tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866242447606383181.comments2023-10-06T14:30:48.719+02:00On the road to discovery: Roxanna Samii blogAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10933270079603837958noreply@blogger.comBlogger132125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866242447606383181.post-62842972005342853972016-02-16T15:35:07.211+01:002016-02-16T15:35:07.211+01:00Roxy, as the post describes, I agree that the ‘bas...Roxy, as the post describes, I agree that the ‘basics’ (wisdom) of organizing good meeting are pretty available at this point in time to anyone who wants to look for them. There are obviously lots of variables that speak to whether those ‘basics’ of good (effective) meeting practices are used (including leadership style, organizational culture, etc..) For those who are interested though, it does seem like it is time to take the available resources for creating an effective meeting environment to the next level. I like how you have begun to do that by focusing on the physical space of the proposed meeting. <br /><br />Perhaps we can encourage meeting organizers who are interested in going beyond the ‘basic good practices’ to look at the broader questions in planning a meeting. As Luis mentions in his comments, a first question might be “What are we trying to accomplish and do we need this in-person meeting to accomplish that?” If the answer is yes, ask the question: With a focus on the particular group, what will make the meeting an effective use of in-person time?” I note the focus on the particular group as although we often think we may be keeping a focus on the specific group when planning a meeting, an explicit focus can help us to determine things that may not at first be obvious – maybe there are differently- abled people involved where walking is not a good option; or an outside space that does not provide enough quiet to focus or shade that may be necessary for the groups needs, etc… With the focus on the specific group we can then be creative with the agenda, room set-up, sitting vs. walking, outside vs. inside, etc… to help generate the outcomes we are looking for from the meeting.<br /><br />It might be interesting to do a group google.doc on “Meeting basics 2.0” similar to the document Nancy White coordinated on online meetings. <br /><br />Thanks for stimulating our thinking!<br /><br />Bonnie Koenighttp://www.goinginternational.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866242447606383181.post-53844742494766397652016-02-15T00:42:46.323+01:002016-02-15T00:42:46.323+01:00Hi Roxy, thanks a lot for the stupendous write-up ...Hi Roxy, thanks a lot for the stupendous write-up you have put together over here and for the shout-out on Twitter. I am surprised you haven't mentioned one of my favourite capabilities from hosting a meeting and that I think we need to start challenging it more and more by the minute: don't host the meeting! After all, the best meetings <a href="http://www.cmswire.com/social-business/i-cant-take-another-status-meeting-infographic/" rel="nofollow"> are canceled meetings.</a><br /><br />I don't think we are <a href="https://vinjones.com/challenge-your-meetings-a-vinjones-discussion/" rel="nofollow">challenging enough</a> how we eventually host, participate and engage in meetings, never mind figuring out their purpose in the first place, and I suspect it's something we should start up doing, and quite a bit and soon, too!, because otherwise meetings would become one of the most pernicious productivity pain points, if not already (I suspect email is pretty high on the list, too!). And I am <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K7agjXFFQJU" rel="nofollow">not over-exaggerating</a> much, I would think. <br /><br />What's interesting about meetings is that they are a necessary evil, indeed, but it's something we can always refined and figure out what works best. For instance, both <a href="https://www.ted.com/talks/nilofer_merchant_got_a_meeting_take_a_walk?language=en" rel="nofollow">Nilofer Merchant</a> and <a href="http://www.bethkanter.org/npwalk-5tips/" rel="nofollow">Beth Kanter</a>, to name a couple of examples, have been huge advocates around hosting walking meetings for pretty much the very same reasons you have stated above as well, Roxy, and they work great! I, too, can recommend them highly! <br /><br />But what I would do myself in terms of getting the most out of meetings, is essentially start challenging the nature of the meeting itself, i.e. whether we *really* need to host it, or not, because if it is something that can be done through offline collaboration and open knowledge sharing tools I don't see a reason why it couldn't be done through plenty of the digital tools we have got to our disposal at the moment. There is here an opportunity to work smarter, not necessarily smarter and I think it's time to start shifting gears in terms of how we view meetings, because right now they are becoming time sinks, but then again we go through huge ordeals to request a 200€ hard driver for work and yet no-one gets to challenge a single meeting with senior leadership for an hour. <br /><br />Time is the new currency and unless we start managing it much more effectively in terms of the time we spend in meetings, I think we are about to have many more problems than we would want to, in order to be effective in our jobs. Now, with