At one point in "Journalism and Digital Media" (C-Span) Chrystia Freeland (@cafreeland; Global Editor at Large; Reuters) talks about "the lack of a common space" and somewhat later on (just after the 41 minute mark) makes a lovely point about how social media like Twitter sometimes surfaces very fine academic papers via outlets such as Thompson, Reuters, and Bloomberg. What I've been working on (for years and years) is a way of bridging that disconnect by tapping into individual's urge to discuss, or debate, or converse. I chose an approach that focuses on discourse. What if there was a "space" (i.e. a web system, in the sense that Wikipedia is a "space) where the nuts and bolts of issues could be explored at a very fine grain?
"Everyone can have their own opinion, but not everyone can have their own facts" is something I approached using cog-psych and historiography. (I'm resisting the urge to bring in post-modernism!) What I realized is that, by exploring the "facts", we end up exploring the subjective narrative that gives material its meaning.
"The research found that not only were collaborators wealthier at the end of the game, they had also gained significantly more connections than the free loaders. Perhaps not surprising in itself, but one ray of light emerged when the free loaders, as a result of being shunned, began to change their behavior to a more collaborative approach.
So what lessons can we take from this for real world collaboration? The research clearly shows that it pays to be generous. It wasn’t merely the selfish that were punished in future rounds but also the stingy. So here are a few principles that you should try to encourage in your organisation if you wish to encourage a collaborative approach amongst employees and other stakeholders
Dear Google – The way you make us thrash around while trying to use Pages shows a lot about how you plan things. Or, as in this case, don't plan things. You don't think things through. And you make us thrash. (Is that what happens when folk succeed in this world? God help us.)
pretty much sums it up!"It's often the non-expert, the outlier or the odd-ball, the person who isn't in charge who has the most innovative or important thing to say.You have to structure ways to hear that person or you will always drown him or her out. I call this collaboration by difference.It's a way of hearing the dissident or disruptive voice.And if you don't do it, you get group-think."–Cathy Davidson, Duke University professor
Key to my thinking: presentation layer remains essentially linear, however "spring loaded" the hyper layer might be. If I start loading this page with tech stuff, that distracts from the primary focus i.e. #discourse and participatory collaboration.