#8217;s an incredibly powerful message, and one that&#8217;s still not widely enough understood. Post is here:  <a href="http://andrewmcafee.org/2008/06/eric_schmidt_reveals_googles_secret/" rel="nofollow">http://andrewmcafee.org/2008/06/eric_schmidt_reveals_googles_secret/</a></p>
<p>Keep up the great work!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stuart Henshall</title>
		<link>http://kmworldblog.com/2009/11/the-collective-intelligence-of-the-connected-organizational-crowd/comment-page-1/#comment-2441</link>
		<dc:creator>Stuart Henshall</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 04:27:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kmworldblog.com/?p=498#comment-2441</guid>
		<description>Jon, We conversed on part of this back in 2003. Thought I&#039;d share it with you again. Glad you are blogging KMWorld. Haven&#039;t seen any tweets. Look forward to catching up at the end of the week. http://www.henshall.com/stuart/2003/06/18/collaborative-spaces-transforming-innovation-capital/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jon, We conversed on part of this back in 2003. Thought I&#8217;d share it with you again. Glad you are blogging KMWorld. Haven&#8217;t seen any tweets. Look forward to catching up at the end of the week. <a href="http://www.henshall.com/stuart/2003/06/18/collaborative-spaces-transforming-innovation-capital/" rel="nofollow">http://www.henshall.com/stuart/2003/06/18/collaborative-spaces-transforming-innovation-capital/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