all of that said, those links I have just shared in this comment will give us all plenty of fodder to figure out how we can get the most of hosting meetings without failing in the attempt. At the same time as having some fun watching Tripp & Tyler's video clips on our corporate life to understand where our challenges begin and what we can do about them :-D <br /><br />Looking forward to the follow-up conversations,Roxy! And thanks much for this wonderful blog post! Well done! Luis Suarezhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11643539614785638494noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866242447606383181.post-21544922152719850422016-01-19T16:11:05.745+01:002016-01-19T16:11:05.745+01:00What an amazing and inspiring post Roxy! Please te...What an amazing and inspiring post Roxy! Please tell us more about your new adventure..best wishes!ALAhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14165386137635554195noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866242447606383181.post-35883550335070738892016-01-17T14:10:28.645+01:002016-01-17T14:10:28.645+01:00"Si nunca te arriesgas a cruzar el rio, nunca..."Si nunca te arriesgas a cruzar el rio, nunca sabras lo que te aguarda en la otra orilla" Roxy decided to cross the river....betty51bloggerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07486840461199484250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866242447606383181.post-87470508616872866862015-12-28T12:48:57.666+01:002015-12-28T12:48:57.666+01:00On the other hand when you consider how using soci...On the other hand when you consider how using social networking for business can greatly accelerate your marketing success your patience <br />is a small price to pay. Whatever the case, the only thing you have to lose is five dollars.<br />Poker Face has received 374,606,128 hits, Just Dance rests at 272,941,674 <br />and Bad Romance has been viewed 360,020,327 times.<br /><br />Here is my blog post <a href="http://500views.com/tag/youtube-real-views/" rel="nofollow">youtube views</a>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866242447606383181.post-31728832153873044552015-11-23T00:02:01.875+01:002015-11-23T00:02:01.875+01:00I've been on the road and running like a mania...I've been on the road and running like a maniac, so finally circling back to nod in strong agreement with my colleagues above. Right on, brothers and sisters! There is nuance. I think many writers want to make a strong statement with a binary. Context always matters!Nancy Whitehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01374074594611764684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866242447606383181.post-34341546548595773262015-11-02T22:38:50.903+01:002015-11-02T22:38:50.903+01:00Coming late to this thread and so many great contr...Coming late to this thread and so many great contributions already. Recently I've been very taken with the analysis of Kentaro Toyama who states that technology is an amplifier of human intent (not a creator of it). <br /><br />For communities this means that technology can enhane them e.g. bringing people together in a community who might not ordinarily be able to find each other, or making that experience richer with different forms of communication, and helping them work together in new ways, helping use new tools to better surface content and expertise BUT this will only work of the human dimensions of successful communities are present and are nurtured e.g. passion, commitment, expertise and trust. The challenge is often that people think a better technology will replace these and focus on the technology to the detriment of developing the human ecosystem needed forit to function effectively. Unfortuntaly there are no technological shortcuts on the people side of things despite what those woh make and sell technology platforms would like us to believe. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866242447606383181.post-36149545946383956372015-10-31T00:12:33.394+01:002015-10-31T00:12:33.394+01:00A couple of cents :-)
Binary - community dead Y/N...A couple of cents :-)<br /><br />Binary - community dead Y/N - question and a vast array of dimensions / viewpoints / thoughts / observations / beliefs and angles; also in the comments and re-tweets.<br /><br />My thoughts go to Heidegger (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Heidegger and specific https://belate.wordpress.com/2010/07/12/heidegger-modern-technology); technology demands a modernity, a worldview where people are things, potentials, objects, numbers.<br /><br />Technology is persuasive; on hand-helds people call, look TV, tweet, gamble, consume digits in public and private and in meetings.... Northern 'development orgs' are in techno-limbo and lost in producing digital flagships an Yammer disasters. People are obsessed with being connected or show withdrawal when not! <br /><br />Privacy is a dirty word. A tweet a day will keep the donor away :-) Funny is that the Geo-positioning data - your position in the real! - is most valuable for virtual busyness (development?) with IT; look at Uber, SMS alert etc. But also dangerous; having the geo-pos data of your spouses lover are needed for a crime-passionelle by drone :-) <br /><br />Technology is NOT free; one has to be connected, use energy and time. <br /><br />There is a serious tech-war going on on the Internet; Internet itself is a commons under thread; also Wikipedia struggles ....; fraud, theft and SPAM are serious problems. Regimes use technology to oppress people / communities.