Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [cp] metacommunity meltdowns

Expand Messages
  • Lilly3653@aol.com
    In a message dated 8/8/2003 10:00:18 AM GMT Daylight Time, ... I will start with the above and then get back to the main point about breakdowns in online
    Message 1 of 6 , Aug 8, 2003
      In a message dated 8/8/2003 10:00:18 AM GMT Daylight Time, miguel.cornejo@... writes:


      It has always seem to me a great pity that those who seek to lead large organisations or large communities have not be required to pass a minimum practice test on human relationship systems; we require people who drive cars to pass road-tests but not people who seek to command and control the livelihoods and learnings of many thousands


      Dear Chria and Miguel,


      I will start with the above and then get back to the main point about breakdowns in online (meta)communities and possible actions.

      The point about need for education when it comes to ones responsibilities in human systems is universal.  Online situations make the issues perhaps more obvious.  However, when it comes to organisations there may be some hope.  Just a couple of days ago a leading hospital in UK has been singled out to look into the ways they deal with people (doctors and nurses pressure especially) as they are suffering enormous stress.  So, we may need to recast our language to that understood by most people at work.  And, human dynamics might be then a subject that it taught at school!  Anyone interested in lobbying for it?

      On the breakdowns and recovery I have a f2f cases to offer.  namely, whenever I found myself in a situation where for whatever reason either myself or another facilitator has made a mistake that all could see and which would affect the rest of the program, we grit out theeth and owned up!  We openly discussed what went on and how to avoid it next time. 

      The effect on the other participants has always been very motivating.  They realised that it is difficult to be a facilitator/moderator etc.  They saw that experts are human.  They witnissed the personal struggle when it comes to being courageous and facing yourself.  And they remembered it.

      So, if the situation is still fresh in people's minds there is hope.  However, the people involved have to feel genuinely that they should resolve the issue in the open.  And they have to trust that while the process is painful it is worth it, first for their own personal growth and then for the community as a whole.

      If it does not happen then you have, along with other community members to decide whether this is a place where you wish to spend your life and your energy.  It is that simple.

      Kind regards

      Lilly
    • Cornejo Castro, Miguel
      Hi Lilly, yes, I ve seen that online too (my f2f CoP experience is rather limited). As CoP manager I actually forbid insults and demeaning language in the coP
      Message 2 of 6 , Aug 8, 2003
        Hi Lilly,

        yes, I've seen that online too (my f2f CoP experience is rather limited). As CoP manager I actually forbid insults and demeaning language in the coP forums, and make a point for apologies being made and taken when a moderator mistreats a user, or viceversa... and I have indeed had to "step down from the horse" and apologize in public quite a number of times :-D. It's surprising how a bit of naive breast-beating clears the smoke and lightens the air. Maybe people actually enjoy seeing the manager humbled. Hmm... :-).

        One of the consequences of this philosophy was the observation that public rows get out of hand very easily. When something offends a user (or moderator) it is generally better to go back-channel (private message system, email) and calmly explore the point. That often leads to retractation and handshakes. When it's done in public, both usually heath up, sides appear, and you end up with a row that can frequently only be ended by banning one of the members and a lot of moderation work... and a diminishing of the CoPs social capital.

        Thanks for the tips :-).

        Best regards,

        Miguel


        -----Original Message-----
        From: Lilly3653@... [mailto:Lilly3653@...]


        On the breakdowns and recovery I have a f2f cases to offer. namely, whenever
        I found myself in a situation where for whatever reason either myself or
        another facilitator has made a mistake that all could see and which would affect
        the rest of the program, we grit out theeth and owned up! We openly discussed
        what went on and how to avoid it next time.

        The effect on the other participants has always been very motivating. They
        realised that it is difficult to be a facilitator/moderator etc. They saw that
        experts are human. They witnissed the personal struggle when it comes to
        being courageous and facing yourself. And they remembered it.

