Week 5: The Professor and the Snap Shot -- Living in a Networked World

I recently enjoyed a conversation with a faculty member at our institution.  He has served the university as a professor of business and economics for over forty years.  He sauntered into my office perplexed by a recent confrontation with a student.  He was teaching a business ethics class and had just drawn an elaborate schematic to highlight various choices and coinciding values and philosophies that supported each potential choice.  He spoke animatedly of the complexity of this particular lesson and his aspiration to truly engage students in a thought-provoking discussion of business ethics and tradeoffs.  He repeatedly wondered why students were not taking notes, either on their computer or in their traditional notebooks.  On five separate occasions, he suggested that this was content for the upcoming test.  And then it happened, at the end of this thoughtful, well-articulated lecture, several students asked him to step to the side so they could take a picture of the elaborate schematic.  Within milliseconds, the students captured the essence of the lecture, imported the picture to their notes and sauntered out of the classroom.  This particular professor found himself caught between the ease of technology in capturing information and his concern about how much the students really internalized during the lecture.  Was it merely enough to photograph the schematic, or did the student miss something by not engaging the material in a more intentional manner?  This incident necessitated a discussion of the pros and cons of living in a flat world.  I reminded him that he could merely take a picture of the schematic and beam it up through the projection system sparing him of the work of elaborately drawing this all out on the whiteboard.  Then he suggested, merely taking a picture failed to capture the critical thinking gained through repetition, Socratic engagement, and questioning of the schematic and the process.  So began an intriguing discussion of the pros and cons of the networked world and its implications on learning and organizations.    

Friedman (2007) constructs a strong argument for the flattened world, first by introducing the ten flatteners and subsequently by illustrating the power of the triple convergence.  Clearly, organization’s benefit from the expanding use of technologies that strengthen teamwork, collaboration, and communication across the organization regardless of location, time or space (Pew Research, 2008).  Moreover, business is no longer confined to physical spaces, and networks now transcend the organization (Friedman, 2007).  Information remains instantaneously accessible, whether at work or at home.  Knowledge-sharing appears greatly enhanced by the growth of networked workers.  However, as with all advances, without clear organizational leadership that defines productivity expectations and provides timely feedback, these technologies may yield less robust outcomes than originally projected (Pew Research 2008).  The data suggests that networked workers find technology distracting.  The propensity to check email, quickly gather updates on breaking news, communicate with personal friends, or check our social networking sites yields decreases in focus and productivity (Pew Research, 2008).  Personally, I have found it necessary to establish personal habits about technology use to ensure appropriate work-life balance.  Without vigilance and discipline, I can easily become consumed by work and neglect important time with family, friends, and other responsibilities.

As Friedman suggests, “there is absolutely no guarantee that everyone will use these new technologies, or the triple convergence, for the benefit of themselves, their countries, or humanity.  These are just technologies.  Using them does not make you modern, smart, moral, wise, fair or decent” (2007, p. 536).  Friedman’s argument suggests again that the technology is only as effective as the leadership guiding the use of the technology or as the individual choosing to create disciplined approaches to the use of technology in one’s personal life.  Living and working in a networked world requires a new model of organizational guidance that clearly defines expectations and outcomes and gives appropriate feedback to ensure workers are aware of organizational expectations.  Similarly, leaders must equip teams to sort through a myriad of information to discern which knowledge may be reliable, valid, and useful for the organization.  Technology can enhance the effectiveness of the networked worker, but the technology alone remains incapable of determining how to best convert the information to useable knowledge. 

Thus, much like the professor in the opening story of this reflection, technology should not be confused with leadership or learning.  Technology may enhance both, but it still requires the human to sort through, process, discern and disseminate what is valuable for the organization.  Technology can crunch thousands of data points, but humans must still be able to critically analyze the data and draw conclusions.  Is taking a snapshot sufficiently capturing the learning in the class? Perhaps, but arguably, the student must take the picture and develop the skills to apply the learning gleaned through the process of thinking critically about the choices in the diagram.  A mere picture captured by technology fails to prepare the student or the worker for the true demands and balance required while living in a flattened world.   

Friedman, T. (2007).  The world is flat.  New York, NY:  Picador.

Madden, M. & Jones, S. (2008).  Networked workers.  Pew Internet & American Life Project, Washington, DC.  Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org