<br /><br />The link between a stock market and the forest fires in Asia is technology and habitats for communities is threatened......<br /><br />And technology brings so much good too. <br /><br />Block-chain technology has the potential of fee free financial (finance = information) transactions kicking banks (Libor manipulations, bankrupt Greece) out of the equation.<br /><br />Technology brought my dads hearing aid, my phone with emergency button, Tetris, my glasses, low cost intercontinental phone / video calls, etc etc etc etc. Given my turns around the Sun, I probably would be dead by now without technology!<br /><br />And the most fun is to manipulate information with technology because we can simulate situations (serious gaming), emulate behavior (agent based modelling) and most amazing suggest a virtual presence. Read Cesar Hildago's book 'Why information grows' where he explains development in terms of matter, energy and information. Any URL can become a community! <br /><br />Back to the question.<br /><br />There is no way back; the opening scene of the Movie Space Odyssey 2001 (look at 1:25 - 1:40 in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHjIqQBsPjk) shows a monkey using bones of a carcass as tool, technology, and throw it up in the air to change into a spaceship.<br /><br />Development and with it communities and networks are heavily dependent on technology. In the end technology is behind climate change.<br /><br />Yes, technology (or disruption through technology) does kill communities. Look around in the USA and everywhere you can see deserted areas because of new technology (cars instead of horse travel, home shopping, video on demand, Tinder instead of church evenings etc etc; communities split up. Dams and new cities made communities to be uprooted. Walls and surveillance keep communities separated and / or oppressed <br /><br />Perhaps 'digital communities' are best nurtured by technology :-) In that case we are only talking about pumping around information. Lets just agree that technology is of specific but limited value for full blossoming of communities. <br /><br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05455963452308399627noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866242447606383181.post-52416377742822172622015-10-30T18:40:32.532+01:002015-10-30T18:40:32.532+01:00How deeply unsatisfying an on-line community is co...How deeply unsatisfying an on-line community is compared to the village square. Yet when it's all we've got, we're very grateful for it.Dan Newmanhttp://mattergroup.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866242447606383181.post-1228343427533852012015-10-30T16:21:11.563+01:002015-10-30T16:21:11.563+01:00(Continues from previous comment …)
Like I said, ...(Continues from previous comment …)<br /><br />Like I said, technology is not going to kill communities. People are communities. And it's our ability to use social / digital tools for a specific purpose (connect, share, learn, collaborate, cooperate, coopete, etc) that will dictate the health of a community, but judging from where we are, I think we are all alive and kicking and doing very well, both in real life and through our virtual interactions. And when we meet up F2F ... Oh my !!! So wonderful! I just can't wait for it to happen! It will be like having a wonderful coffee & cake where we can catch up from what we talked about yesterday, as if it were from like forever! :-DLuis Suarezhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11643539614785638494noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866242447606383181.post-28670141536988819262015-10-30T16:20:38.201+01:002015-10-30T16:20:38.201+01:00Hello Roxanna, thanks a lot for the ping (on Twitt...Hello Roxanna, thanks a lot for the ping (on Twitter) and for the heads up on this terrific blog post! Wonderfully crafted reflections on the power of communities and the role technology plays to ENABLE them to achieve a certain purpose. Each of the paragraphs you put together triggered a number of thoughts and ideas in my head, so will try to add some of them over here to keep the conversation going: <br /><br />1. Technology will NEVER be able to kill a community, I am afraid. It's what most folks seem to keep ignoring time and time again. Communities ARE people, not tools. Regardless of the technology, the community will always be there. In fact, they have always been there without technology and thriving pretty much. A community can never be killed. It can go dormant, but it can't be killed, unless the core component, ALL community members, decide to move on and do something else. <br /><br />2. The example you mentioned about how communities can join and divide is a clear instance of the work ahead we need to go to move from Cooperation / Collaboration into Coopetition, where we collaborate to compete with our competitors in an open, collaborative and social environment, where technology is the enabler of such interactions. This is where most communities are stuck at the moment as they don't feel comfortable inviting the enemy to sleep with them, when that enemy is the main option available out there to help them grow, not necessarily just out of their comfort zone, but just that, grow, as