Thealphswarmer communication models

Multi-Variate Modes of Communication: thealphaswarmer_toolsets

Corporate enterprises, not for profits, government entities, universities and non-government organisations all enucicate vision statements that aim to intersect with current or future market needs. Earlier today, whilst watching the Bloomberg Big Business Decisions show I was encapsulated by Reid Roffman’s (Co Founder of Linked In) discussion with the host around how the professional network site, at its very core, aims to maximise economic opportunities through connections. LinkedIn, as we all know, is all about leveraging capabilities within individual profiles and contextually harnessing them in a focused effort towards restyling and upskilling. This paradigm is also ensconced at companies like Microsoft and Google as at the very essence of their organisational DNA lies the precepts of ‘collective intelligence’ (i.e. all of us are smarter than any of us). As such, its important, regardless of organisational scope or size, to nurture ground rules and best practice frameworks of communication when dealing across, within and beyond virtual ecosystems. Here, one can be thinking primarily about networks which are voluntary and self-sustaining rather than networks which are mandatory for participants as a result of their business or profession.

To put this into some practical perspective, lets (for simplicity), label the three types of communication levels that are present in any virtual group. These are:

1. The Shout (one-to-many)

2. The Whisper (one-to-one)

3. The Gossip (one-to-some)

You can read more about these here. However, for the sake of relevance and context; in the business domain; lets asses the viability and sustainability of a network from a human communications and interactions viewpoint:

There are, in essence, three types of network dialogues across any communication medium:

Network Dialogs

There are 3 basic types of dialogues humans have with each other:

1. TCB (Taking Care of Business) – getting things done

2. Grooming – Nurturing relationships through trivia and small talk

3. Emoting – Sharing how we feel – good and bad

There are 3 main channels we can use for these dialogues:

x. Speech – over the phone or face to face

y. eMail/Web – any form of asynchronous communications

z. Messaging – any form of real-time communications via web or mobile phone

The types of networks that can proliferate are delineated but not limited to below (as a conceptual framework)

Voluntary Professional Networks

These networks often fixate on the TCB Dialog with no room for Grooming or Emoting – in fact these latter two dialogs might be positively banned or frowned upon.

Web-only Networks

Networks which only use the eMail/Web channel but don’t allow Speech or Mobile Messaging make it very hard for their members to Groom or Emote.

• I-centric Networks

These networks present the rest of the community mainly as a resource which I can draw upon. Thus they support 1:1 and 1:M encounters but neglecting the M:M encounters which can be great for building group relationships.

Viewing a proposed network using the 3 dimensions of communications can be a powerful way to spot and fix obstacles and problems to sustainability before the network gets off the ground. Therefore, what you are really looking for is a SUN (Sustainable Unified Network)!

In future articles I will outline an incubation type of approach that not only keeps things focused but also entertains with practical references to free internet technologies and tools that can be leveraged for purpose!

Acknowledgements:

Ken Thompson: Founder & Author of Bioteams.com and businesssimulations.com.

Read my review of his book here