more about networks

Manuel Castells is one of the key thinkers on networks. In his view networks are made up not only of nodes but also of hubs. The hubs are places where the lines of communication connect. A node may be just about anything: a media outlet, a website, an organization, or an individual. Over time some nodes in the network may emerge as being more important than others depending on geographical, political, historical, or personal circumstances. For example: a company that offers a particular service or product will be connected to various other outlets and customers because it is useful to them. It serves their purposes to be linked. With a growing importance in the network, certain sites may become major nodes or hubs where other nodes connect and intersect. This can be diagrammatically represented as follows:

What is particularly instructive for Christian movements and organization is how networks hold together. The effective performance of a network over time and distance will depend to a large degree on the cultivation of shared beliefs, principles, interests, and goals- perhaps articulated in an overarching ideology. This combination of beliefs and principles together form the cultural glue, or reference point, which holds the nodes together and to which the members subscribe in a deep way. “Such a set of principles, shaped through mutual consultation and consensus-building, can enable members to be “all of one mind” even though they are dispersed and devoted to different tasks.” Dee Hock, the brilliant philosopher-businessman who founded Visa Corporation, makes this point well when he notes that…

Purpose and principle, clearly understood and articulated, and commonly shared, are the genetic code of any healthy organization. To the degree that you hold purpose and principles in common among you, you can dispense with command and control. People will know how to behave in accordance with them, and they’ll do it in thousands of unimaginable, creative ways. The organization will become a vital, living set of beliefs.

Remember the reference to ‘fit and split” in the chapter on Apostolic Environment? Well it is these overarching beliefs that provide a central ideological and operational coherence (fit) that allows for wide tactical decentralization (split) This culture or ideology “…also sets the boundaries and provides guidelines for decisions and actions so that the members do not have to resort to a hierarchy because ‘they know what they have to do.’” This is analogous to what the best military practice refers to as ‘commander’s intent’ and ‘rules of engagement’: these set the guidelines for the scope of individual decision making. Through these, the solider knows what do and what the limitations are, how they do it is up to them.

It is worth reflecting here on what Hock says are keys to developing networked organization. He says….

But all this organic networking requires significant, or ‘dense’ (Arquilla and Ronfeldt), communications to hold it all together. Arquilla and Ronfeldt note: “The network design may depend on having an infrastructure for the concentrated communication of information. But this does not mean that all nodes must be in constant communication. But when communication is needed, the network’s members must be able to disseminate information as promptly and broadly as desired within the network as well as to outside audiences.”

August 31, 2008 | Filed Under organic systems, the forgotten ways |  

Comments

3 Responses to “more about networks”

  1. Duncan McFadzean on September 1st, 2008 5:40 pm

    This is a great point - there’s an increasing desire for the permissive approach, and the liberation to express visions and dreams. But without the purpose and the principles, it can be directionless. How do you fit this article with the Starfish concept, where the central hub did not exist?

  2. Marlin on September 1st, 2008 6:40 pm

    great post - finally some substance to this network talk. In my observation it is shared values that bring the clue for coherence. The values usually come from ideology or experience, but ideology or experience is not enough. We try to do value-based church networks and the experience is very good, even though it takes quiet some time.

    Values have a bad name in the corporate world. They are usually forced down on people by some high-level function. I think the same can happen in church networks. Once people understand the value of shared values, it is tempting to come up with statements that you send to everyone and expect that they come together around them. Values need to be caught and discovered, not told or implemented. It would be intersting if you could write more on the process of value discovery and how an organization helps members to come to a shared understanding. Do you have anything on that?

  3. alan hirsch on September 2nd, 2008 4:00 am

    Duncan, I totally love the Starfish and the spider. Its a great, but simple, book. But even they admit that all organizations are to some degree ‘hybrids’ and that there are few, if any, pure starfish like organizations.

    Marlin, I try to express how people might discover values in The Forgotten Ways Handbook. I think the trick is to actually ‘act our way into a new way of thinking’ rather than ‘think our way into a new way of acting’. I believe this is best done by developing a set of common practices that are values embodied in action. Rather than identifying conceptual frameworks, we rather disciple people around key ideas related to Gospel and life. Try refer back to the section where I blogged about this under ‘discipleship’. How would you do this?

Leave a Reply




Comment spam protected by SpamBam

Copyright © 2008 The Forgotten Ways • Linear WordPress Theme • Powered by WordPress • Maintained by Noble Design