Ton, Lilia, Dina and Gary have been discussing how to turn blogs into actionable knowledge.
Amongst the attractors of the conversation are frustration at not taking the loose ends of blog-nurtured ideas further;
I do have a feeling that I’m not responsive enough in picking up the thoughts we dream up here in the blogosphere and turn them into action. The blogs reveal emerging patterns, and we can nurture the memes we think important, and block or criticise the ones we think are not.
But I seem to be less succesfull at moving stuff from the complex and un-ordered realm (to adopt some of Dave Snowden’s vocabulary) where my addiction is fed, to the more ordered realm of the knowable and practice.
and equally a concern that we should not close off interesting avenues through premature crystallisation into action:
The loose ends offer me a sense of the possible, a landscape that can go anywhere, a sense of adventure that keeps coaxing me back to explore a little more. I wouldn’t want it tidied up in a tight focused and deadlined bundle because I know, philosophically, to do so would require closing off many of these possibilities, discarding the undiscovered territories.
After I’d let these posts mull around in my mind for a day or two, the first thought that came to me was this - just because I don’t neccessarily blog about actions I have taken as a result of blog-inspired knowledge creation, that doesn’t mean there wasn’t actionable knowledge created!
We all make decisions (often subconsciously) about what to blog and what not to blog. For many people (myself included) the most potent area of such decisions is around our relationship to our employer (or clients for the self-employed)
My “day job” and most of my coaching work are both in the context of the same organisation - an organisation that has a very high public profile and puts strong confidentiality clauses in our contracts… I’ve had conversations with other bloggers who work in the same place about how we tread that line between bringing insight from the things we do there whilst keeping ourselves employed - for most people this comes down to not explicitly naming the place and generalising sufficiently from things that happen so that specifics cannot be identified.
The second aspect of work-based discretion relates to the very nature of the work - particularly in my case to coaching - for obvious reasons I am not going to relate things on a public site that could be identified by a specific coachee.
The third area of discretion relates to friends / partners, children - although many people do blog about their personal lives I choose not to.
But just because I blog carefully (or not at all) about those areas of my life does not mean that I don’t derive actionable knowledge from blogging that I can apply to those domains. The dilemma though is how to report that back? Some actions won’t make it through my blog-filters; others may be delayed or distorted; in either case there is a break in the learning cycle with my blog learning colleagues.
This is not about the trust I have in the people with whom I have blogosphere conversations, it is more about who else is eavesdropping. Is there any way to resolve this whilst still using an open channel? I’m not convinced there is - the contradiction we need to resolve is that a completely public channel will inevitably cause us to filter what we write, whilst part of the power of the blogsosphere is the opportunity to discuss ideas with people from very different contexts. As Lilia said:
I said to a couple of people on my first Skype round that I wish to be able to get many of us to work together at the same place, but I guess it’s not feasible
And even if it would be I don’t think it would work well: the power of our joint discoveries comes from “weak-tied” nature of our connections, different backgrounds, different countries and different lives. Still, sometimes I wish to know easy ways to turn weak ties into strong ones, at least for the time needed to develop ideas that worth it.
I wonder if the more sophisticated Wiki tools would help here - the ones that allow sections to be made secure? Or some other way of easily forming a secure group that is (paradoxically) open and easy to use for those in that group?


December 2nd, 2003 at 1:41 pm
The counter-proof I offer to your open channel problem is CB-Radio, a completely open channel that has been used for education and direct collaboration for years. Even our local police, until very recently, did all their co-ordinating communications via an open eavetroughable channel. So that’s not problem.
I’ve also participated in many highly successful Wikis, most notably the WikiPaedia that vastly surpassed the meagre success of the closed, cloistered and “expert reviewed” big-brother NuPaedia; these two are my best example of the immense power of open collaboration vs the cloister approach. DMOZ is another: The search engine information flow shows that Yahoo may be richer, but all search engines are deriving content from DMOZ.
On your other point about not blogging the actions you do take, that is an excellent point. I take actions because of blog content all the time, some of it directly work related (and often critical to work, having outlined issues I had overlooked or misunderstood) — even if it is only as an ice-breaker or a topic of dinner-time conversation to get the kids engaged in some family interaction. This morning, our local radio station morning hosts did a bit they called “Best of the Web” where their second leading site to talk about was Merriam-Webster’s dictionary and I thought to myself, “What will they do tomorrow?”
And then thought how their daily “top content” problem is instantly solved if only they knew about DayPop or Blogdex, and if they were only running their own commentable blog, or better still an IM client, or even if they had more than one general-delivery email for the entire station, I could have told them about it right then and there!