individuals and as members of a community. <br /><br />3. What's starting to become rather troubling is how everyone keeps (ab)using the term 'community' to refer to plenty of groupings that are everything, BUT communities. I think we need to do a bit more of a conscious exercise as to what *is* really a community and what it is not. And, to me, the key aspect to differentiate them from everything else has always been the VOLUNTARY nature of members to gather together, connect, share, learn on a particular topic for a specific purpose. No voluntarism in there, no community. That simple. <br /><br />4. I'm really sorry for what I'm about to say (got a blog post coming on the topic myself as well...), but, like mentioned in the comments above, I'm going to disagree 100% with Mintzberg's blog post, because he 'totally' misses the point on the blend of physical AND virtual communities. If things were like he mentions, I would have been unemployed for the last 18 years of my professional career, where 99% of all of my knowledge work has been produced, shared, connected, learned through BOTH physical & virtual communities. I had numerous times the situation where I was part of communities and networks where I was the only person in Europe. Everyone else from elsewhere. Did that stop us to connect, learn and work together in a social, collaborative manner? No, not at all. Quite the opposite. Working in virtual, remote networks and communities helped us work harder to amplify our physical interactions whenever we would find a chance to meet up. <br /><br />I suspect Mintzberg's article is a reflection of the world he comes from, Academia. Today's business world, more hyperconnected, integrated, networked than ever ignoring technology, AS AN ENABLER, is a completely different story. And a case in point in here, Roxanna. You shared this article out there to the #KMers community where a bunch of us have already met in real life, and plenty of others haven't. Like you and me, yet, here we are, connecting, collaborating, sharing on a topic we are both truly passionate about, and we have never met. The moment we do is going to feel like we know each other from back in the day, coming close to 10 years, if I recall correctly, when we first bumped into each other through our KM blogs. Yes, case in point. Luis Suarezhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11643539614785638494noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866242447606383181.post-23841367613287227582015-10-30T08:49:22.303+01:002015-10-30T08:49:22.303+01:00Hi Roxanna, I also read Mintzberg's blogpost a...Hi Roxanna, I also read Mintzberg's blogpost and I disagreed. "An electronic device puts us in touch with a keyboard, that's all" is not true anymore. Even the opposite is true. Most people are now in continuous touch with their friends (sometimes co-workers) and that changes the experience of nearness. Hence with online technologies we have the tools to create for more closely knit communities. Some years ago I read about the term 'distant closeness' but now I don't see this term anymore. It describes living at distance but feeling a close intimacy through technology. <br /><br />Maybe Mintzberg has never experiences this? Joitskehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09087406142343521335noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866242447606383181.post-44110534271664187772015-10-29T16:44:55.449+01:002015-10-29T16:44:55.449+01:00Great post and topic.
Communities as we all kno...Great post and topic. <br /><br />Communities as we all know come together for different purposes and the formats/tools they use to forward their purpose can and will be different. So some communities can probably be very effective just operating virtually (as was previously noted many of 'us' who have responded thus far only 'know' each other virtually :). But in other cases in-person interactions are not only 'nice' but can be necessary. So in the example you gave of introducing 'disruption' I have found that (as we are humans and often respond with very human emotions) it is much easier to manage disruption (where emotions can often be intense) while maintaining the unity of the community in-person than online. <br /><br />Just some initial thoughts. It is a topic that is very nuanced and a bit hard to tackle in 140 characters or even in the short give & take of a blog post and comments, so I hope 'your community' can keep exploring this together in one way or another!Bonnie Koenighttp://www.goinginternational.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866242447606383181.post-23905955551763098222015-07-30T15:13:19.184+02:002015-07-30T15:13:19.184+02:00Yes, thank you, Roxy, for starting and encouragi...Yes, thank you, Roxy, for starting and encouraging this conversation! Social media is definitely changing but I believe it’s an evolution as we learn what ‘works’ and what doesn’t vis a vis true engagement, using new tools I don’t think there will be a next ‘big thing’ but I do think there will be a reevaluation of how we get value from social media (which is here to stay :) that will combine many of the factors you raise – curation, engagement and bringing together thought with feeling (heart & mind). I am not sure which platforms will take hold going forward (my crystal ball is a bit cloudy :) but I do find some of the continued experimentation interesting including newcomers like https://this.cm/ which is based on the idea that you can only share one article a day (curation),and the interactive platforms many conferences are setting up to combine in-person discussions with online discussion. Here’s to continuing to explore together, keeping the thought (why?) and the heart (interactive engagement) together!Bonnie Koenighttp://www.goinginternational.