The weakest link

ac's picture

The Weakest Link
(Taken from http://www.knowledgearchitect.org/weaklink.html)


1. Context

1.1. Productivity
Collaboration is the greatest productivity tool available. No other tool or activity can provide productivity like collaboration. This is true not only for humans, but for all species, in all forms of life, as well as for all groups and organizations.

1.2. Complexity
Collaboration is a complex activity requiring coordination and orchestration of all contributors and contributions, typically to achieve common and complementary objectives.

1.3. Communication
The coordination of contributions depends on various factors but a single one is more important and critical than all others, and that is communication, which applies at all levels of collaboration and is the main key to coordination and effective collaboration.

1.4. Applications
While this is true and applies to all forms and applications of collaboration, it is especially true in emergency and crisis response and preparedness, where it is simply crucial.

1.5. Process
To begin, communication, in every form, is the most sophisticated activity that beings are capable of. It is especially sophisticated as it requires each and every communicating being to use its experience, knowledge, and motivation to imagine, articulate, formulate, encode, transmit, perceive, receive, decode, understand, consider, evaluate, and assimilate knowledge.

1.6. Fragility
Communication is also our most fragile activity as issues happen at every step and because no two beings are the same, each having its own experience, knowledge, motivation, imagination, as well as articulation, formulation, transmission, perception, reception, decoding, understanding, consideration, and assimilation processes.

1.7. Organizations
More so, in most collaboration environments and especially in emergency preparedness and response, beings are also typically organized into multi-level groupings, and each of these groups is also a communicating being, with its own complexities, experience, knowledge, motivation, imagination, and communication processes.

1.8. Differences
Communication and collaboration are no small feat, and we have not yet considered the physical aspects, constraints, limitations, and failures that are so common and natural, especially in crisis and emergency conditions, and especially if the collaborating beings have not been trained together, come from very different backgrounds and environments, and more so, if they do not even know each other.

1.9. Value
Collaboration success is indeed something to be proud of, and worth every bit of productivity that it provides.


2. Issue

2.1. Weakest
Communication is the most crucial link or element, but it is also the weakest.

2.2. Sharing
The prime objective of communication is sharing knowledge, which, as introduced above brings up questions about how knowledge is to be shared, but also other fundamental questions including questions around what knowledge is to be shared, when should what be shared, and which beings should share which knowledge with which other beings, when, and how.

2.3. Giving
These questions outline the important main difference between Sharing and Giving: Entitlement (further introduced in : http://www.KnowledgeArchitect.org/). 

2.4. Coordination
Trying to answer and manage all of these questions, for a great number of beings, a great variety and volume of knowledge, information, information levels, and classifications, in the middle of an emergency and crisis, especially if physical communication resources are failing, can be a frustrating, expensive, inefficient, disastrous, and even a deadly nightmare.

2.5. Solution
The good thing is, that much can be done to maximize communication, collaboration, productivity, and efficiency, even in crisis and emergency situations.

2.6. Domain
Obviously, communication and knowledge sharing are not the only aspects of emergency and crisis response and preparedness, but they are pervasive and crucial in every aspect. As the weakest link, they are our focus here.

2.7. Priority
Proceeding by priority, the first obvious consideration is that adequate preparedness mitigates crisis and emergency. In fact, full preparedness means that there is no crisis. Consequently, while we will consider response aspects, we will try to first ensure preparedness.


3. Preparedness
The five main dimensions of collaboration, communication, and knowledge sharing preparedness include:

3.1. Infrastructure
Infrastructure integration, agility, and scalability, as well as availability, redundancy, and reliability, for communications as well as for knowledge management and sharing. While at first, this may seem like a lot, it is really quite feasible as today's technology can do a lot for the required infrastructure. In fact, the infrastructure requirements can be split in two main logical considerations:

3.1.1. Integration
Ensure a single integrated and extensible operational network environment providing infrastructure integration, agility, and scalability, as well as integrating everyone and every collaborator, on permanent basis.

