Peer Production and Collaboration: Difference between revisions
Line 49: | Line 49: | ||
McKensey has conducted annual surveys the past several years on companies' use of web 2.0 in various ways. This year's report is on its web page at http://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/The_rise_of_the_networked_enterprise_Web_20_finds_its_payday_2716. Interesting to see the number of companies reporting increased number of successful innovations and decreased product development costs when fully utilizing the web. After reading this week's assignments, I went back to re-read this article and wondered why it had not impressed me as much on my first read-through. [[[[User:Sjennings|sjennings]] 16:01, 15 February 2011 (UTC)]] | McKensey has conducted annual surveys the past several years on companies' use of web 2.0 in various ways. This year's report is on its web page at http://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/The_rise_of_the_networked_enterprise_Web_20_finds_its_payday_2716. Interesting to see the number of companies reporting increased number of successful innovations and decreased product development costs when fully utilizing the web. After reading this week's assignments, I went back to re-read this article and wondered why it had not impressed me as much on my first read-through. [[[[User:Sjennings|sjennings]] 16:01, 15 February 2011 (UTC)]] | ||
As for the books of this month, I am reading [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikinomics Wikinomics] by [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_Tapscott Don Tapscott] & [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_D._Williams Anthony D. Williams] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Here_Comes_Everybody Here Comes Everybody] by [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clay_Shirky Clay Shirky]. Coincidentally, these two books describe and reveal amazing aspects of peer collaboration and its consequences. Regarding the mass collaboration's economic effects, the Goldcorp Challenge can be deemed a symbolic case. To summarize a long story behind the success of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldcorp Goldcorp], sending an SOS to people outside of the company significantly contributed to discovery of new gold mines and boosted its financial growth. In a common sense, showing any sign of a company in a trouble is looked as a disaster in business management. Nonetheless, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rob_McEwen Rob McEwen], at then the CEO of Goldcorp Inc., risked asking for a help and announced the Goldcorp Challenge to look for undeveloped mineral properties; and it worked out in a incredible way. These books are absolutely recommended for someone who is looking for a detailed explanation on our class topic. --[[User:Yu Ri|Yu Ri]] 17:55, 15 February 2011 (UTC) | As for the books of this month, I am reading [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikinomics Wikinomics] by [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_Tapscott Don Tapscott] & [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_D._Williams Anthony D. Williams] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Here_Comes_Everybody Here Comes Everybody] by [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clay_Shirky Clay Shirky]. Coincidentally, these two books describe and reveal amazing aspects of peer collaboration and its consequences. Regarding the mass collaboration's economic effects, the Goldcorp Challenge can be deemed a symbolic case. To summarize a long story behind the success of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldcorp Goldcorp], sending an SOS to people outside of the company significantly contributed to discovery of new gold mines and boosted its financial growth. In a common sense, showing any sign of a company in a trouble is looked as a disaster in business management. Nonetheless, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rob_McEwen Rob McEwen], at then the CEO of Goldcorp Inc., risked asking for a help and announced the Goldcorp Challenge to look for undeveloped mineral properties; and it worked out in a incredible way. These books are absolutely recommended for someone who is looking for a detailed explanation on our class topic. --[[User:Yu Ri|Yu Ri]] 17:55, 15 February 2011 (UTC) |
Revision as of 12:56, 15 February 2011
February 15
The free software movement is one example of a trend towards distributed volunteer networks of individuals collaborating on collective projects that were formerly the domain of the for-profit private sector. In this session, we explore how far such peer production can go in redefining the economic and social structures of modern society.