December 2nd, 2003 at 3:11 pm
Hi Julian,
Thanks for joining the conversation. Your point about filtering what you blog is a good and a very valid one. And I am beginning to see more now of how I myself let blogging generated thoughts trickle through to my working and personal environment.
My main point I think becomes somewhat clearer to me now as well: there is a lot going on in my blog that I would love to turn into action but that is discouraged or stonewalled in the environment I am in, i.e. my work. In some of those instances I’m sure I could turn it into action with a few people who ‘get it’, and the most obvious ones are my fellow bloggers whom collectively came up with the stuff in the first place. So I am looking to turn some of those bloggers on some topics into colleagues for part of their and my time.
December 2nd, 2003 at 3:24 pm
I think the issue with open-channel dialogue relates to the sort of problems one is seeking to build knowledge around. If it is knowledge of a “how do I do that” type then open-channel works well. If it’s “how to I deal with this person/entity” then less so
I think open channel can also work well where you are the business entity (i.e. you are self-employed) - because at the end of the day it is entirely down to you. The issue I’m conscious of and wrote about is when you work for a larger organisation - my instinct is that if I wrote openly about the sort of problems around which I need to generate knowledge I would find myself in water that was at least uncomfortably warm… I may be being over-cautious of course!
December 2nd, 2003 at 3:26 pm
Ton - I see what you mean, and this I think is the nub of what Stuart Henshall is touching on (http://www.henshall.com/blog/archives/000627.html) - if your interests lie in certain directions then why not move your source ofincome in those directions too!
December 3rd, 2003 at 1:39 pm
julian…
i have been following lilia’s ‘loose ends’ conversation as well and you add an excellent conversation topic - a delicate tightrope we all walk, consciously or unconsciously - about how much we reveal about the questions and challenges we have in our daily lives.
even as a business owner one must have a degree of sensitivity and awareness of one’s languaging on this open network.
that being said, it is refreshing when more general daily business problems and dilemmas are openly aired and shared. in the large fortune 100 companies that i have worked with - when there was an openess regarding the business challenges and questions there was always more room to invent and create effective solutions.
December 3rd, 2003 at 7:54 pm
Judith
Of course you are right - a climate of openness within an organisation about the challenges it faces is essential to the successful mobilisation of the combined thought-power of all concerned to deal with those challenges. The place I work for is actually very good at that. My concern is more that if I were to write more openly about what we get up to, I would have to be careful to adopt “the voice of the organisation”. That isn’t far from my natural voice (I wouldn’t still be working there if it was) but it would nevertheless be a distortion in this personal space…
December 4th, 2003 at 1:24 am
Julian, Your comment and perspective are really appreciated. You are not alone in your dance! I know you understand the value of open channels and their ability to eliminate rumor etc.
Yet we still require places that allow “free-wheeling” and “thinking out loud”. “Brainstorming Rooms” may be better than personal blogs for such activities “where unapproved risk” is involved or the context later forgotten. Too strong a delineation between corporate and private destroys the capability to really bring others in. We all understnad that this is a trade-off.
Then we know blogs that are about “blowing off steam”. Those personal aspects are probably not the best things to be blogging if you are interested in self - preservation internally or externally.
However there is also a safer place someplace in the middle. It’s a “collective” sharing space where boundaries are more appropriately crossed. Customer exchanges are examples.
Plus there’s advantages for enabling others to work on common problems. Best Practices are one example. This form of sharing may even go cross industry. Perhaps blogging and wiki’s can take that form of collaboration to an even higher level.
Like with profiles degrees of access for blogs will likely develop.
December 4th, 2003 at 1:33 am
Actionable Sense
There is a little trepidation when a troupe starts exploring whether it can really collaborate and how it can make money. I was serious about both conversational blogging and jazz communities. I reread and reread new posts from overnight, spent…
December 4th, 2003 at 4:49 pm
I think the “safe places in the middle” are exactly where it will grow. The blurring of corporate and private is (IMHO) where authenticity starts to show through…
December 9th, 2003 at 9:41 pm
The power of loose ends (3) or the weakness of weblogs when it comes to joint actions
To continue The power of visible loose ends (1) and (2) Gary Lawrence Murphy, comments :”cit”In most cases, the necessity comes first, and that’s when we will overcome all barriers to make it happen.
December 24th, 2003 at 9:31 pm
Regarding the word “actionable”. It is being used here with no understanding of its true meaning.
Please see http://www.hyperdictionary.com/dictionary/actionable
December 30th, 2003 at 12:35 pm
Marshall - yes you are right, the use of the word here, originally (at least within this “conversation”) coined by Ton, seems to mean “knowledge that someone can directly use to influence their actions” - which as you say is different from the dictionary definition (the OED agrees with your source).
Time to find a thesaurus!