        So, if the situation is still fresh in people's minds there is hope.
        However, the people involved have to feel genuinely that they should resolve the
        issue in the open. And they have to trust that while the process is painful it is
        worth it, first for their own personal growth and then for the community as a
        whole.

        If it does not happen then you have, along with other community members to
        decide whether this is a place where you wish to spend your life and your
        energy. It is that simple.

        Kind regards

        Lilly
      • chris macrae
        I assume we are distinguishing between 2 contexts: The community that someone is trying to preserve And the community that is in the midst of total change, as
        Message 3 of 6 , Aug 9, 2003
          I assume we are distinguishing between 2 contexts:
          The community that someone is trying to preserve

          And the community that is in the midst of total change, as is intended
          to be the case between large experiments democratically funded in 3 year
          stretches

          The point of distinguishing contexts is the best practices of stability
          are sometimes the worst of crossing the chasm of meltdown

          Oh boy! if you look around the world at organisational systems, there is
          at least one school of systems learning/KM that is concerned with the
          practices of large scale change. I realise Miguel is talking to a
          different topic from the subject title which I intended.

          Chris Macrae, wcbn007@...
          More on designing inquiries for total system change in first thread at
          http://www.knowledgeboard.com/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=116352&d=1&h=417&f=56&
          dateformat=%o%20%B%20%Y
          what to do if you don't have time that trust-building knowledge
          inquiries take?

          Uk mobile 0793 144 2446
          -----Original Message-----
          From: Cornejo Castro, Miguel [mailto:miguel.cornejo@...]
          Sent: 08 August 2003 18:50
          To: com-prac@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: RE: [cp] metacommunity meltdowns

          Hi Lilly,

          yes, I've seen that online too (my f2f CoP experience is rather
          limited). As CoP manager I actually forbid insults and demeaning
          language in the coP forums, and make a point for apologies being made
          and taken when a moderator mistreats a user, or viceversa... and I have
          indeed had to "step down from the horse" and apologize in public quite a
          number of times :-D. It's surprising how a bit of naive breast-beating
          clears the smoke and lightens the air. Maybe people actually enjoy
          seeing the manager humbled. Hmm... :-).

          One of the consequences of this philosophy was the observation that
          public rows get out of hand very easily. When something offends a user
          (or moderator) it is generally better to go back-channel (private
          message system, email) and calmly explore the point. That often leads to
          retractation and handshakes. When it's done in public, both usually
          heath up, sides appear, and you end up with a row that can frequently
          only be ended by banning one of the members and a lot of moderation
          work... and a diminishing of the CoPs social capital.

          Thanks for the tips :-).

          Best regards,

          Miguel


          -----Original Message-----
          From: Lilly3653@... [mailto:Lilly3653@...]


          On the breakdowns and recovery I have a f2f cases to offer. namely,
          whenever
          I found myself in a situation where for whatever reason either myself or

          another facilitator has made a mistake that all could see and which
          would affect
          the rest of the program, we grit out theeth and owned up! We openly
          discussed
          what went on and how to avoid it next time.

          The effect on the other participants has always been very motivating.
          They
          realised that it is difficult to be a facilitator/moderator etc. They
          saw that
          experts are human. They witnissed the personal struggle when it comes
          to
          being courageous and facing yourself. And they remembered it.

          So, if the situation is still fresh in people's minds there is hope.
          However, the people involved have to feel genuinely that they should
          resolve the
          issue in the open. And they have to trust that while the process is
          painful it is
          worth it, first for their own personal growth and then for the community
          as a
          whole.

          If it does not happen then you have, along with other community members
          to
          decide whether this is a place where you wish to spend your life and
          your
          energy. It is that simple.

          Kind regards

          Lilly
        • Cornejo Castro, Miguel
          ... Possibly. There are many angles to that subject... It is evident from the facts that the nature trust-building measures is not something we agree on. But
          Message 4 of 6 , Aug 9, 2003
            -----Original Message-----
            >From: chris macrae [mailto:wcbn007@...]
            >Cc:
            >Subject: RE: [cp] metacommunity meltdowns
            >(...) I realise Miguel is talking to a
            >different topic from the subject title which I intended.