Readings
- Yochai Benkler, News, Information and the Wealth of Networks (watch from 8:32 to 26:07)
- Zittrain, Chapter 4: The Generative Pattern
- Joseph Reagle, ”Be Nice”: Wikipedia Norms for Supportive Communication
Additional Resources
The following audio streams from NPR may be interesting:
- Wikipedia, Open Source and the Future of the Web
- Wikipedia Wins Users and Critics by Jenny Lawton
- Wikipedia's Growth Comes with Concerns by Laura Sydell
Class Discussion
Listening to, and reading, various pieces on Wikipedia I am struck by the amount of effort that Jimmy Wales seems to put into promoting the idea of Wikipedia as, to paraphrase, "a close-knit community of dedicated users" with emphasis on user reputation and his role as "benevolent dictator", and distancing himself from the more "democratic" (read: anonymous contributors) aspects of the site which (I assume) are generally the first things that come to most peoples' minds when Wikipedia is mentioned. I wonder if this attitude was always a core part of the site's conception, or whether it was developed in response to outside criticism of the encyclopedia’s (lack of) credibility. Or if it is merely an accurate description of how the site has evolved... I would hazard to guess that Wikipedia, despite what Mr. Wales may say, is *both* a close-knit community *and* a conglomeration of faceless, unorganized (naturally organizing?) "ants"; I doubt the site could survive without both aspects. I am also struck by the parallel between this view and the criticism of Wikipedia skeptics: they see "peer review" being essential, where a "peer" is a responsible member of the academic community, while Mr. Wales sees "peer review" as equally essential, only with "peer" defined as a responsible member of the Wikipedia community. I wonder that seems to occur to no one that the "Wikipedia community" (let alone the "faceless ants") might very well contain those self-same learned academics who compose and edit articles for Britanica. And if companies are hiring PR agents to "protect" their image on Wikipedia, then I wonder why University faculties have not taken it upon themselves to jointly, publicly venture into Wikipedia to improve the quality of the articles found there in. Surely, after 10 years we should have started to take this thing seriously. BrandonAndrzej 00:57, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
What has struck me most about the readings from this week has been the innate desire of most people to help and be helpful. "Be Nice" was particularly interesting because of how thorough the author was in examining these behaviors; I've never read social theory like that before and it's great to get a good foundation to start working from. However, beyond the obvious example of the Wikipedia community, there are dozens of other communities and companies that I did not realize were taking advantage of people's urge to contribute constructively, including the importance of peer reviews for sites like Amazon and Yelp, and the adoption of consumer-generated innovations by companies like LEGO. The article from Business Week, "The Power of Us," contained one quote, from Yochai Benkler, natch, that really caught my attention: "The economic role of social behavior is increasing." Today, consumer input is not just useful, it's almost mandatory in order for a company to be successful. This made me consider what Hollywood and the record and publishing industries are doing with themselves. They have been referenced in nearly ever reading we've had so far as the industry most affected by the easy sharing of information via the Internet, and yet not one article has discussed what that industry is doing to counter that damage. Is this a simple omission by these authors, or has the industry not responded at all? mcforelle 3:32, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
McKensey has conducted annual surveys the past several years on companies' use of web 2.0 in various ways. This year's report is on its web page at http://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/The_rise_of_the_networked_enterprise_Web_20_finds_its_payday_2716. Interesting to see the number of companies reporting increased number of successful innovations and decreased product development costs when fully utilizing the web. After reading this week's assignments, I went back to re-read this article and wondered why it had not impressed me as much on my first read-through. [[sjennings 16:01, 15 February 2011 (UTC)]]
As for the books of this month, I am reading Wikinomics by Don Tapscott & Anthony D. Williams and Here Comes Everybody by Clay Shirky. Coincidentally, these two books describe and reveal amazing aspects of peer collaboration and its consequences. Regarding the mass collaboration's economic effects, the Goldcorp Challenge can be deemed a symbolic case. To summarize a long story behind the success of Goldcorp, sending an SOS to people outside of the company significantly contributed to discovery of new gold mines and boosted its financial growth. In a common sense, showing any sign of a company in a trouble is looked as a disaster in business management. Nonetheless, Rob McEwen, at then the CEO of Goldcorp Inc., risked asking for a help and announced the Goldcorp Challenge to look for undeveloped mineral properties; and it worked out in a incredible way. These books are absolutely recommended for someone who is looking for a detailed explanation on our class topic. --Yu Ri 17:55, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
Links
Chris Anderson: People Power
Business Week: The Power of Us
Nasa: Clickworkers Study
- the link to the NASA Clickworkers Study seems to be broken. Here is a link to the program's home page --Gclinch 13:14, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
Yochai Benkler's Seminal Work on Peer Production: Coase's Penguin
Jimbo Wales: Talk on the Wikipedia Community