What we have to date in one doc here

 

Possible Title: "Is there an inevitable paradigm shift for the field of OD incorporating new collaborative technologies?" (I know this sounds prescriptive.... but it just came to me ML)

 

Single loop or mulitple loop learning process? - theoretical models tied to evolving action.

particpatory action research - contantly dynamic - (not like Lewin's model, newtonian)

sociology models are more relevant, our openness, something is cooking over here, lets go there. trust. fluidity

 

Why do we want to write this article?

We want to share the theoretical learning we initiated around the research and the method of research we chose with the OD Community through the OD Practicioner, and to suggest furture avenues for research and theory.  suggest furture avenues for learning about .

Why would someone want to read it? (hook)

 

During the call of 11/5 Ed Esbeck said, "ODN started with the emphasis on creating a network and dealing with isolation OD practitioners feel in the time between conferences, twitter is bringing us back to that original idea of staying connected and supporting each other. I also liked the idea of generational paradox: seasoned OD practitioners are newbies in social media and are often coached in it by those who are only starting out in the OD field. 

 

I.Introduction

     a. flocking to Seattle idea - 

          i. the idea of a wiki as an approach to working collaborative

          ii. the technology already existed and was in use in the communtity, i.e. PNODN wiki + Twitter itself is an existing technology

          iii.

     b. student consultant contracted

How it happened [what format is this in? I can't seem to open it. -rlr] -it's .tiff and contains a drawing of how I understand what happened after what Anna here is a pdf

 

I've started to compile the sequence of events, is it the way we want to go?

How it began

Regional Planning Team (RPT) was faced with too many choices of social media sites (facebook, linked in, second life etc.) and not enough people with expertise on the subject to make a decision. It seemed like we needed a way to get connected before the conference and stay in touch even after it was over, it had to be versatile and easy to use. 

Rachel Lyn put in a request for proposal to do an action research focused on the use of Twitter, which up to that point I really haven’t used much. Right around the same time Time published an article on the use of this micro blogging venue for meetings, “what a great fit!”, I thought. 

We started talking about the details, and by mid August we had a first conference call with the group. Within a few minutes of the initial invite, at least 20 participants had signed up, there was definitely energy around the idea. Luckily, we only had 10 (?) participants during the kick off conversation and even that effected its style: instead of being more casual and spending time getting to know each other we had to use more directive approach to orient everyone and get familiar with the scope. We had decided in advance that the main collaboration tool would be the wiki (pbworks.com) and it was interesting how different our comfort level was even with this piece of technology, which wasn’t even our main focus, some knew what to do right away, despite only having a smart phone for browsing. Plus, being scattered all across the continent and calling into one conference added a virtual element by itself, wonder how different would it be if we met in person... Would we lack the diversity of perspectives that added so much to our interaction?

The most tangible accomplishment of the first phone call were the goals:

1. Support virtual attendance at OD Net Conference; helping the non-attending community interact with the attending community.
2. Expand the conversation threads that form on the floor of the conference through Twitter
3. Network the networks
4. Inquire into the uses of social media in Leadership and Organizational Development

(Throughout  the whole process in the months of working on preparing for the conference and analyzing its outcomes we have been reviewing them.)

Call two came exactly a week after the first one and, again, so many different ideas and approaches, but we all wanted to be on the same page with how we proceed and the little things we do every day to build a base for what will come . A participant guide was what was created in response to this need:

What you can do now

 

• Twitter actions

• Keep a journal about what you notice about:

• Block you calendars for regular conference calls on Fridays at 12 pm PST, 3 pm EST
• Set up email notifications or an RSS feed for this wiki.

 

 

These stayed on the wiki for the duration of the project and we came back to the from time to time. Learning the Twitter interface, rules and culture was a big part of our personal learning, each one of us did it differently: some read books, others got coaching from colleagues, we created a couple of videos to help guide our fellow network members through the intricacies of applying it to the conference specifically, as we found multiple existing resources assisting with general use and, when we came together on Fridays it was hard to keep the balance between discussing technical details and behavioral or OD aspects of the project.

