Comments on: Another social platform for development cooperation?

By: Social Platform for Development Cooperation: How does it work? What does it look like? « Orgbook

Thu, 13 Mar 2008 21:15:44 +0000

[...] About ← Another social platform for development cooperation? [...]

By: David Wilcox

David Wilcox — Thu, 13 Mar 2008 08:16:07 +0000

Hi Arjen

Thanks for the mention. You may be interested in a new project I’m working on to explore the implications of Web 2.0 f for membership organisations http://www.commonspace.org.uk. Also I hope to see you at Social Innovation Camp, where I’ll be exploring Andy Gibson’s ideas for Partner Up http://www.sicamp.org/?page_id=38.

By: Matthew Slater

Matthew Slater — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 21:22:58 +0000

It’s a really good idea to have a universal W3 database, and the initial concept doesn’t sound at all expensive. However, I forsee there are a number of political and organisational obstacles.

Like most coordination mechanisms, there would be no obligation on organisations to participate.
Therefore there would need to be a demonstrable benefit to participating organisations, or they just wouldn’t bother. This is a constant problem in the humanitarian sector.
The complexity of organisations and relationships and projects in the non-profit world could be very hard to model

By: Alberto Nardelli

Alberto Nardelli — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 12:43:31 +0000

Hi,

I’m the chief strategist at UnLtdWorld. Thanks for the mention.

I just wanted to add to your coverage that UnLtdWorld, incorporates a “neighbourhoods” feature, which similarly to Last.fm dynamically connects people around different parametres of similarity.

Also, in terms of organisations – we recently launched the Research Lab (www.unltdworld.com/lab) which provides a deep breakdown of the network, and will soon release APIs to make these accessible and usable within and beyond UnLtdWorld. An example, could be for organisation to dynamically and more efficiently connect, interact and engage with their audience through an application, or for researchers to use parts of our data within their own projects/sites.

Organisations can of course also create profiles or groups, yet the focus is on people as at the end of the day people, even if as representatives of an organisation, and not organisations, use social networks.

Feel free to email me if you have any questions or would like further info: alberto at unltdworld dot com .

By: Bev Trayner

Bev Trayner — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 12:05:06 +0000

Thanks for your comments about CIARIS and I think your suggestion of a “clear picture of all the connections between the organisations” is an important one and you are not the only one looking for such a thing. It looks like we are going to take the next development of CIARIS (called “Shirikisha”) in that direction. I’ll keep you posted …

By: Johannes

Johannes — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 08:47:02 +0000

I think your idea is pretty interesting. One of the questions you need to ask however, is whether a social networks with organisational entities as main actors would work as well as a network among individuals. One of the reason for the Web2.0 success is that individuals can act freely, in kind of an anarchiv way, thus harnessing the benefits of quick reaction, adaption and exchange. But if it’s organsations acting in this network, any interaction would be closely tied to the policies and procedures existing in these organisations. Who would be responsible, who owns the content and who can say what in the name of the organsiation through this network? That’s pretty tricky to answer and I think the obstacles for free exchange through such a network would be pretty high.

By: Camilla Burg

Camilla Burg — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 05:10:04 +0000

As an editor and outreach co-ordinator on WiserEarth, I read your blog post with interest. Creating collaborations and connections in the currently fragmented world of the development sector is key to avoiding the duplication of efforts and making sure resources go where they are needed – however it’s a big job…and time and resources (and often the motivation) are lacking. WiserEarth.org could be in a position to help. It started off simply as a database attempting to map out the good happening around the world…108,000 organization listings later, it has gradually been developing its networking capabilities (and yes, at the moment, many organizations are still not using these features for exactly the reasons cited above in your blog posting). As a nonprofit project aimed at serving the NGO community, it needs to get better at encouraging the networking aspects of the site. But how to do this? As a community-driven website, we (the editors on the site) are hoping that the answers are out there in the community….so that ‘yet another portal’ will not be needed. With thanks for the important work everyone is doing out there. Camilla

By: Dorine Ruter

Dorine Ruter — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 20:12:38 +0000

Looks like a complete blog post… That should make up for me not writing anything on my own blog since months ago!! Now let’s hope it’s of any use to you.

By: Dorine Ruter

Dorine Ruter — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 20:11:14 +0000

Hi there Arjen,
Thanks for making the effort to explain in detail what you actually envision with COOpen.net.

I think the ‘why?’question (why aren’t organisations using the networking feature of WiserEarth?) is crucial to your project and how it should commence/be introduced/develop/etcetera.

The organisation I work for (NGO/consultancy organisation) definately has no problem with sharing who we work for/with, so in our case it would mainly be lack of time to start using this network/tool. Entering data AND maintaining that information should be worth the effort and time. That means we need to be sure that:
1.) People use this tool so that it makes the organisations using it more visible (including for acquisition purposes, etc.) and
2.) The information available is accurate so that we ourselves can use it to establish new links with others (i.e. find ‘friends’ and ‘neighbours’).

It probably is a bit of a chicken-egg situation. We won’t be using the tool unless our main partners/donors are, and they in turn will most likely have a similar idea.

While I am typing this, I see Ismaels comment appear and I don’t think it’s such a bad idea at all. Getting a group of early adopters might do the trick. Of course, be carefull with the ‘brand’ you’re creating. You don’t want it to be too much ‘ICT’ minded to get the support of the larger development community.

It could be you also need to convince and team up with those people that are already building/hosting similar tools. Because of the huge supply, the ‘market’ for this kind of thing could just be too crowded.

Finally, a more practical question. What do you mean with (geo) tagging publications? I.e. how could our organisation, with it’s own website on which our publications are (or should be…) uploaded, ‘tag’ those without too much of an extra effort? Are you talking del.icio.us kind of tagging or something completely different? Hope you can explain.

Thanks again. I’ll keep an eye on your initiative and hope many others will comment and provide you with suggestions. The change you seek in the development world might have started when you posted your idea.

Regards,
Dorine

By: ismael

ismael — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 18:14:22 +0000

Hi Arjen,

I support your arguments about going one step beyond and feeling that what’s already out there is not enough.

On the other hand, I can also understand the reluctance of the “oh-no-not-yet-another-portal” and the barriers in skills that some (many) people and (especially) organizations still have.

I know what I’m going to say is not very popular but… what about trying to launch your idea in the framework of ICT4D NGOs only?

No, not trying to build a two-speed network for NGOs, nor two classes, but just being practical: early adopters will be eager to try new things… and set the path for the ones to come after.

Just wondering…