Moving
forward I want to develop a meaningful professional network, from which I can
find knowledge, new understanding and opportunities and share the knowledge and
opportunities I gain along the way. I am beginning to understand that having a
presence and engaging in these activities is key to being successful. But in
order to do this I am aware that I need to develop a better understanding of
the concepts of networking and how these are applied to my own professional
work. I consider that the best place to start is in understanding the theories.
Cooperation
as defined by dictionary.reference.com is
“an act
or instance of
working or
acting together
for a common purpose
or benefit;
joint action.”
For me
before considering reader three the idea of cooperation would have been seen as
purely positive, the idea that we are able to work together to achieve a mutual
benefit should hold opportunities for all. However reader three concentrates on
cooperation as part of Game theory, the idea that one player has to succeed at
another’s expense. Is that how we see our professional practice as a game?
Where we can only succeed at the expense of others?
Robert
Axelrod 1986 describes the notion of cooperation as
“…the benefit of cooperating fully
with others, until you reach a
point of maximum benefit and then to
defect”
To me this
seems extremely cold, of course there will always be an element of this, as
human beings we form relationships for mutual gain, for example have friends
because they listen, make us laugh or are really interesting, or even a little
bit of you do this favour for me and I’ll help you out. But I would like to
think that we don’t just “defect” when we feel we have had all we can from
someone. It is a very sceptical view of the world and I am not entirely sure
that I agree.
In terms of
our professional networks and indeed life we will always come across people
that are out for themselves, the girl in the audition who will ask for your
help with the choreography and then purposely stand in front of you so you cant
be seen, and in limited short lived relationships then I understand that this
can happen, especially in extremely competitive environment like auditions and
interviews.
In
meaningful networks where strong working relationships are forged then I would
like to think that this wouldn’t be the case, I think that our connections may
be fluid, there may be times when we rely on particular people more that
others, but to cut them out of our network when we have reached “maximum gain”
I feel would be a very foolish move. I believe that everyone in my network has
meaning, we all gain knowledge all of the time, and we should be open to share
this with others, this may not allow us to get immediately ahead but in the
long run should mean that we all have a more valuable network and a larger
knowledge base to draw from, those who have been more cut throat earlier in
their careers may not have such a valuable advantage.
I think this
is why I feel that looking professional networks from the perspective of
affiliation is much more comfortable one for me, and a model that I would like
to build my future professional networks around.
“…a network of support that will help
us when in need”
(Crisp and Turner 2007 pp266)
To me this
is a similar idea to that of cooperation, where we are able to work with others
to reach joint goals, or to be there for each other to provide, support, advice
or share our working or creative knowledge. The Important difference is that we
do not “defect” or end relationships based on what we are able to gain. For
this reason I think that networks that are based around affiliation can only go
from strength to strength as my knowledge grows I am able to share this my
network and vice versa, again this comes back to the idea of growing a vast
knowledge base.
As a teacher
this is also of vital importance, affiliation between myself and my students
are important in my previous post about how I make my network connection, I
talked about the importance of face to face contact and the element of trust.
In a educational situation both student and teacher have a lot to gain from
each other, as my ability as a teacher grows so does the experience my students
have, and as they grow and develop I am forced to up my game and work harder for
them, allowing mutual development. I am of course aware that at some point my
student will move on, but I believe that the relationship forged by this mutual
trust will mean that a link will remain as it has for me and my past teachers,
keeping that network intact.
Within this
theory I also find it interesting that we are able within our relationships to
balance the needs of each individual. O’Connor & Rosenblood (1996 pp267)
link this to us being able to maintain
“relative and preferred levels of social
stimulation”.
Whether we
are introvert or extrovert may link to our ability to network successfully, as
it impacts on our level of affiliation or privacy. I would say that I am not an
extrovert, I am quite happy in my own company and don’t really feel the need to
share my thoughts, compared to someone who likes to voice their opinions does
this leave me at a disadvantage when it comes to networking?
I think that
it possibly does, I may be more reluctant to share my thoughts and this may
mean that relationships within my network are less valuable as less is shared
between its members, however it is possible that the opposite is true as the
nature of my communications may be more valuable as I will only communicate
things that are of greater importance, perhaps less is more?
Either way
it is an important thing to be aware of, it makes us more understanding of
other people within our networks allowing us to form relationships that are
mutually comfortable, and to be aware of our own behaviours and how these may
be improved to make our networking more successful.
