Integrated Social Networks (2)

Add comment January 23rd, 2007 Robert Bosman

In the last blog post about the next generation of social networks (in the previous blog post called Integrated Social Networks or INS), a list of essential characteristics of such networks was mentioned. In this article we want to talk a little more about three of those: a profound INS will be for each of it’s private, corporate or governmental users Multi-role as well as Multi-dimensional and will enable Full data aggregation.

It is easy to underestimate both the bearing and the consequences of this statement. So let’s illustrate it using the following graphic:

We see an individual (or a collection), that has at least one role in two organizations. Almost all organizations have all kinds of formal and informal sub-organizations: divisions, subsidiaries, business units, projects, meetings, etc etc. In essence those subs are the different roles of an organization. So, in reality the person in the picture above, will not only be connected to the organizations as such, but also to one or more of the sub-organizations. Consequently, both people as organizations are inter-connected and ‘multi-role’. And they will both have many types of information: appointments, tasks, messages, documents, products etc. Moreover, people also have all kinds of personal relations, that may also generate those types of information. So ‘full data aggregation’ has to cover all kinds of information. But that aggregation of data will be different for each person, each organizations and each sub-organization, because they all share different parts of the whole information warehouse; so each player has to be able to see and maintain that part of all information they are entitled to. In other words, “multi dimension” means that each player has to be able to see and maintain a different dimension of all data available.

So, people ask: Show me my network, not only the connections I have in one social networks, but in all of them, including all organizations and governments I am connected to. And show me my aggregated organizations, projects and meetings. And the products I bought over time, not only per store, but of all stores. Show me an aggregated overview of my financial situation, my insurances. And give me access to all documents I created, read or still have to read for the next meetings I am going to.

Likewise, organizations come up with about the same questions, but than not in the ‘I’ format, but in ‘We’ and ‘Us’. And of course, each organization and sub-organization is a dimension in itself. In the graphic above, 3 dimensions are visualized, all as a cloud with a different color; but in reality we should show a whole rainbow!

In essence governments, governmental organizations, non-governmental organizations, intra-governmental organizations and supra-governmental organizations are all just organizations with a different type of ‘business’ and different responsibilities. The main difference between those organizations and all others, is that they have either the power to make rules for all other players in the field or a role in the execution of that rules (we will write about the opportunities in Society 4.0 that arise from this power later on). But from the point of view of organizational processes, those organizations are not different at all. So the organizations in the graphic above, may also be any kind of governmental organizations.

All of the above illustrates both the desireability of fully integrated social networks as wll asthe complexity of it. And how can we solve complexity? As always, by looking at the details and see the simple solutions that are available; and we think Euler’s wisdom and mathematics may help us in this matter. Last century we found that we can brake down all information in the world into zeros and ones; this century we will find a solution to make human cooperation in any type of organization so easy, that we never ever can imagine the administrative complexity - maybe we should be honest and just call it a mess! - of today.

Technorati Tags: digid, federated login, verification, tusted third parties, web 2.0, URM, CRM, HRM, social networks, co-creation, society, euler

Integrated Social Networks (ISNs)

Add comment January 23rd, 2007 Robert Bosman

As stated in the previous three blog postings, we are heading towards a new generation of social networks, that will integrate personal, corporate and governmental collaboration and co-creation. So let’s call them integrated social networks (ISN).

The future will show 2 main types of Social Networks:

Personal Social Networks
+ Corporate Social Networks
= Partially Integrated Social Networks
=========================

Personal Social Networks
+ Corporate Social Networks
+ Governmental Social Networks
= Fully Integrated Social Networks
======================

Of course an INS is also partial, if it is composed of Personal Social Networks and Governmental Social Networks only, so no integration with corporations. And that brings us to one of the major future dangers: a separated development in which corporations and governments both start to develop their own partially integrated social networks, each based on a different architecture. This ‘data island scenario’ will drive the end user even more crazy - with all that incompatible logins, account names and passwords - than is the case today. Moreover, such a scenario will not only be x times as expensive and inefficient, it will also frustrate the development of the most important data validation services, that will be absolutely necessary to build and maintain the trust levels we need in Society 4.0. And it is even worse: when we as a society start integrating data without offering sufficient data reliability, we will substantially support all kinds of organized crime and even terrorism.

In other words: we can not afford a ‘data island scenario’ in the development of integrated social networks. But that is exactly what is happening at the moment. The absolute lack of global standards for Integrated Social Networks at one hand and the ongoing growth of opportunities for using web techniques, encourage millions of organizations and a lot of governments to generate their own solutions. The Dutch Government, for example, is investing a tremendous amount of money in all kinds of integration projects, among which are very sophisticated ones that are integrated with a lot of governmental and semi-governmental services and even with some major corporate services. All praise for that!!! But… the English Government is doing the same, based on a different strategy and architecture. As is the government of the USA. And we may add most other countries to the list. In the corporate environment we see the same. This is almost a horror scenario, that by the end of the day may produce at it’s best a local sub optimalization, with a tremendous administrative problem in integrating the different data islands.

Who can stop this development? Not the individuals; they don’t have the investment power (yet). Not the governments; they are not the leading inventors of new system opportunities but only users of existing technologies. Not the majority of all organizations; they are also followers of the technical developments. But one category is left: the leading system developers, the major global ICT corporations that have the power to generate and maintain new global standards. I realize that they are in a tremendous competitive fight. Nevertheless, it is their responsibility to help our global Society developing in a safe and reliable way; that way can only be the development of profound common, global standards for Integrated Social Networks.

And history thought us, that it was the rise of common standards - even standards like language, writing and printing - that created the major leaps in human development. That leaps will also create new business opportunities for the standard creators.

I hope this article will contribute to the rise of those standards; 2BeWise as an organization is dedicated to contribute to it.

Technorati Tags: digid, federated login, verification, tusted third parties, web 2.0, URM, CRM, HRM, social networks, co-creation, society