Daily Archives: May 21, 2008

These days I’m getting back to blogging after I found out that I was spending too much time on Twitter!
If one had to chart a ladder of engagement wrt time you build with virtual networks for me it would look like this
Linkedin (low time investment required) —>Yahoogroups (email lets me respond when I want to respond)—->Facebook (those apps are turning me off) —>Ning (I manage two networks there) —-> Blogging (reading other blogs and composing my own posts) —>Twitter (high time spent on it)
Rob May recently blogged about the “Return on Conversation” with regard to blogging. I was wondering where your returns on conversations are – are they neutral, negative or positive?

Kathie posts:

I strongly believe that networking isn’t something to be carried out when work has dried up (which was this VA’s problem) but rather something that is continuously worked upon, every single week. It doesn’t matter how busy you are, something constructive should be done regularly towards the building of your business. Otherwise, a few weeks or a couple of months down the track you’ll find things quiet again and wonder what’s happened?

You stopped networking, that’s what happened!

how true!

From Tom Davenport:

I don’t want to get into whether a few interesting technologies can transform the most hidebound of organizations, or even if these 2.0 tools somehow are more important than nuclear power and weapons, the internal combustion engine, and airplanes as tools that can transform government. No, my question is whether these exaggerations, which are typical of pronouncements emanating from the heights of gurudom, are helpful or not.

One could argue that they are helpful because they motivate us to strive for greater impact from new technologies or management approaches. Perhaps they help us keep our “eyes on the prize.” Without such optimism, maybe the pressures of everyday life would keep us from ever accomplishing anything. Maybe people are just looking for something new and different—what’s objectionable about that?

On the other hand, this sort of techno-utopian argument could be harmful. It might lead, for example, to disenchantment with the technology when it doesn’t lead to the promised result. Companies and organizations might end up spending more on the technologies than their utility warrants. If gurus were ever held accountable for their proclamations (and they hardly ever are), it might also lower the credibility of all management experts.