 

We had doubts when reviewing pros and cons, so many in the OD community are valuing face to face interactions above all others, will they tweet? Will they feel offended if others tweet? Etiquette was one the major concerns, we did not want to be a distraction to the essence of the conference - full presence. 

Jeff: These barriers make me think Twitter is not for everyone and it's not for everything. It seems like while opening participation with Twitter, we also risk distancing some folks. I guess we ask what the "appropriate"use of Twitter will be so not to annoy those in the room who expect full and engaged present participation. If I were in the room, I'd be annoyed by folks on cell phones. It's normal to ask that all cell phones be turned off.

     c. our assumptions

 

II. Terminology

     a.microblogging: a form of blogging that is intanteous and limited to no more than 140 characters.

     b.tweet: a single message posted to Twitter

     c.retweet: a function of a repeat of someone else's tweet, messages that repeated are noted with a simple "RT" code and usually a mention of the tweet's origin

     d.hashtags: a way of grouping tweets with a simple "#" sign followed by a name or a code which forms a unique tag for specific purposes. (#odnet09 and           #odconf2009 were both used at the conference and both initited from outside the research group, Flocking to Seattle.)

     e.mention: a message containing an "@" sign signifing a specific profile, person owning the profile, or weblog (is this also called reply?)

     f.profile: a unique twitter account designated by the sign "@" followed by a username (@odnetwork).

 

III. Motivation 

     a. regional planning committee virtual attendance indecision 

 

many options considered: linkedIn, facebook, second life, video streaming, round table technology etc. - all seemed as exciting possibilities, but would either require sophisticated technological skills or significant financial investment.

 

     b. action research particpants wanted to learn if this was relavant to the future of OD

 

     c. action research particpants wanted to a taste of the conference that they could not attend

 

Jeff? survey data? My Observations About Twitter at the Conference? Scrubbed Copy of Flocking to Seattle Survey Response by Question (date filtered).xls

 

     d. particpants wanted to create a live confernce presence online for those who could not attend to attend virtually

 

     e. particpants wanted to learn about Twitter and social media technically

     f. initial Flocking to Seattle meeting # of attendees to information session

 

we had close to 30 people sign up for the first call, about 10 actually called in, 5 people average number of participants (experienced some turn over) since. 

     g. balance between concentrating on own learning of technology and spreading the word or recruiting tweeterers (od vs. social media?) 

 

 

 

IV. Design of study          

a. data collection

     1. focus group to form basic understanding - What about Twitter Works Well  and What Barriers exist to optimal performance 

     2. inital survey of the OD Network to discover the themes and patterns of the situtation - Survey design page

b. controlled study - Logisitics Page, Intervention

c. kiosk - Projection of Tweetdeck feed on highly visible wall

d. conference username - @odnetwork

 

V.Critique of Approach

     a. action research familiar method of organizational learning and change within the OD community

     1. participatory, emperical and experiemental

        i. participatory in that the research team remained and open system members were invite to contribute at their capacity. members from 7 states particpated

          ii. particpatory the group collaborated to collect data and interperet it at each phase of the project

         iii.emperical in that the group collected anicdotal data on individual experiences

          iv. experiemental in that the group collaborated to design multiple interventions

         v. expeirmental in the we used a wiki (http://flockingtoseattle.pbworks.com ) and held a weekly teleconference meeting to manage the project 

     b. method to evaluate the intervention and the program itself

     c. Twitter is said "to add to the network knowledge building" and "allows individuals to generate resources baased on specific thematics" schemes (Stevens

     d. The method was useful for including participants with a range of range of knowledge levels of the media

               1. support for that

 

VI. Findings (what)

a. network cohesion -

i. network core growth - followership structure that formes

ii.networking the network - nodexl.com (ranges)

iii. not mechnistic or hierachical

b. content of tweets - wordle cloud

i. summary of types of tweets

c. collaboration

     i. self organization around the use of hashtags

aa. intentional structure of tags did not have traction

     ii. RTs to distribute ideas and generate peak ideas or nominial vote process

     iii. back channel dialogue

d. control group - the mechanistic approach did not serve to develope our therory. - (Wheatley and Frieze, 2006)

WHY? resaerch behavior and learn about the value of microblogging for OD practice by influencing a self ogranizing conversation over Twitter and initiating connections through the OD community around the events of the OD Network's Annual Conference.

