Yesterday, serendipity brought me from my research on artificial intelligence to the expression “intellectual technologies”, quoted by Nicholas Carr in a recent article. Nicholas Carr explains that this expression was used by sociologist Daniel Bell to describe the tools we humans have developed to increase our mental abilities: reading, writing, calculation, to name only a few. Behaviorist approaches such as organization methods, communication and group interaction practices are other examples, I think.

These approaches have to be learnt. They may become a “second nature” but they are not instinctive, the way language is. We are not genetically designed to read, calculate or interact smoothly in groups.

Yet, it is striking to see that reading and writing have become so intricate in us that they seem quite natural, at least for those who were happy enough to get an education. (True, there is still work ahead before this applies to all people in all countries.)

What if technologies aiming at improving attitudes and social interaction were broadly taught in schools and colleges ?  Should not they be part of every graduate’s ABC ?

In my opinion, they should be a part of what everyone gets to learn at school. There is no doubt that studying books like “Getting things done” (David Allen), The Evolution of cooperation (Robert Axelrod) ou “How to win friends and influence people” (Dale Carnegie) would be as useful and beneficial as studying algebra and literature.

In recent years, professional social networks have become mainstream: Linkedin, Viadeo, Xing, to name only the most famous ones. Having an account in several of them seems to be synonymous with a lot of work. You need to update your profile on each and everyone of them and manage various networks of contacts. Is it worth it ?

I think it is a great opportunity for your career and you should seize it for 5 main reasons.

1. Each network has a special focus
2. Creativity pays in the use of online social networks
3. Online networking should be a task with a time allowed to it
4. Online networking is a mid-term investment
5. Social networks are mostly free

1. Each network has a special focus

Having a live account on several networks enables you to reach various targets. For example, Viadeo is historically well positioned in the French market, while Xing is dominant in Germany. Should you have business or prospective business in these countries, it is interesting for you to be in these networks (they have English versions). By contrast, Linkedin is more anglo-saxon and is well suited for you if you work in the US or with international partners.

2. Creativity pays in the use of online social networks

Since you have access to several networks, why not use them differently ? For instance, you could decide that one of them is dedicated to high value added contacts. In that network, you will accept invitations to connect only from people that you have met in real life. Even better, only invite contacts who you actually worked with. True, you might not be able to show off with hundreds or thousands of contacts. But those you will have in this select network will be people that you know you can count on to transfer your introduction demands, answer questions or write recommendations on your profile. Conversely, on a second networking site, you might decide to get in touch with far more contacts: people whose blog you read, whose online reputation you are aware of, even if you have never met them in real life, executives working with potential clients or possible partners. This network will be much bigger and will grant you access to thousands of contacts of potential interest for your activity. However, the trust effect will not be so powerful and you must not expect the same level of cooperation as in the first network.

3. Online networking should be a task with a time allowed to it

Having a dormant account on a social network is worthless. Does it mean online networking will swallow a huge amount of your time ? In fact, there are seven activities that can help you make the most of social networks, without taking too much time. What I suggest is to spend one hour every week to make your social networks lively.

Here are the main actions you can undertake:

• Update your profile

A new job ? With a new company ? Update your profile so that people can find you.

• Update your status

Linkedin makes it possible to describe in one sentence what you are currently working on. In a few words, you can let your contacts know about your projects, assignments or professional interests.

• Answer questions to show your expertise

Most networks offer a feature that makes it possible for you to ask questions and answer other people’s. You can get solutions to some daily work issues and, by answering questions, you take a stand as a legitimate expert in your field.

• Write and publish articles in groups

Groups are good places to discuss with other users and discover relevant contacts.

• Accept invitations to connect

This is obviously the main feature of social networks.

• Selectively transfer requests

From time to time, people will contact you through people you know, asking to transfer a request: job offers, requests for being introduced to another person, etc. Here, you should play a role of filter, to only transfer to your contacts demands that you think they will be interested in. The more seriously you will play this role of filter, keeping in mind the interest of your contacts, the more they will be willing to do the same and the more you will assert your reputation of an efficient networker.

• Write recommendations

Recommendations are notes you can write for contacts you know particularly well and that will be displayed on their profile (after their approval). In these notes, you can explain when you had a chance to work with a particular person and what you could appreciate in this cooperation. Recommendations are interesting in that they offer precious contextual information about somebody’s profile, written with an external view. Do not hesitate to write and request some. This will show your interest in your contacts, and there is no doubt they will do the same for you, making your profile richer and more unique.

Regard these 7 tasks as « to-do’s » and self-training. Make no mistake: taking care of your online reputation is now a prerequisite in your professional life. Reviewing profiles on social networks has become part of the daily routine of recruiters. Whether you are open to new job opportunities, working in sales, freelancer or in business relationships with numerous providers and clients, maintaining lively social networks is now a key success factor.

4. Online networking is a mid-term investment

Being active on two or three social networks can definitely benefit your career. You should try to be active in each of them, with no prejudice. You will soon discover the one or two network(s) that really work(s) for you. Then you will be able to concentrate on it/them.

