in LO2475, Rick Karash wrote...in part...
> One of the features touted in electronic meeting support systems is
> Anonymity. That is, where each participant can add their ideas, comments,
> and evaluations anonymously.
> The notion is that people may be more free to say things they wouldn't say
> with attribution, things like, "We all know this won't work, but nobody
> will say so," or going way back, "The Emperor has no clothes!"
> What do you think about enabling anonymity in business conversations?
> Good, bad, when should we use it?
It a modest idea that's been blown out of proportion to its utility.
Let me start by citing an example of where anonymity is really
valuable: You've got a disparate group (potentially even enemies)
and you need to get some answers fast. Example: Merging opera-
tions after an acquisition; if you want the best ideas, untainted
by the "conqueror/vanquished" identities, you need anonymity.
In this case a Group Decision Support System (GDSS) like Ventana's
GroupSystem for Windows is a good tool. It gets people engaged
with one another, but it forces ideas to be evaluated on intrinsic
merit (influenced, to some degree by articulation skills of pro-
posers), instead of principally by the *source* of the idea.
Now, the downsides (in brief; I believe there are more):
First, by providing support for an outlet, it actually sanctions
and validates the dysfunctional behaviors that normally take
place that anonymity is designed to overcome! So, except in this
special situation, we actually reinforce the dysfunction! I'd
rather address the root causes and solve those first.
Second, anonymity leads to severe abuse. Two examples:
1. By masquerading as another party (i.e., choosing their kinds
of words, phrasings, etc.) I can convey a sense of importance
to an otherwise unimportant idea.
When The WELL set up an anonymous conference several years
ago, several people began to assert they were other people
altogether, resulting in some severe damage to reputations.
The experience was so distasteful that, as newcomers try to
spur interest in anonymity every several months, older heads
prevail and the idea is discounted because of the damage
that can be done when accountability for one's actions and
words is removed.
2. You can build your own groundswell of support for an idea:
First, propose your idea. The (anonymously, of course) you
begin adding new features to it, congratulating yourself on
having thought of it; each non-participant wonders why they
haven't climbed on the bandwagon...and then many do, rein-
forcing the process! It's amazing to watch.
Anonymity would appear, on surface, to be a good idea. I have
yet to see any environment (save the exceptional condition I've
cited) where it actually contributed to productivity...and it can
sow seeds of real distrust if one or more miscreants decides to
leverage the lack of accountability.
--
Carol Anne Ogdin "If we fixed a hangnail the way our
Deep Woods Technology, Inc. government fixed the economy, we'd
CAOgdin @ DeepWoods.com slam a car door on it."
--Cullen Hightower