Our hunches were that we were learning about a self organizing system, that we would not be in control, that others would also be initiating and that something would emerge in the form of a network. In the bounds of Twitter as about frame of research we expected the behaviors of the network to reflect the functions of Twitter that S. Johnson (2009) described as: 

The initial understanding was that pointing and sharing was the content of the network, the information content. Searching for information, we likened to process. Follower structure was collectiong of connections in the newtork. To understand the power of networking with social media and the network as a form of organizing in and of itself, we set out to observe what would emerge and what emergence looked like in our action research approach and in the invervention of social media use at the conference. 

 

 

 

VII. Learning Aids and future research tools

     a. http://www.codeplex.com/NodeXL

     b.

 

VIII. Possible Quotes

     a. conference

          1. E. Seashore on Twitter being like a continuous "ckeck in" [DATE? retrieved form?  See APA sixth edition second print for how to cite a blog]

          2. P. Block on the conference structure being "like sardines" and "convos that matter" [Keynote citation of a Tweeter feed?]

          3. J. Powell on flocking to Seattle, Web 2.0, being followed and her sense of belonging from the recognition [keynote address]

 

     b. references

          1.S. Johnson, (2009) How Twitter will Change the Way we Live, Time Magazine (June 05)

i."In the room, a large display screen showed a running feed of tweets. Then we all started talking, and as we did, a shadow conversation unfolded on           the screen: summaries of someone's argument, the occasional joke, suggested links for further reading"(Johnson, 2009).  

ii.. "Injecting Twitter into that conversation fundamentally changed the rules of engagement. It added a second layer of discussion and brought a wider           audience into what would have been a private exchange. And it gave the event an afterlife on the Web" (Johnson, 2009).

iii. "Twitter users have begun to find a route around that limitation by employing Twitter as a pointing device instead of a communications channel:           sharing links to longer articles, discussions, posts, videos — anything that lives behind a URL." (Johnson, 2009)

 

2.Signorelli, A.. (2009). How Virgin Media uses Twitter for collaboration. Strategic Communication Management, 13(4), 8.  Retrieved August 13, 2009, from                     ABI/INFORM Global. (Document ID: 1785568881).

i."Twitter can really maximize collaboration without the need to get to know and understand each other first."       

ii. Abi Signorelli, director of internal communication at Virgin Media, reports Twitter has enabled Virgin to collaborate both internally and externally in           ways that support the core value of the organization they call "being human."

iii. "Getting social at Virgin Media is a hot topic for us right now. We want to transform how we communicate and collaborate internally using social           media tools and techniques."

3.Seashore, E. (2009).

                    i. "Checking in on Twitter is the electronic equivalent of a check-in. Only you check-in with 500 people."

                    ii. "Twitter gives you a context for what is going on. You'd think staff facing a major decision in an organization would spend 10 minutes doing a                               check-in."

 

X. Bibliography

Stevens V. (2008). Trial by twitter: The rise and slide of the year's most viral miroblogging platform. June 2008, retreived March 2009 from http://tesl-ej.org/ej45/int.html

 

Signorelli, A.. (2009). How Virgin Media uses Twitter for collaboration. Strategic Communication Management, 13(4), 8.  Retrieved August 13, 2009, from ABI/INFORM Global. (Document ID: 1785568881).

 

          Broadbent, S. (2009) Stefana Broadbent: How the Internet enables intimacy retrieved from http://ted.com on November 20,2009

        

          Bligh, X. (1971).

          Gleason, X. (1986).

          Anderson, (2003).

          Twomey, x. (2009)  Time Magazine June 2009,retreived http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1902604,00.html#ixzz0aC6Tw1VH

 

 

UPDATE: this issues was invite only. we are submitting for Spring. 

 

Blog posts about the conference:

http://bit.ly/1hpmzP - @TMSAmericas

 

 http://bit.ly/kJfbN - @ODforNonprofits