Comments on: Blogstorming, Wikipolishing and simultaneous emergence? http://seradigm.co.nz/2009/09/03/blogstorming-wikipolishing-and-simultaneous-emergence.html Sense Making Wed, 16 Sep 2009 12:57:38 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Pia Waugh http://seradigm.co.nz/2009/09/03/blogstorming-wikipolishing-and-simultaneous-emergence.html#comment-13949 Pia Waugh Mon, 07 Sep 2009 02:03:06 +0000 http://seradigm.co.nz/2009/09/03/blogstorming-wikipolishing-and-simultaneous-emergence.html#comment-13949 I think we did come to this from slightly different angles, and we are also trying to use open tools wherever possible to ensure access to participate and sustainability of the outcomes. I think in terms of methodology, it has been invented long before either projects :) We have had online/offline collaboration in highly effective ways throughout the Open Source world for many years. Combinations of people contributing ideas, the sorting of ideas into a living working roadmap, and then the implementation of those ideas in practise. I think also it isn't that there is fear people will say the wrong thing, but rather a trust that given the opportunity for peer review, the "most useful/appropriate" things will emerge. we try to ensure all items discussed are put into the briefing paper, no matter what our thoughts on them, however we also ensure the crowds responses, where possible, are also recorded. I think this peer review of ideas put forward it really useful. The final endorsement system helps a) weed out any inappropriate stuff put into the wiki and overlooked and b) gave some sort of basic prioritisation as to what people thought were the most important recommendations. Hope this all helps, and we are looking into Dave's methods as well. Thanks! :) I think we did come to this from slightly different angles, and we are also trying to use open tools wherever possible to ensure access to participate and sustainability of the outcomes. I think in terms of methodology, it has been invented long before either projects :) We have had online/offline collaboration in highly effective ways throughout the Open Source world for many years. Combinations of people contributing ideas, the sorting of ideas into a living working roadmap, and then the implementation of those ideas in practise.

I think also it isn’t that there is fear people will say the wrong thing, but rather a trust that given the opportunity for peer review, the “most useful/appropriate” things will emerge. we try to ensure all items discussed are put into the briefing paper, no matter what our thoughts on them, however we also ensure the crowds responses, where possible, are also recorded. I think this peer review of ideas put forward it really useful. The final endorsement system helps a) weed out any inappropriate stuff put into the wiki and overlooked and b) gave some sort of basic prioritisation as to what people thought were the most important recommendations.

Hope this all helps, and we are looking into Dave’s methods as well. Thanks! :)

]]> By: Dave Snowden http://seradigm.co.nz/2009/09/03/blogstorming-wikipolishing-and-simultaneous-emergence.html#comment-13925 Dave Snowden Wed, 02 Sep 2009 21:28:58 +0000 http://seradigm.co.nz/2009/09/03/blogstorming-wikipolishing-and-simultaneous-emergence.html#comment-13925 Parallel invention I assume. Some differences, I recommend technical writers to synthesis the material and significant levels of coaching to get people into the blog storm. Other variations include use of SenseMaker™ to gather blog like material in large volumes. You are wrong on starting conditions. Yes I had experience, but I took the principles of CAS theory and applied them (Praxis, or theory informed practice) otherwise OK Parallel invention I assume. Some differences, I recommend technical writers to synthesis the material and significant levels of coaching to get people into the blog storm. Other variations include use of SenseMaker™ to gather blog like material in large volumes.

You are wrong on starting conditions. Yes I had experience, but I took the principles of CAS theory and applied them (Praxis, or theory informed practice) otherwise OK

]]>