That's pretty much it, IMO. There are clear (and in present times usually semantic rule-based principles) for designing social hierarchies for the forms of organized social systems. They are typically based on the accepted vertical arrangements of codified knowedge (or power when applied to the results of elections) and assume that the dynamics of the system flow along the lines of the vertical arrangement of knowledge (see any job or position evaluation scheme).

Such schemes are essentially dissonant with peer-to-peer exchanges of information, the negotiation of roles depending upon the purpose at hand and the scaffolding of knowledge and meaning that often follows ... upcoming post.

Seems to me you are ignoring the hierarchies which evolve in the network or perhaps a member of the hierarchy has lost the necessary perspective to recognize the hierarchy?

Dave,
I met you briefly in London, 1st week in Dec.06 when you spoke at the Ark Group conference. I have since been reading your blog, (and others that you've linked your readers to), and I must say that I am getting a much appreciated education in knowledge sharing. My colleague and I, Joyce Keene, have a psychology background and work in a law firm.....we've been charged with the task of knowledge management. Your thinking holds tremendous appeal because you appreciate the people side of the equation. Anyhow...to the point, just read 3.18.07 posting and was most interested in the distinction that you made between networks and hierachies. It made me think about "grapevines" and how they frequently carry important knowledge. What's your understanding about grapevines and their function in an organization?

Interesting point Cheryl, I have been having a similar debate with Verna Alee on a list serve. Status and pecking order issues are natural in any social system, but they are fluid and can change quickly. I am using hierarchy here in the sense of formal power, organisational charts etc. I also think the real issue here is the clustering aspect of the blogoshere.

Hi Gloria - and yes I remember the conversation. I think the informal networks (or grapevines) of an organisation are more important than for formal system for knowledge transmission but also for validation and trust. I have written about that some time ago - article available here.

Dave,

This is the second time recently that you've mentioned a good podcast that you were listening to; please list them so that we can all join in!

Matthew

Sorry Matthew

Its "All in the Mind" from ABC
2007-03-10 Prospects for a Transhuman mind?

http://www.abc.net.au/services/podcasting/

what I like about that page is the fact that they also have a written transcript. One thing that I don't like about podcasts is the fact that it has to go at their pace, not at mine. Thus I prefer reading (exception: in meatspace, I prefer speaking and listening).