5. Social networks are mostly free

Some networks are nearly 100 % free (like Linkedin) while others provide premium features for a fee. Explore what each site has to offer and decide to pay for what is useful for you where it is useful for you.

If you follow these 5 pieces of advice, you will see that being active in more than one social network is not so time-consuming and can serve your best interests. In practice, two or three networking sites, regularly updated and distinctively used, can leverage your professional efficiency.

Why call this blog Cooperatics and not “Collaboratics” ? Both words, cooperation and collaboration, include the same notions: action and a sense of collectivity. Yet the two terms are not synonymous. First, their ethymology is not the same. Collaboration comes from the Latin “laborare” which means “work hard”, while cooperation comes from “opera”, which means “work, activity”. So this term does not have the same connotation of hardship as collaboration.

Besides, collaboration does not imply an individual desire to take part in a common work, while this desire is at the root of cooperation. Collaboration mostly takes place within a structure, and requires an overall plan, which is not needed in cooperation.

In the end, cooperation requires the free participation of individuals to a common work, because they have a personal interest in this participation. It is distinguished mainly by the fact that the person that cooperates brings his/her creativity. Much more than collaboration, cooperation features the concepts of interpersonal network and self-organization.

I am starting a new topic on this blog, called The Cooperation Lexicon. It aims at focussing on specific terms, explaining and discussing them, as well as providing examples.

Today, let’s study co-creation.

Co-creation is a process in which an organization creates, in a cooperative mode, with its partners or customers:

• a product or a service
• a marketing campaign
• new concepts

Co-creation is most visible at the time of innovation. When French bank Caisse d’Epargne gives a free hand to youngsters to imagine a new credit card design, co-creation operates in this way: the bank is setting up the contest, provides voting tools, while young people contribute online ; at the end of the day, there is a new product, a freshly designed credit card.

But co-creation can also be a part of a brand’s personality, not only during the creative process, but on a daily basis, because it is deeply rooted in its offer. Take Ikea, for instance. Their consumers co-create the store chain’s offer by getting their items themselves in the stock and bringing them home in their own cars, thus allowing lower prices. The same is true for Amazon: readers’ opinions and comments are one of the main key success factors of the site. Of course, competitors have copied Amazon, but the brand keeps improving the co-creation with the readers, just because it is part of the brand’s identity.

Co-creation does have limits. For a consumer, being a part of it takes time. It is crucial that the company provides the right tools, especially interactive tools, so that co-creation be a pleasant experience. It is also key that the questions asked to or the tasks requested from the customers be clear enough. Indeed, it is very difficult for a consumer to answer questions like: “what do you want ?” or “how should we design our next product?”.  It is often more efficient to show consumers creative drafts to comment on. This is typically what French public transportation company RATP does with its participatory website. Another important issue is benefit sharing. When a consumer co-creates with a company, he/she brings their creativity and sometimes their work. It is just fair that the company acknowledges it some way or other, for instance with prizes or VIP events.

While Wikipedia continues to be the leader on the market of collaborative encyclopedias, it is no longer unchallenged. Other initiatives have emerged, like Citizendium and more recently Knol. In some ways, the fact that these new projects have been unable so far to compete significantly with Wikipedia is an additional clue that WP’s model is a success. Several reasons can explain why Wikipedia remains number one:

• it can benefit from years of experience and content accumulation
• it is very well indexed by Google
• the media have covered Wikipedia extensively for years
• Wikipedia is fun and enjoyable to use

In my opinion, the “fun factor” is the main reason why Wikipedia leads. No other project so far has managed to create the same excitement and sense of community. Yet, what I have found striking during the past few weeks is that the ideological divide between the various collaborative projects has shrunk . While Britannica has opened the door to user participation, Wikipedia is discussing the possibility of moderation on some articles edited by non-registered users (flagged revisions). The production and sharing of knowledge using wikis decidedly remains a very exciting subject. Larry Sanger’s recent post about this lists numerous areas of research on wiki knowledge and governance  and provides an interesting basis for discussion.

Martin Roulleaux Dugage provides a very interesting definition of a community versus a network or a group. A community is a network that has decided to auto-organize by adopting 6 attributes:

You are whether in or out the community

Why do we decide to stick together in the first place ? What meaning does it have ?

Community members are committed to achieve something. In that respect, for instance, active Wikipedians form a community, since they edit articles and create new ones on a regular basis.

Community is no jungle. Social interactions are governed by a set of rules, or an etiquette.

Community members share words. It can be a jargon. At any rate, it helps them communicate and create a feeling of belonging.

A difficult, exciting, controversial video about the impact of singularity on evolution, consciousness and the future of social and political organization, starring Ray Kurzweil and Gödel, among others.

Warning: requires attention.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDqaMFHGEZ8

Singularity seems inevitable, for better of for worse. But for a dramatic war and the return of a dark age ?

The Washington University just launched a program to help design more productive and resistant breeds of rice. The project is a partnership with IBM and aims at creating a grid of one million computers within two years. This grid will be equivalent to a 167 teraflop CPU.

More about this: World Community Grid to Tackle Rice Crisis