From Networking to Tensegrity Organization
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
193. VI. TENSING NETWORKS - Tensed networks; balancing and focusing network dynamics in response to networking diseases 195 - Tensing associative networks to contain the fragmentation and erosion of collective memory 201 VI. TENSING NETWORKS - Tensed networks; balancing and focusing network dynamics in response to networking diseases 195 - Tensing associative networks to contain the fragmentation and erosion of collective memory 201 '19 S. in response to networking diseases* The 1970s have seen the development of considerable enthusiasm for" network" building, whether among individuals or among groups and institutions. Much hope has been attached to this" alternative" vehicle for action following the failure of " coordinating bodies" and" organ izational systems" to respond to the perceived needs without imposing unwelcome forms of or der. Recommendations to create a network are widely felt to be low-key, low-threat options in a variety of sensitive situations. As such they may also serve as convenient (" cosmetic,,) tokens of action where " effective" action is not considered possible. The purpose of this paper is to examine some of the assumptions underlying the enthusiasm for networks and their operation in practice. It is hoped that such an exercise will identify some of the pitfalls of the network option and identify possibilities for improvements. Minimal requirements sponse to such pressures. Participation a network. This is often the case with for network emergence tends to be undemanding. " invisible colleges" (1). 2. Diffuse membership: 3. Minimal organization: The creation of networks is facilitated by It is characteristic of many networks that Since networks are frequently created to the following factors which should be the membership boundary is unclear. avoid conventional modes of organiza contrasted with their equivalents in con Particularly when the network does not tion, and since alternative modes tend ventional organizations. have a single controlling centre, portions themselves to be lacking or suspect, little of the network may relate closely to bo can be done to "organize" a network. 1. Minimal commitment: dies not perceived by other portions to be A member of a network is seldom obliged part of the network. Such bodies may Responsibilities can seldom be allocated, to make any major commitment to the ne perceive themselves to be part of the ne since an "allocator" is not recognized twork or to other members individually. twork and may be so perceived by those and there is little obligation to respect Any strong commitments may be made to whom they relate. Membership is often such allocation anyway. A degree of or on an ad hoc basis, but they may also be not of the card-carrying variety and i ganization is introduced through agree avoided. Pressures to respect network 9 more a question of degree of involvement ment that a particular body should pro obligations are mitigated by the mem as perceived by others over a period of cess information for the network. Such ber's self-arrogated right to reserve re- time. Consequently some are considered activities exert a pressure on other mem members who do not perceive them bers which results in a minimum amount selves to be, and others are not so con of organization. However this may effec sidered although they may well perceive tively be equivalent to the action of a (*) Working paper for a meeting of the Unit themselves to be. A network of interact newsletter or journal on its readership ed Nations University GPID project (Gene ing bodies may of course exist even even if some «readers" are stimulated va, October 1978). though it is not recognized or labelled as to correspondence, others to write arti- 196. des, and others to participate in « read verging on total passivity or inertia. But - fragmentation of the network into sub ers clubs ». again the requirement that a network be networks " productive» or "active» may well be - member activity only in response to sti 4. Minimal expectations: rejected by members in favour of "be mulus or to occasions, namely not self It is characteristic of many networks that ing» (as opposed to." doing »). As with activating or continuous members do not necessarily have high the traditional "old boys network », its - member dependence on continuing en expectations concerning the action of the significance emerges from its existence, couragement, whether verbal or in the network. Frequently networks are con not the specific activities which it may fa form of some financial support (namely ceived as auxiliaries or complementary to cilitate from time to time. This is not to « activated» members as opposed to action which members may undertake in deny that a network may suddenly be ac " self-activating,,) dividually through other (conventional) tivated in response to some specific situ - limited ability of members to process structures. Or alternatively networks may ation (e.g. a crisis, an election, etc.), al communications from other members function where expectations are reason though in becoming "active» its mem and to integrate them into some larger ably low because it is recognized that bers may prefer to create one or more framework major or sudden progress is not possible, conventional (ad hoc) structures through - reliance on forms of communication particularly through conventional struc which to work. which in themselves hinder integration tures. and collective learning (or action) : 9. Unpredictable potential transforma - presentations, or exchanges of doc 5. Diffuse concerns: tion :, uments, in a " show-and-tell " spirit, Whilst some networks have very specific As implied by the previous point, most of to impress others of the importance concerns, the members of others have a the above characteristics need to be of particular isolated activities wide-range of preoccupations which qualified by the fluidity of networks and - publication of collections or compila overlap or reinforce each other in a com the attitudes of members towards them. tions of documents which require plex manner. Of particular importance are Networks can change and evolve very that the reader perform the task of those cases where the domain of interest rapidly, to the point of manifesting cha integration which the contributors of the network is highly complex, trans racteristics contrasting markedly with avoid disciplinary and involving a variety of those noted above. It is not clear what - presentation of results as the work of possible responses (research, political factors contribute to, or trigger, such individual member bodies rather than action, personal life-style change, etc.). changes. as an integration of their thinking The concerns of the network as a whole - member interaction designed to im may well be extremely elusive to the Unpleasant prove respective individual contribu point that members recognize each other networking realities tions but not to integrate them less in terms of a shared attitude to pres In continuing this study, it should be not - inability to focus (or build) on issues ent concerns, and more in terms of a ed that the purpose is to highlight the raised by individual contributions, or shared response to potential future con weaknesses of network activity not its on the lacunae which emerge be-. cerns. many strengths which have been ade tween them quately lauded elsewhere (2, 3, 4). 6, Minimal organization of preoccupa - different skills and perspectives re Clearly combinations of the weaknesses tions: main alien (or occasionally hostile) noted above may result in a network of It follows from the previous point, and to each other and do not lead to the minimal significance, if only to those who from point 3, that the concerns of a net production of a framework which ex tend to perceive themselves as members. work are seldom well structured. The emplifies their complementarity. Such activity as there is may then be complex subject domain may resist con characterized by : Difficulties such as these are due to ventional efforts to organize it and mem - regular contact between key members many factors which will become better bers may themselves resist efforts to or only known in the future. However, insofar as der their perceptions of it within any par - irregular or no contact with some mem the network is designed to reinforce what ticular framework. Where an effort is bers the members are doing mdividua!iv any made to use some framework, this tends - member contact (if any) with central el way, it comes to be evaluated against the to be viewed as an administrative conve ites and rarely (if at all) with other ability of the member to act without the nience minimally related to the non-expli members network. This loses sight of what the net- cit substantive ordering of the domain. It follows from this that conceptual integra tion tends to be a major difficulty (even if its desirability is not rejected for reasons analogous to members rejection of the organizational coordination or integra tion, which gave rise to the network in the first place). Efforts to use the network model to structure the substantive con cerns have not paralleled Its use to struc ture the relations between members. 7 Minimal collective learning: Since a network maintains no central re pository of written records, collective learning (if any) tends to take an oral form, This can be powerful in its own way but fails to build up a body of knowledge (as opposed to lore) which can be drawn upon on suitable occasions. 8. Minimal activity: It follows from the above points that the network, as a network, is often character ized by minimal activity or productivity, '197. work can achieve as a whole. This is ex - a newsletter, bulletin, etc. (b) which are solely concerned with the amined below by considering the" com - a journal or compilation of papers " transport" of communication units be munication units" and "comunication - a data network.