Formal/Structural Formal/Special Purpose Informal Size Large: 25 to hundreds Smaller: 10 to 50, but may Small: 2 to whatever be larger or smaller emerges within the group Purpose Channels of authority and Completion of assigned Meet needs and interests accountability as well as tasks of individuals involved. communication Usually a mix of social “official” and work related activity. Type of Some face to face Mostly face to face Mostly face to face Communication conversation, but much conversation, but some conversation, some written: reports, electronic. Work output electronic, rarely written. memoranda, email mostly written: reports, minutes, presentations Venue Within formal structure Within formal structure May emerge within formal structure, or emerge across organisational boundaries Duration Years to life of the Depends on function and Highly variable and organization whether convened for generally less stable. specific task or ongoing Some forms persistent (e.g., standing while membership committee). Weeks to changes over time (e.g., years to life of the communities of practice) organisation Content of Task Oriented, but within Gossip, and Official, “public “hidden Communication official transcripts but also trust transcripts” transcripts”, building and knowledge formation and (Scott, 1990, p14) Structure Well defined by position, Well defined by position Emergent, no specific rules, policies and skill set structure Group Leadership Defined by position. May Defined by position, skills Fluid and dynamic within involve but and experience. May be the group, based on “charisma” rarely dynamic. more dynamic, based on needs, personal traits, individual skills, skills, experience and experience and personal other factors qualities. (Source: Tobin 2016) Within and among these groupings are the technology based communities of practice above. I’ve described In these smaller groupings, which tend to be relatively stable over time, the experience of day to day interaction makes it possible to get to know, with a high degree of certainty, how co-workers are likely one’s to behave in different circumstances. Interaction also helps to shape that behaviour, diminishing uncertainty even further. No amount of exhortation from rather remote senior executives (especially in larger organisations), no matter how eloquent they may be or how exemplary their personal behaviour might be, can have an effect even remotely comparable to close and interaction. In whichever everyday, “up personal” ways these local interactions play into the broader culture of an organisation, trust-building is an entirely local process.
Formal/Structural Formal/Special Purpose Informal Size Large: 25 to hundreds Smaller: 10 to 50, but may be larger or smaller Small: 2 to whatever emerges within the group Purpose Channels of authority and accountability as well as “official” communication Completion of assigned tasks Meet needs and interests of individuals involved. Usually a mix of social and work related activity. Type of Communication Some face to face conversation, but much written: reports, memoranda, email Mostly face to face conversation, but some electronic. Work output mostly written: reports, minutes, presentations Mostly face to face conversation, some electronic, rarely written. Venue Within formal structure Within formal structure May emerge within formal structure, or emerge across organisational boundaries Duration Years to life of the organization Depends on function and whether convened for specific task or ongoing (e.g., standing committee). Weeks to years to life of the organisation Highly variable and generally less stable. Some forms persistent while membership changes over time (e.g., communities of practice) Content of Communication Official, “public transcripts” Task Oriented, but within official transcripts Gossip, and “hidden transcripts”, but also trust building and knowledge formation and (Scott, 1990, p14) Structure Well defined by position, rules, policies Well defined by position and skill set Emergent, no specific structure Group Leadership Defined by position. May involve “charisma” but rarely dynamic. Defined by position, skills and experience. May be more dynamic, based on individual skills, experience and personal qualities. Fluid and dynamic within the group, based on needs, personal traits, skills, experience and other factors (Source: Tobin 2016) Within and among these groupings are the technology based communities of practice I’ve described above. In these smaller groupings, which tend to be relatively stable over time, the experience of day to day interaction makes it possible to get to know, with a high degree of certainty, how one’s co-workers are likely to behave in different circumstances. Interaction also helps to shape that behaviour, diminishing uncertainty even further. No amount of exhortation from rather remote senior executives (especially in larger organisations), no matter how eloquent they may be or how exemplary their personal behaviour might be, can have an effect even remotely comparable to everyday, “up close and personal” interaction. In whichever ways these local interactions play into the broader culture of an organisation, trust-building is an entirely local process.
eOandPWinter2016Edition08.docx