3.1.2. Availability
Ensure network availability, redundancy, and reliability, using the existing and expanding Internet base, with the existing cable, wireless, microwave, cellular, and satellite infrastructures, backing it up with with flexible, easily deployable wireless broadcast (e.g. WiMax, 3G) antennas with power backups, so that where a communication infrastructure becomes inoperative, another one can quickly replace it. In summary, one network and protocol with multiple redundant channels and technology, with easily re-deployable units.

3.2. Collaboration
Integrating Main collaborating beings operations, including public services, media, contractors, health care, government, military, and coordination, in the middle of a crisis and emergency, is a problem that is seriously constrained and limited by integrating their collaborative operations on a permanent basis.  With a common and integrated redundant network environment, integrating collaborator contribution and operations is a functional and strategic issue but not a resource or an infrastructure one.

3.3. Knowledge
A knowledge and information classification and sharing network requires a technical management operation, that is a working group with appropriate infrastructure support, managing the knowledge sharing environment and coordinating operations with/between collaborators and participants. This operation could be, but does not have to be centralized. Manned and operated by knowledge management, sharing, and communication professionals, this operation is key. One of the justification that many have today, still, for setting up their own network (e.g. health, military, etc) is knowledge and information security, confidentiality, and privacy. Their concerns are real and need to be addressed adequately. For example, in addition to normal network, system, and application security, all shared information should be encrypted at all times, only to be selectively decrypted, according to resource entitlement, as well as detailed classification, and contexts. As well, all information access should be logged and traced with related entitlement, classification, and context information. All shared information is considered private, valuable, sensitive, strategic, and proprietary unless otherwise specified by the respective owners. As well, knowledge and information are only shared according to owner classification, which can change at any time. All shared information can be accessed, modeled, managed, processed, transformed, shared, and published according to specified entitlement, classification, and context. This is crucial as collaborator respect is a prerequisite to collaboration. The information owners decide what, how, when, why they wish share and providing them with the greatest protection is key to their willingness to share and contribute. Confidentiality and trust are key communication factors, especially for collaboration. The knowledge sharing and communication platform has to support collaborator respect by all possible means.  Such a platform is feasible today, but it is not something that can be just quickly thrown together, in the middle of an emergency, not any more than an integrated reliable network. In other words, a permanent solution is required to ensure preparedness and minimize crisis and emergency.

3.4. Training
With a permanent operating platform, network, and infrastructure, training and exercise is on-going, both in dedicated specialized exercises and in normal everyday operations. The world is not a quiet place, events, crisis, emergencies happen every day, every hour, and every minute. An adequate integrated, efficient, reliable, and resilient collaboration, communication, and knowledge sharing infrastructure, is a priceless tool, at any time.

3.5. Propagation
While ideally, an integrated entitlement secure universal knowledge sharing and communication platform should be available to serve everyone on the planet, reality imposes a much more progressive and pragmatic path. In fact, the proposed solution should first be implemented in a single location, first as a pilot project, and then progressively, as a city wide project, before being propagated to other cities and areas.  A lot of the required infrastructure is already existent, even the proposed redundancy is being developed already in many areas. The integration of the different collaborators is somewhat of a political and strategic issue but offers advantages that far outweigh the costs, it is very reasonably resolvable. The main effort required is setting up and integrating the knowledge sharing platform.  There again, the solutions already exist and are simply waiting for application and integration.


4. Response
With everyone prepared, trained, and supported with an adequate and resilient infrastructure, crisis and emergency response is simply a question of every collaborator doing its best and humans have been known to respond to the call of duty with remarkable strength, creativity, feeling, and honor, when given a chance.

erapisardi's picture

contribution

"The weakest link" perfectly describe the framework and actions to be implemented to move towards collaboration. This article points out the challenge each of us is facing to build a more resilient society: resilience to cope with all sort of crisis or emergency (economic, environmnetal, cultural, civil, and also personal).

My comment would like to contribute in the path of collaboration.