            Possibly. There are many angles to that subject...

            It is evident from the facts that the nature trust-building measures is not something we agree on. But that is probably beside the point.

            The interesting part of the subject (from my point of view) is the practical side of dealing with "entropy" forces within a large community; "entropy" here meaning all those tendencies that pull towards meltdown.

            It is a very interesting field: in most CoP investigations, we see lifecycles that eventually end at the point where the community members give up on it (not the managers: they're not necessary). That end may be unavoidable, but it easy to see that there are measures, both managerial and structural, that can help equilibrate and rectify an unstable system.

            Some of them are the ones we've been mentioning about respectful "rules of engagement", openness in admitting mistakes, backchanneling personal conlict, openness of goals and strategy, participation of stakeholders in strategy and management decisiones...

            The bigger the community, the harder the impact of entropy forces (metacommunities or CoP systems are even worse, as they're usually pre-fractured). And the more interesting those equilibrating designs and practices become.

            I'd really appreciate any input regarding this :-), as I'm sure all of the practitioners here have succesfully fended off at least a couple of meltdown situations.

            Best regards,

            Miguel

            . There is a large number of origins for them
          • chris macrae
            And again, I would ask the opposite quest of this conversation starter - should I have called it melting up to something bigger than the old is decaying around
            Message 5 of 6 , Aug 9, 2003
              And again, I would ask the opposite quest of this conversation starter -
              should I have called it melting up to something bigger than the old is
              decaying around (because the system never was living ,ie openly governed
              to adapt to conflicts, and so compounded them over time all around its
              people)

              -that's a really hard community challenge I know, but is there is anyone
              here that wants to see this century the way the system is spinning so
              far

              have a look at some system change conundrums, and see why FENDING OFF is
              not the unlearning practice I am inquiring about

              http://www.wwdemocracy.nildram.co.uk/index.htm

              http://www.smartgrowth.org/about/principles/principles.asp?prin=10&res=1
              024


              chris macrae, wcbn007@..., London & DC
              Beyond http://www.beyond-branding.com/hubbub.htm

              -----Original Message-----
              From: Cornejo Castro, Miguel [mailto:miguel.cornejo@...]
              Sent: 09 August 2003 14:07
              To: com-prac@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: RE: [cp] metacommunity meltdowns

              -----Original Message-----
              >From: chris macrae [mailto:wcbn007@...]
              >Cc:
              >Subject: RE: [cp] metacommunity meltdowns
              >(...) I realise Miguel is talking to a
              >different topic from the subject title which I intended.

              Possibly. There are many angles to that subject...

              It is evident from the facts that the nature trust-building measures is
              not something we agree on. But that is probably beside the point.

              The interesting part of the subject (from my point of view) is the
              practical side of dealing with "entropy" forces within a large
              community; "entropy" here meaning all those tendencies that pull towards
              meltdown.

              It is a very interesting field: in most CoP investigations, we see
              lifecycles that eventually end at the point where the community members
              give up on it (not the managers: they're not necessary). That end may be
              unavoidable, but it easy to see that there are measures, both managerial
              and structural, that can help equilibrate and rectify an unstable
              system.

              Some of them are the ones we've been mentioning about respectful "rules
              of engagement", openness in admitting mistakes, backchanneling personal
              conlict, openness of goals and strategy, participation of stakeholders
              in strategy and management decisiones...


              The bigger the community, the harder the impact of entropy forces
              (metacommunities or CoP systems are even worse, as they're usually
              pre-fractured). And the more interesting those equilibrating designs and
              practices become.

              I'd really appreciate any input regarding this :-), as I'm sure all of
              the practitioners here have succesfully fended off at least a couple of
              meltdown situations.

              Best regards,

              Miguel

              . There is a large number of origins for them
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.
            »
            «