by Jon Husband
October 11, 2008 at 5:18 pm
· Filed under Collaboration, Communities, Distributed Work, Enterprise 2.0, KM, Web 2.0
First, I want to clarify something for context.
I do not believe that what I call "wirearchy" will replace hierarchy holus-bolus as an organizing principle (I have said and written this many times). Rather, I subscribe to Stan Davis’ perspective, outlined in the book Future Perfect (1987).
.
Networks will not replace or supplement hierarchies; rather the two will be encompassed within a broader conception that embraces both. We are still a long way from figuring out the appropriate and encompassing organization models for the economy we are now in."
.
So … today in my inbox I found David Gurteen’s 100th newsletter, a folksy and informative ramble through David’s latest peregrinations. David is a speaker, consultant and human networking "hub" who travels the world animating Knowledge Cafes.
David was recently interviewed by The Economist Intelligence Unit for a report titled "The Digital Company 2013 - The freedom to collaborate".
David outlines the key themes explored by the report, which sound (to me) very similar to several of the key elements of wirearchy I have discussed here and there over the past several years.
I wonder what Bertrand Duperrin or Luis Suarez (just to pick on a couple of energetic thinkers about the organization of the future) might have to say about the digital company of the year 2013 ?
.
The digital company 2013: Freedom to collaborate
I was recently interviewed for a report The digital company 2013: Freedom to collaborate. being written by Kim Thomas for the Economist Intelligence Unit.
Key findings:
- Technology knowledge will permeate the enterprise.
- Social networks will be common in the workplace, like it or not.
- Beware information paralysis.
- Digital tools will democratise access to information.
- Digital tools provide employees with greater control over the information they can access.
- IT will also need to loosen the reins.
- Ceding technology control will be good medicine.
Powered by Qumana
Share:
These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
Permalink
Hi Jon,
When I read the report I found it very interesting but maybe too much tool-centric. Of course I agree with the conclusions but it’s too much like bringing web 2.0 and personal behaviors within the company and we know that making web 2.0 tools available at work isn’t enough to make the used and that people voluntarily behave differently once they’re at the office.
Saying that I mean that if the organization itself doesn’t change, companies in 2013 have many chances to be the same as now. People won’t develop online practices which are different that the ones they have in real life (or in real office…) and obviously these practices doesn’t make sense in the common top-down siloed organization. So the company 2013 have to be, first, characterized by the way people do business and, as a consequence only, by the tools that make these practices possible for scattered teams and serve as a catalyst.
So the Digitial Company 2013 will only be the consequence of the company 2013 (mistinking means for goals is never a good thing). It will be close to what you call wirearchy or what I call a system oriented organization (http://www.duperrin.com/english/2008/06/20/what-if-the-future-of-organizations-was-soo-or-spo/) which are a mixing of top-down and adhoc organization.
A company is first about business and people. Thean about the way people do business. Then only about the tool they use according to the way they do business. The opposite reasonning often leads to business failure.
Very good points, Bertrand, with which I agree.
I too found the report focused on tools, whereas as you state it is miore about the way (s) people do business with each other.
We’ve been watching the evolution of this for quite some time, actually, with the rise of co-opetition, various kinds of partnerships at different points along the value chain, EDI, several faltering attempts in the late 90’s at what we call collaboration, the rise of teams and teamwork throughout the 90’s and 00’s, and so on.
I find it astonishing by now, and very interesting to watch, in terms of the stubbornness of wanting to hold on to the old structural assumptions and principles.
Interestingly, re: wirearchy I have had quite a number of people email to suggest that recent events (such as the financial crisis, the use of the Internet in the US political campaigns and the way(s) it continues to transform the processes of the news business) seem likely to speed up the transition That I think we both believe is underway.
I have some ideas about crisis which inspires me future posts… not only about the organizational structure in itself but what’s behind (cult of predictability, etc…). But most of all, about what’s needed to get out of the crisis. More to come 
Me too Just thinking it through while doing laps in the pool today.
HTML-Tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