Collaboration

In my experience collaboration means also to be open minded, not to judge, to be humble and considering that contributors have "the same right to say something" (that does not mean the same right to decide). This is more humanistic than technological, but human beings are very strange thing and sometimes their lust for individual power or consensus, could be the worst driving force towards a collapse.
In other words, true collaboration should imply a sort of code of principles based on respect of others thoughts, and intellectual honesty, avoiding any sort of false consciousness or judgement. Collaboration is strictly related to democracy.
An example: The most famous collaborative project like Wikipedia has its code of coduct that is enlightening. [see @ this link»]

Public information

We should also rethink about public information both for preparadness and emergency. Crowdsourcing, citizens journalism, user generated content are different words that have in common one concept: «including»and «involving» people, and not only some kind of élite, in the information process. Citizens/volunteers/witnesses are a great resource.
In some cases a top-down approach has not enough flexibility to understand, explain, and manage what is happening in the field.Provocatively I would say a top-down approcah consider the map and not the territory, a bottom-up one starts from the territory.
In 1963, in Italy, we had a huge disaster where 1917 people died. "On 12 February 2008, while launching the International Year of Planet Earth, UNESCO cited the Vajont Dam tragedy as one of five "cautionary tales", caused by "the failure of engineers and geologists." [see wikipedia]. The experts failed as they did not considered the territory, but other more political and business issues. The Vajont inhabitants several times denounced that the impressive dam was not in a safe place. But their words were unhearded. And they died.
What should have happened in the web 2.0 era? Nobody knows, but maybe we could not make the same mistake twice.
Crowdsourcing is a way to open collaboration to a wider target and to develop knowledge from every single person.
This introduces the issue related to the reliability of sources and to the setting up of a strict process to assess and validate every single information. Ushahidi crowdsourcing platform experience could be taken into account for further discussions.

Information structures and formats

The use of web standards to gather and share information could be a crucial point.
Xml, tagging (including meta tagging), geolocating, etc. although they are a web 2.0 reality, they are not so widespread.
Public Administration at local and central level, should begin to promote the new deal by using a simple semantic standards and formats to manage public information and data so to ensure and encourage knowledge sharing.
In Italy, in the past years, our government legislated establishing strict criteria on public admninistration websites, such as W3C standards. It was Web 1.0 era. Now Web 2.0 should drives towards a new set of standards including, things such xml, tagging, geolocating, etc. to build, through true collaboration and sharing, transparency and accountability.
Unfortunately lots of Public administrators think that web 2.0 is to have a Facebook page/group or a twitter account, or a you tube channel.
Gov 2.0, becomes a mere Exercises in Style, that is to say an empty label.

Mine/Yours/Ours

Collaboration means to be proactive in sharing. André Cusson is totally right stressing the concept the "giving is not sharing".
But my question is "Are we ready to give?", and "Are we ready to share?".

ac's picture

Gathering, Modeling, Managing, & Sharing

 

Hi Elena,

You bring up interesting comments and I would like to further on our points and suggestions.  

 Gather and Broadcast

As you point out, everyone has useful knowledge and information. Crowdsourcing, citizens journalism, user generated content and most of Web 2.0 provide very useful tools and initiatives to support information gathering and broadcast, which are fine for information contributions requiring broadcast. But some simple examples may help highlight many issues that still need to be resolved, for effective collaboration.

Security
Imagine, for example, that you are working for an information or security agency that is part of a wide collaboration network, using crowdsourcing and Web 2.0, for example again, and that in some of your work and research, you learn that a group of individuals are learning to fly airplanes and do not seem interested in learning to land. Should you share that knowledge and if so, why, when, where, who with, and how? How validated is that information? what would happen if the public media had the information? Would it jeopardize any further investigation? Create assumptions? Trigger rage, or panic, or mockery, or indifference? They could be preparing terrorists, or students on an experiment, or pranksters looking for fame. So what sharing should be done and how would you control it? The current responsible and legal answer is that the information should not be shared because inadequately sharing it could cause irreparable damages, probably worse than the potential risk. On the other hand, if the information could be shared adequately with all the required expertise, support, and control, then, it may be possible to validate, investigate, track, as well as also prevent disaster, crisis, wars, and costs.