Social
constructionism is based around the idea that our observations and knowledge
about the world are informed and reinforced by our experiences and relationships
with others.
“…all knowledge, and therefore all
meaningful reality as such,
is contingent upon human practices,
being constructed in and out of
interactions between human beings and
their world, and developed and
transmitted within an essentially
social context.”
(Crotty, M 2005. pp 42-44)
This is a
complicated issue to understand but important when related to professional
networks, it means that the meanings that we relate to the world will be
directly influenced by the people that we surround ourselves with. The meaning
of behaviours or characteristics of groups or even just colours or symbols are
made to mean something, by us all being in agreement.
This then
means to me that if I have a particular issue or problem that I then go on to
discuss with my network, be that friends and family or a working network, the
opinions of others will help me to shape meaning and create new knowledge for
myself.
I think this
really highlights the powerful nature of human relationships and of our
personal and professional networks.
We have all
heard about children falling in the wrong crowd, this social interaction has
changed the behaviour of the child because the meanings of things in their
world have been influenced by the social group that they are a part of.
Does that
then mean that we are at risk of “falling in” with the wrong network, of being
in relationships with people that have a powerful influence over how we
construct meaning may mean that we miss opportunities because some people say
that company is bad to work for? Or because they don’t think your new idea will
work out?
Conversely
though, does that mean that we have the opportunity to “fall in” with the right
network? One that already shares a number of principles and ideals that will
then allow us to debate and construct further meanings and knowledge by
combining the intellect of everyone within the group.
The idea of
social constructionism highlights to me the importance of making connections
within my network with the right people, people that share my ideals or my
interests in order for us all to construct the kind of meaning and knowledge
that will support our further development, and not damage it.
Connectivism,
“in relation to professional networks
the theory of connectivism
provides an explanation about how
networks both learn and provide
the means for individuals to connect
and learn”
This theory
is connected to the spread of the internet and the changing ways in which we
now learn. Learning used to based on the teacher transferring knowledge to the
student, now through the theories of connectivism it is the idea that the
information is out there, within other people, the internet and classrooms and
that we are able to interact with this and learn from it, the use of social
networking, blogs and wikis makes this easier.
Information moves
much more quickly that it did in the past, knowledge becomes obsolete rapidly
and it becomes impossible for us to be able to keep up.
“the amount of knowledge in the world
has doubles in the past
10 years and is doubling every 18
months”
(American society of Training and Documentation)
It is
becoming impossible for us to keep up and so the ability to store our knowledge
externally from ourselves is an important one. We have the use of the internet,
it is becoming less important to have knowledge but more important to know how
to access knowledge.
This means
that our social network is of growing importance,
“since we cannot experience
everything, other peoples experiences,
and hence other people, become the
surrogate for knowledge
‘I store my knowledge in my friends’
is an axiom for collecting knowledge
through collecting people”
(Karen Stephenson)
This is
surely the whole premise for a professional network, you store knowledge,
information and important contacts through the use of networking sites to a
greater or lesser extent. The BAPP blogs are a perfect example of this the
sharing of knowledge and information with in a network of people with common
interests in order for people to learn and improve there own knowledge.
Applying
these theories to my own professional practice has been easier than I thought,
and I consider that I have made some important discoveries that I will be using
to shape my professional networks of the future.
The two
theories that I feel I need to be wary of is cooperation and social
constructionism. In terms of cooperation the thought of “defecting” form a
networking relationship as it is no longer beneficial is uncomfortable, and to
me it always a good idea to leave doors open behind you, none of us know what
is around the corner and we may live to regret losing that option in the
future. I know that there will always be people who will do exactly this and
being aware of this can only have its benefits also; being careful who we put
our trust in and with how much we share should always be in our mind in
professional networking.
Social
constructionism I feel also raises questions about who we affiliate ourselves
with, it shows the power of the social group in being able to shape how we see
and interact with the world, and I imagine this can be a pit fall that many
fall into, allowing the wrong people to influence us could be detrimental and
we should be mindful of this when we introduce people into our networks.
Affiliation
with the right people and building a network of support around us to me is the
way that a network should be constructed. We should be able to trust and rely
on the people we network with, and this holds gains for us all, as knowledge
grows and is able to be shared then everyone in the network should benefit from
this. This is linked to connectivism, the fact that our sources of knowledge no
longer have to just be within ourselves, strong and social network that are
able to share, debate and communicate new information should surely make for a
network that is of value to everyone involved and create a vast knowledge base
for each member to draw from.
No comments:
Post a Comment