Underutilized Synergy

Now here is an interesting principle:

"The value of a network is proportional to the square of the number of users of the system."
-Robert Metcalf

As real-time communication between vast numbers of nodes (people) throughout the world becomes a reality, the power of this principle will become exponentially more apparent. The reaction time of entire organizations will reduce and the landscape will allow anyone to compete with anyone else. Identity management will inevitably become an overwhelming concern, while a node's geographic location will only be important for knowledge acquisition. But what happens to the people at these nodes? Physically, they are all staring at a computer screen sending and receiving pieces of information. The purely intellectual involvement of people in work is not natural, and its physiological effects ultimately limits productivity. Example: The same architect who, no more than two generations ago, would have been playing with blocks, sticks, and paper to design a house, is now staring at a computer screen using computer software to “build” a piece of intellectual capital, which will ultimately be used to build a house. Is creativity hindered, bolstered, or left unchanged? With lower levels of physical involvement in work, blood circulation slows, hand-eye coordination is redefined with a mouse/keyboard, and energy levels decrease. Daily exercise, while extremely beneficial for maintain health, is rarely coordinated with intellectual activity. The end result for the individual at a node is better networking capabilities, combined with lesser contributions to the network. Networking enables synergy, but what is the cumulative power of people when intellectual faculties are not being fully-utilized?

Change

In business literature, this has to be one of the most commonly addressed topics. Evolution, whether its economic, technological, or biological, enables people to adapt to the environment. Since the environment changes without regard to the comfort level or adaptability of people, the burden to change rests upon people as individuals, groups, and ultimately populations.

The process of change can be viewed in two ways: inside-out and outside-in. The latter is comprised of endless trials, innumerable errors, extensive documentation, probabilities, major resource investments, and most importantly, hope. The former is the result of enlightened action; a "knowing" of exactly how to respond to a particular change in the environment, avoiding trial and error. In considering biological evolution, Darwinianism is an example of the outside-in approach. Mutations, most of which are unsuccessful, fail until one ultimately succeeds at helping an organism adapt to its environmental conditions. In business, however, market research and analysis provides us with a view of the market environment; a luxury not available to living organisms that don't have access to the Weather Channel. A company's response to market conditions is not a "shot in the dark" as it is in evolution, but rather a calculated action with probabilities of success associated with it. Such "enlightened" change can only occur through an accurate view of the market conditions. The accuracy of that view, then, is paramount.