We have been practicing and advocating stakeholder networks for some time with positive results from these open collaboration processes. Today's complexity of work and rapid marketplace shifts demand network approaches. And for a reason - trust is the crux of success.
In a recent Deloitte paper, The Elements of Value Network Alliance: Strategies for Building Allliance Partnerships, “trust” plays a central role, particularly in those networks built on “social” ties. Iin their section on Building Social and Relational Capital they describe:
"In sectors where uncertainty precludes stability in strategic planning, collaborative networks can enable firms to overcome the risks and costs of specialization through internal development. However, alliance firms need to establish trust to offset the risks of perfidious network participants appropriating the fully evolved capabilities of partner firms without absorbing the prior costs of R&D. One way of building trust is to foster sufficiently deep ties between the network players to ensure opportunism is reduced.
This is an important concept within network analysis and social networks in particular (those networks built on social contacts between firms). Here, the need for firms to be fully embedded within the network and the notion of trust being used to mitigate any moral hazards at the outset of the partnership is prominent. Consequently, trust in this instance refers to the confidence that a firm will have that a network partner will not exploit the vulnerabilities of another."
We recently used action research to explore Facebook Groups for Business. An aspect that quickly emerged is the intersection of “social” and “professional” identities as they apply to networking sites and their potential for business. Beyond the vernacular meaning of the word social, (which by the way does not have an equivalent meaning in French or German), only the definition of "social" entails trust. "Professional" is a more clinical description of skills, competence and expertise for which one typically pays.
John Seely Brown Brown and Paul Duguid wrote in the Social Life of Information about the importance of the human context for how we construct information, as well as the significant underpinnings which support our technological ability to access it so seamlessly.
Their description of little Sweet Pea in the Popeye Cartoon crawling along ledges and other tenuously supported structures oblivious to the supporting structures is germane to our need to be mindful that social networks (built on trust) are the supporting structures for successful alliance partnerships. Information flows based on the social contacts. Social contacts are enabled through social networking platforms like Facebook.
In The Sustainable Enterprise Fieldbook we write about a new form of trust for open contexts.
"Trust has reemerged as a critical component for collaboration" declares Charles Heckscher and Paul Adler in the introduction to The Firm as a Collaborative Community: Reconstructing Trust in the Knowledge Economy:
Complex knowledge-based production requires high levels of diffuse cooperation resting on a strong foundation of trust. Contrary to the claims of neoliberal approaches, neither markets nor hierarchies are sufficient for coordination in such conditions: bonds of trust are essential. Yet the old corporate communities based on a culture of loyalty, which have been the basis for for commitment for a century now, have been taken apart by three decades of economic turbulence, downsizing and restructuring. These developments raise the fear that the foundations of organizational trust are eroding when they are most needed.
A growing group of theorists has been exploring the possibility of a new form of trust that would enable interdependent activity in the more fluid,open contexts characteristic of knowledge production, reconciling choice with community. The past few years have seen a proliferation of work on non-traditional forms of trust: “studied,” “deliberate,” “swift,” and “reflective.”
And an emerging body of research focuses on new forms of organization among professionals and in “post-bureaucratic” firms and markets. (p. 2)
Open or collaborative systems hinge on the abilities of the members of those systems to trust one another, to share information, respect and value differences, adapt to the environment, learn, and follow through on commitments." (Chapter 8, p241)
Research by Lisa Abrams, Rob Cross, Erick Lesser and Daniel Levin (2003) in Nurturing interpersonal trust in knowledge-sharing networks, found -
"In many ways, non-work connections made other people seem “real” and therefore approachable and safe. These personal connections created a belief that each person had some level of concern for the other. In merging two groups after an acquisition, one organization we worked with held a series of face-to-face meetings to help encourage trust and integration of the merged group. Most notably, they created what they called a persona book, with color pictures and background information on people. Part of this was professional information (e.g., areas of expertise, company career, previous employment, education) that allowed employees to quickly learn about their new colleagues’ expertise. But that is not the part that people seemed to care about. Rather, the people we interviewed repeatedly indicated that it was the personal information (e.g., person you’d most like to have lunch with, ideal vacation that you’ve never taken, hobbies or hidden talents, first job or weirdest experience) that they read and used in making contact with other people.
Of course, the extent to which people are willing to make disclosures regarding their personal lives depends in part on their individual comfort level. Many people may be hesitant to share details of their personal lives with others in the office, either because they feel that such information could be taken out of context or simply because they wish to maintain a separation between their work and private lives. Yet, establishing some non-work-related connection seems to pay dividends in promoting interpersonal trust important for knowledge transfer."
~ 2003 71 Academy of Management Executive Abrams, Cross, Lesser, and Levin
To summarize trust dynamics in networks:
- Deep network ties can mitigate risk and uncertainity in unstable markets.
- Information flows based on social contacts.
- Non-traditional trust forms: studied, deliberate, swift and reflective are emerging.
- Professional and persona blur to make people real, approachable and safe.
I think it is time for leadership in organizations to get over their hang ups over the use of the word “social” and grapple with “trust” as well. We need to think of "social" as one's persona - who are you as a whole person; your unique blend of competencies, skill, expertise and personal values, beliefs and interests. In today’s connected world trust hangs in the balance of both for network success.
Come to our workshop - Open netWORKS for Co-generating Knowledge and Innovation -at KM World & Intranets to learn more.
~ Victoria G. Axelrod