Privacy
The case is not much different if I learn that my neighbor's house is not earthquake proof, should I share that information on the public earthquake collaboration group's crowdsourcing site? Would that help anyone? On the other hand, with an adequate sharing platform, we could possibly get some support to help him remedy the situation, without destroying the value of his house and his reputation.

Context, Time, and Place
Information broadcast is good but respect and consideration are better and the best is when it all works properly together. Every piece of information and knowledge has its sources as well has its effective targets, at different points in time, space, and context. Once we have fixed the neighbor's house, the same information could be ready for a larger target audience, as well as provide a new collaboration model, but it is essential that sharing is done adequately and that the knowledge owners and responsible entities control that sharing.

Components
The keys to effective collaboration include:

  • Information gathering and broadcasting technologies (e.g. crowdsourcing, citizens journalism, user generated content, Web 2.0)
  • Integrated resilient networking, for all
  • Knowledge entitlement, management, modeling, and sharing framework and professional services
  • A solid knowledge architecture paradigm
  • Integrated knowledge classification
  • Human and machine readable, streamable, and transformable knowledge representation (e.g. based on XML)

Knowledge Infrastructure

Giving everything to all, forever, might be good, if we could, but I believe that even then, entitlement would still be an issue. Any realistic case of giving, still requires answering questions including what, when, how, why, to whom, still requiring entitlement. Effective sharing is even much more specific and constrained. In fact, entitlement is a fundamental structural natural knowledge management principle. We typically know it intuitively in our everyday lives (e.g. if I lend my car to a friend for an event, I assume that the car will be returned properly), but now, with these new powerful open knowledge and information sharing networks and applications, we also require the infrastructure to support classification, entitlement, and tracking.

Collaboration
Building on knowledge sharing, based on entitlement, collaboration is the greatest productivity factor. Let's enable it for the information age and economy.

 

Cheers, ac.
erapisardi's picture

Written vs no-written rules

Hi André

you pointed out very interesting issues, and I do agree with what you said.

Some other thoughts about "Security"

Who should decide what it is public or not? Sometimes it happens that security of information is "decided" a priori and not  deeply analysing what is information for, or considering to whom and for what information should be. Some manager  (and it is not a matter of age but of approach) are still convinced that owing information means having more power, that is to say sharing information is perceived as a driving factor to decrease the level of power. That is why the security could, in some cases, represent an excuse.
Moreover I think that security is a true double-edge issue. Think that you are living in a no-democratic country, where the security of information permeates a wide range of information to ensure consensus, to the detriment  of truth. Using the web forcing the security level imposed by the government could unmask the fiction. Think about human rights for example.
That is to say that high level of secutiry could hide something else, that it is unpleasant.

I think that security of information needs to be analysed case by case, but I have no doubt that some information "must" be shared. On the other end the example you wrote is enlightening as it introduces the concept of information process. I think that there are, and there will always be information that are "top secret", but sometimes it is not only the information in itself, but the phase of the information process in which there should be a higher security level. In the example you described I think that the security level should be activated when you discover something that could represent a dangerous scenario (to whom communicate, who to trust,....) but how? which are the criteria? ...

 

How to turn this into practice?

I think that at this point the next step should be to put into practice this approach, testing and drawing the rules or components fot the collaboration era. As you know I am conducting a test using a crowdsourcing platform, and I am facing problems related to security, commitment, reliability of sources. Maybe it could be interesting to tell the story of this test, analysing the scenario from different perspectives and introducing correctives underway. Moreover I would like to implement a local authority website focused on resilience that could involve citizens\volunteers\institutional bodies. So my questions would be: how to involve all these actors? which sould be the security levels? which could be the governance of the information process? .....
I would really appreciate your contribution.
Moreover I think that sharing experiences could be important to define a common basis to be used for a sort of collaboration manifesto.