Comments on: Conceptualizing the Performance Ecosystem

By: sflowers

sflowers — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 20:31:55 +0000

I gotcha ;) Maybe the model representation could look a bit less tech / IT centric?

I know that in reallity a lot of what we do is supported by IT:) I think it’s up to us to temper the focus and consider ‘nature and people’

By: Clark

Clark — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 15:36:16 +0000

Steve (do I have that right?), thanks for the detailed feedback. To be clear, my intention is that you may not have the KM/CMS/LMS underpinnings, it’s a goal, not a given. And you’re right, I hadn’t explicitly accounted for Google, library, etc, but I see them as components of informal (social/perf supp). I’m more concerned with the elements that organizations should be considering, rather than all the elements out there (they just shouldn’t block them ;).

And I worked very hard to have performance support/social integrated into a whole with formal, implying both an overlap and integration. I agree that dropping fences is critical: support people in getting information, not control it. Let’s set those pigeons free!

By: sflowers

sflowers — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 12:00:48 +0000

Hey, Clark –

I see where you’re going with this:) Had a similar model around somewhere (much more cluttered than yours is).

The elements that seem a little out of alignment to me:

1. The whole thing is underpinned by formalized technology(and technology itself). I’m sad that e-solutions hang out together. I think the world is really much more organic than that. I think technology is important, but the whole thing shouldn’t fall apart if the rug of technology is pulled out from under it:) Maybe that layer could share an equal representation of underpinning that is ‘the real world and everything else’. This is defined by stuff like (1) Google, (2) Your local library, (3) That smart senior guy that you work with, (4) Your little sister’s genius friend, (5) a penchant for experimentation… or anything else that’s not a formalized CM/KM/LM. The real world deserves at least an equal share. If you want to stratify further, maybe there’s a part of that level’s sphere that is ‘social tools in the wild’.

2. I like performance support in the pie. I think that there’s more to formal and social than the diagram represents. There’s individual (which could be formal or informal – doesn’t have to be social), informal could overlap with performance support (how many of us search for what we need without ‘participating’ actively), and social could be peer / group or have a facilitated component that overlaps with formal.

I’m digging the mobile layer. I do think of this outside the normal sense of mobile (devices). This is ‘where you are’. Mode doesn’t matter. Low tech ‘where you are’s’ could include a printable that you could read on the train.

To me the forward strides are going to be dropping the fences and coming to terms with e-solutions as part of the natural order of everything. Sometimes that’s formally constructed for the learner, and other times it’s learner constructed or discovered. Options and not pidgeon-holing to a specific set is where it’s at, imo.

If 42 is the answer, what was the question? :P