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866242447606383181.post-83928467234449983882015-07-30T14:14:42.815+02:002015-07-30T14:14:42.815+02:00Hi Roxanna, thanks a lot for the ping on Twitter a...Hi Roxanna, thanks a lot for the ping on Twitter about this absolutely wonderful blog post! Greatly appreciated. It reminds me of another blog post I put together myself in 2012 under <a href="http://www.elsua.net/2012/08/20/twitter-is-where-conversations-go-to-die/" rel="nofollow">"Twitter is where conversations go to die"</a> in which I pretty much reflected on the same issues you bring up. As a result of that blog post I shared back then I decided to transform entirely the method in which I'd make use of Twitter leaving behind the broadcasting more from others and look for the real engagement: a conversation. <br /><br />Alas, vast majority of folks nowadays can only talk about themselves and how cool they are and the cool things they are NOT doing (which is why they promote someone else's work to catch their attention as link bait). If you look into it, and we go back over 20 years it's the same problem we had back then with KM, where people would keep protecting and hoarding their knowledge because they felt it was their unique competitive advantage and therefore wouldn't want to hand it over to others. Fast forward to 2015 and we have exactly the very same problem. People nowadays are more focused on sharing useless content, but keep up with their presence, than relevant, gorgeous tidbits we can all benefit from. <br /><br />Yes, we need to go back to basics, but basics to me is to have each and everyone of us who wants to have a different experience to challenge the useless junk we get exposed to and stop following those who share it. I remember the days when I used to share across plenty of curated items from people in my networks, only to discover most of that content was garbage. Nowadays, instead, I only keep sharing those items I know I have benefited from myself, even as a learning experience. That's why I no longer share listicles, productivity articles, marketing junk, etc. etc. <br /><br />We need to be more focused, even if that means we are not going to constantly be there. There is a reason why no-one reads Twitter / tweets anymore. Why should we if we are only broadcasting me, me, me messages? We need to smarten up, and focus on what we really want to get out of our social engagement and Toby above has pretty much hit the nail on the head: from shallow into real life engagement. One piece of great content at a time. <br /><br />One conversation at a time :-D <br /><br />Thanks much for entertaining this wonderful conversation! Looking forward to the dialogue ... Luis Suarezhttp://www.elsua.netnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866242447606383181.post-18573190624195234432015-07-29T16:41:53.607+02:002015-07-29T16:41:53.607+02:00I think a key challenge for us all is to learn how...I think a key challenge for us all is to learn how to convert shallow social media engagements into real life engagement.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07950459025269297071noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866242447606383181.post-85328542630951256192015-06-03T14:11:04.714+02:002015-06-03T14:11:04.714+02:00Thank you for this post and sharing your thinking ...Thank you for this post and sharing your thinking re: what makes successful (and enjoyable teams). Having also worked with a wide range of teams over the years - some successful & enjoyable, some less so :) I agree with you that there is a combination of direction (which can be facilitated, trained, etc...) and alchemy. I think the alchemy (at least partially) comes in through the group dynamic - the personalities of those involved, their own personal styles and motivations and how that translates into the group dynamic. If there are people in the group that don't really want to be in it for some reason, you can 'bring them along' but a toll may be taken on the process and result and the 'magic' you describes may not have all of the necessary ingredients to happen.Bonnie Koenighttp://www.goinginternational.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866242447606383181.post-89308209479257610202015-05-14T22:17:08.797+02:002015-05-14T22:17:08.797+02:00Thanks for this very useful blog!Thanks for this very useful blog!Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10862874961048941571noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866242447606383181.post-33110886636204146422015-05-07T12:42:46.775+02:002015-05-07T12:42:46.775+02:00I particularly support your call for "transf...I particularly support your call for "transformational" indicators Roxanna. We need to assess whether people have more meaningful control over their lives as a result of (and during) our initiatives - a kind of agency audit? We need to ask to what extent were all sectors included in each key aspect of the project cycle and ask how they feel the process affected their sense of self-efficacy to effect change that they value.