Our fine colleagues take a very myopic view of social networks when they say that "Social networks, as they relate to organizational behavior, are based on the exploitation of weak ties for the purpose of spreading a particular message." The same set of people who staunchly supported forming issue-based groups after their analysis of W2W have now conveniently chosen to ignore one of the greatest advantages social networks have to offer; bringing the right people together to work on the right things. Social networks aren't merely a communication medium. They are the lifeblood of social and political efforts and an invaluable tool for discovering extraordinary synergies within organizations.
Civil Rights Movement: We appreciate Kevin Bacon's reference to the sit-ins led in the early 1960's. They are correct in their view that a few campus leaders are responsible for the proliferation of sit-ins throughout the American South. That being said, the success of sit-ins and the Civil Rights Movement is attributed more to collective action among a network than due to a "core of dedicated and trained activists." For instance, the Montgomery Bus Boycott in 1955 is an example of the power of a church-based network to effect social change. When Rosa Parks, secretary of the local NAACP, made the premeditated decision to break the law, she knew that staying power of the ensuing boycott depended upon the ability of the community to arrange a complex carpooling network.[1] And if network structure wasn't central to the Civil Rights Movement, then the death of Martin Luther King Jr. by an assassin's bullet in 1963 would have also meant the death of the landmark Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act of 1964 and 1965 respectively.
Occupy: With respect to Occupy Wall Street, Kevin Bacon also rightly points out that social networks are not guarantors of organizational success. Supporting their argument, it is true that an attempted Belarusian Revolution led to a heavy handed response by Luschenko and the Chinese Government did not take kindly to a mass student protest in Tiananmen Square in 1989. Social networks and mass action movements can produce the antithesis of what its supporting elements seek to achieve. However, it is premature to categorize the Occupy Movement as a failure that lacks "clear demands." Just this week, organizers cited the "forgiveness of student debt" (amounted to a cool $500 billion dollars) as one of their core objectives.[2] One of our MIA group members even heard the pro-Capitalist "Forbes on Fox" commentators on the Fox News Channel give a fair hearing on this grievance. Therefore, it's too early to prejudice the real potential of the Occupy social network, especially as it continues to swell in size, to impact Federal Policy.
On particulars, our colleagues also misstep when equating a large network with a leaderless one. Social networks exist in all forms of organizations whether big or small, hierarchical or flat. Contrary to helping in forming leaderless organization, analysis of social networks can help identify potential leaders or groups by carefully looking at various parameters around in/out degree and eigenvector centrality. These networks, when analyzed affectively, can also lead to better-managed and well-targeted information flows in order to shield against information overload. Both of these notions were clearly exemplified during the analysis of W2W network when various teams looked at leveraging well-connected girls for specific issues that they were passionate about.
Other political movements have without a doubt been not only successful, but done so in a much shorter period of time than would have been possible without social media to empower social networks. Who would have guessed, for instance, at the first Tea Party Patriot rally in February of 2009 that the Tea Party Caucus – which has since used digital social networks to organize and recruit[3] – would come to dominate the old Republican guard in 2011, and bring us to the brink of both a government shutdown and debt default? Who would have guessed that a single act of defiance on a bus in 1955 would spark a social movement that would end de jure segregation in the United States just 9 years later?
Terrorism: If Kevin Bacon were correct in its contention that social networks are not the greatest source of organizational strength, then the "War on Terror" would not constitute the threat it does today. Its survival after the collapse of the Taliban in the Al Qaeda nerve center of Afghanistan can only be attributed to the weak ties "headquarters" had with its affiliates in countries all around the world. Conversely, the success of the United States military and intelligence services hinges on their ability to identify and destroy the terrorist "nodes" that have the highest degree centrality. The brilliance of terrorism is that it does not abide by geographic boundaries. Kevin Bacon correctly points out that passion and "purpose' can be the impetus for terrorism but terrorists are ineffectual without a vehicle to translate ideology and passion into organizational success.
A wealth of connections does not create a lack of focus; it creates an abundance of opportunities. For all the reasons provided, we reaffirm that since social networks are already the main driver of organizational success, and have been for decades, given new technology and an analysis discipline that continues to be refined, that will only become more critical by 2025.
[1]"Martin Luther King Jr. and the Global Freedom Struggle: Montgomery Bus Boycott 1955-1956." http://mlk-kpp01.stanford.edu/index.php/encyclopedia/encyclopedia/enc_montgomery_bus_boycott_1955_1956/
[2]Pilon, Mary. "Student-Loan Debt Among Top Occupy Wall Street Concerns." The Wall Street Journal Blog. October 12, 2011. http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2011/10/12/student-loan-debt-among-top-occupy-wall-street-concerns/
[3] Corbin Hiar. “How the Tea Party Utilized Digital Media to Gain Power.” PBS Media Shift. October 28,2010. http://www.pbs.org/mediashift/2010/10/how-the-tea-party-utilized-digital-media-to-gain-power301.html.
No comments:
Post a Comment