In response to Doug Seeley's question:
> It appears to me that the challenge is how to nurture this
>role of informal networks, as the key adaptive strategy of
>the organization. Does anyone have any idea what this strategy
>actually looks like in organizations?
I'm smiling as I write this, Doug, because of the unusual number of times
someone asks a question in this list and someone else says, "Yes, I have
ideas about that. In fact, I wrote a book about it."
So I'm laughing because I do have some ideas about your question and in
fact, Jeff Stamps and I wrote a book about it (THE AGE OF THE NETWORK)
which I referenced a few weeks back in response to this "Informal
Networks" thread.
We regard networks--both informal and formal ones--as the successors to
hierarchy and bureaucracy, not replacements for them but in addition to
them. We agree with you that networks are a key adaptive organizational
strategy. In the organizations that we've studied, they have been
successful because they have made their networks explicit. I know that
this idea rubs many people on this list the wrong way. For many people,
the idea of making an informal network "formal" in any way defeats its
purpose.
Networks gain power and legitimacy by becoming more explicit about their
work. Yes, the hierarchy can squash a network but it can also benefit from
it. The organizations that we've studied which are the most successful are
those that use each form of organization for what it does best--and
networks are critical to the organizational mix of the moment.
Jessica
**************************
Jessica Lipnack <jlipnack@netage.com>
The Networking Institute, Inc., 505 Waltham Street, West Newton, MA 02165 USA
Tel: 617/965-3340 Fax: 617/965-2341 Web page: http://www.netage.com
***************************
--jlipnack@netage.com (Jessica Lipnack)
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>