<br />Phat Controllerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15715086457462457453noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866242447606383181.post-10625317904780126502015-05-06T15:49:00.101+02:002015-05-06T15:49:00.101+02:00The generic indicators often can not have the same...The generic indicators often can not have the same readings in very specific interventions. In its generality, they can hide relevant information.<br /><br />Perhaps we should consider applying a working methodology when assessing the impact of interventions. Thinking about how the situation was before the intervention and how it has been after the intervention. And being able to understand what has helped us to achieve the goals, what we did not have and would have helped us achieve more and better results, which allowed the sustainability of the system, and so on. Those indicators would offer a better grasp of the impact.<br /><br />I am not referring to create tailored indicators. Simply working with concrete indicators of the project through conceptual frameworks that allow us to discern the best indicators for each intervention.<br /><br />Embedded or not as part of the overall development project, there should be a set of specific ICT indicators that could give us rellevant information of its contribution to the development impact.<br />Jaume @Fortunyhttp://www.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866242447606383181.post-52965930222017909132015-05-02T02:31:46.289+02:002015-05-02T02:31:46.289+02:00Totally agree with your points, Roxy. Here's a...Totally agree with your points, Roxy. Here's another resource from Richard Heeks. Although you've probably read it already. http://www.seed.manchester.ac.uk/subjects/idpm/research/publications/wp/di/di-wp59/. Sandy FlorAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05343000155799063984noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866242447606383181.post-87210014509452836592015-04-30T10:45:20.474+02:002015-04-30T10:45:20.474+02:00Hi Roxanna. Pls see http://www.m4dimpact.com/ ma...Hi Roxanna. Pls see http://www.m4dimpact.com/ maybe some indicators there on impact of various M4D initiatives in agri, health, educ, money, etcFrancis Hooknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866242447606383181.post-62480453436844841792015-03-29T12:29:37.107+02:002015-03-29T12:29:37.107+02:00Hey Roxy...
I would definitively agree that soci...Hey Roxy... <br /><br />I would definitively agree that social media made the UN (and the larger nonprofit world) more connected and closer. Often in a fun way too...<br /><br />We still have a very long way to go, though... I'd love to see more regular gatherings of the social media people from the different organisations. And while we had a large "social" aspect a few years back, we definitively need to bring that back again. Not just by sitting together, but with active mutual support...<br /><br />When are you back?<br /><br />Peter<br /><br /><br />Peterhttp://blogtips.orgnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866242447606383181.post-28642341376405878372015-03-02T17:23:38.097+01:002015-03-02T17:23:38.097+01:00Great blog! Just a few comments. Understanding gen...Great blog! Just a few comments. Understanding gender gaps requires to look into different aspects, such as democracy gaps and more importantly cultural, educational and social aspects. The Global Gender Gap Index 2014 according to the World Economic Forum gives as the best five performers in terms of scores Iceland, Finland, Norway, Sweden and Denmark, while USA and Egypt rank 20 and 129 respectively out of 142 countries. While the five Nordic countries and USA have more women attending tertiary education compared to men, when it comes to political empowerment women in these five countries are basically equally represented compared to men in parliament and ministerial positions but the number of American women in these positions remains much lower. Therefore, reduction of the gender gap requires political empowerment of women so that they can contribute to shape social/labour market policies. Improvement of these policies will help more women enter the labour market and make a contribution to economic growth. In other countries cultural and social norms are still impeding to reduce the gender gap and there education is fundamental to tackle this issue.betty51bloggerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07486840461199484250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1866242447606383181.post-84415650533048832282015-01-26T05:22:35.965+01:002015-01-26T05:22:35.965+01:00Hi Roxy. Nice article. I think there is a lot of h...Hi Roxy. Nice article. I think there is a lot of hype about the "impact" of social media on humanity that isn't substantiated. Maybe this is due to misunderstanding, or maybe socmed has become a scapegoat (cynically I lean to the latter).<br /><br />The Dunbar number is a great conceptual tool (in addition to being a number) and IMHO is under appreciated. I also think the concept of ambient awareness is quite important in this age, and a positive result of social media.<br /><br />All the best for your new experiences at Cal and around the Bay Area.Michael Riggshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05669764110474163606noreply@blogger.com