Jessica--
Your thought-provoking post raises many questions about the difference between
networks and formal organizations.
> So...spending time on purpose is a very valuable activity for people
> in a network. Likewise, coming back to the purpose, mining it for
> all it is worth, and revising it is critical to network clarity.
> This leads to being clear about who is in the network, what everyone
> is doing, and what the desired results are.
> In short, networks require a high degree of tolerance for ambiguity
> and change, as Valdis says, fluidity without rigidity. It's very
> tricky but it can work to great effect.
[change of quotated location by jr]
What is the essential difference between a network and THE network, meaning the
network represented by the formal organization? If a formal functional
organization recognizes and fully supports the process that makes its work
happen, is that an effective network? If the formal organizational network
holds the same purpose as the informal networks, are they in essence working
toward the same ends? When the formal and informal networks are aligned in
their purpose, are they in effect extraordinarily powerful in their combined
impact? Would there be value in having the formal and informal networks aligned
and working toward the same ends? When can this happen, and why would it
happen?
Is there more ambiguity or a different kind of ambiguity in a network than in a
formal organizational structure?
--Rol Fessenden LL Bean, Inc. 76234.3636@compuserve.com
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>