July 3rd 2008

Finding confidence while bridging multiple research practices

Just because I thought about it while taking a break from writing on PIM and GTD - a quote from Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity by Etienne Wenger that explains in a very nice way the troubles I have with finding confidence while trying to bridge multiple research practices (bold is mine).

Uprootedness is an occupational hazard of brokering. Because communities of practices focus on their own enterprise, boundaries can lack the kind of negotiated understanding found at the core of practices about what constitutes competence. That makes it difficult to recognize or access the value of brokering. As a consequence, brokers sometimes interpret the uprootedness associated with brokering in personal terms of individual adequacy. Reinterpreting their experience in terms of the occupational hazards of brokering is useful both for them and for the communities involved. It can also allow brokers to recognize one another, seek companionship, and perhaps develop shared practices around the enterprise of brokering. [p.100]

Tags: , ,

No Comments yet »

August 15th 2007

Weblog conversations revisited: conversations with self

Earlier:

So, in our experiments with extracting weblog conversations we’ve got one that included 1000+ blog posts from 34 bloggers. Once we included self-linked posts in the analysis, several independent conversations got “glued” together by chains of self-linked posts, turning the whole thing into a mess.

Looking into self-linking was another of my interests to revisit the original research. For me self-linking is one of the indicators that (some) weblogs are written as a conversation with self:

In the simplest case, a weblog post is fully and only embedded into “a conversation with self”, a personal narrative used to articulate and to organise one’s own thinking. A single blogger could have several of such conversations simultaneously, returning to ideas over time. Next, each of the posts can trigger a conversation with others that can take several rounds of discussions as well. (Efimova & de Moor, 2005: 9)

Thread ArcsAnjo and me have discussed a few possibilities to visualise those conversations with self (at least as far as one could do based on self-linking). One was inspired by Thread Arcs of Bernard Kerr from IBM research (which I actually found referenced in a thesis chapter by Manuel Lima describing precedents of Blogviz).

What Anjo did with it is different, but provides a nice way to visualise some patterns:

The above image is an example of a variant on the Thread Arcs idea. Left to right is time, and the arc that links connected posts is filled with a colour: the darker the colour the shorter the time span of the linked posts.

Another example. Visualisations like this can, at the very least, differentiate between those who use their weblog to create an intricate structure of linked posts over a long period of time, compared to bloggers who hardly refer to their own posts.

The final example depicts Lilia’s self-linking practices. I see waves, woods …

In the visualisations you can see clearly that self-linking is more of a personal habit rather than something that every blogger (in our sample) does consistently. Actually, as you can see from the last image, my own weblog is an extreme example of self-linking; others link to their own posts rarely.

Eventually I want to lok at the reasons for self-linking: Why some people do it and others don’t? Is it related to their uses of a weblog to document and organise their thinking? or wanting to inflate google rank? Do people who have easy tools to organise and retrieve their blogs posts (e.g. with categories or tagging) link to themselves less? Is it related to a number of blog posts? to the breadth of topics covered? to some strange personality trait? Does it change over time?

However, those visualisations still help a lot. They indicate that there are probably only several people who (because of chains of their own posts linked to each other) link separate conversations between bloggers into a whole big mess (connectors?). And they help thinking on detangling the mess :)

Archived version of this entry is available at http://blog.mathemagenic.com/2007/08/15.html#a1935; comments are here.

Tags: , ,

No Comments yet »

June 12th 2007

Blogger thought group and attributing ideas

Browsing my archives and realising that I’d better quote those comments to Context and attribution (12 Feb 2004!) in a blogpost, which is easier to find later.

By Alex Halavais (#):

This is, arguably, easy enough with words, but much harder when it comes to ideas. I came up with some thoughts that, I will assert, are my own. Someone noted that these followed closely some things you had written about in your blog. I am a regular reader of your blog, and I think it is likely that these entries–at the very least–prompted my thinking in a particular direction. This tendency to remember the ideas but forget their source–the “sleeper effect”–has been shown in communication research several times over the last 50 years.

You actually know about this, because someone else made the connection and hyperlinked it. But otherwise, I would have been abscounding with your ideas without due credit. As interersted as I am in encouraging hyperlinking as attribution, there has to be a limit.

I wonder whether a standing set of citations (your “Regular reads/dialogues”) constitutes a kind of “thought group”–an indication that your ideas are at least in some part attibutable to the people you communicate with every day?

By Piers Young (#):

Crikey - all sounds like we’re beginning to enter the murky world of Intellectual Proprty Rights. Have a few brief comments: 1) that this trail is happening at all is a good thing. It underlines the fact that there is value (however intangible) in blogging. 2) I don’t think the “thought group” idea’s is quite enough. Most, or at least many blogs have a “thought group” anyway: a blogroll. Most, or at least many bloggers have diverse interests: they may be into KM and skiing, KM and whiskey or KM and needlecraft or - you get the picture. One of the great things about links is that it allows me to get an idea which blogs most interest me. Without specific citations, I - as let’s say a needlecraft afficionado - would have to wade through a whole load of stuff on marketing, whiskey and skiing. Links, along with a whole load of other good things, help you filter. 3) That said, I agree there has to be a limit. In many cases it just isn’t practical to search all the citations and make all the links. But surely you do as much as you’ve got time for? And with the joys of trackback, bookmarklets etc, you almost by definition have time for one.

Alternating between typing, reading, browsing my weblog and walking around (usually means writing flow :)

Archived version of this entry is available at http://blog.mathemagenic.com/2007/06/12.html#a1908; comments are here.

Tags: , , ,

1 Comment »

July 4th 2006

Blogging as boundary practice

I’ve been thinking for a while on weblogs as boundary objects (and bloggers as boundary subjects :). I don’t think I’m 100% on classical definitions here, but don’t be angry - I need to play with the idea to see what comes out of it.

Also: you may want to read Denham on boundary objects here and here

My interest in blogging pretty much defined by the fact that weblogs cross boundaries - this is where the most of fun lies and the most of troubles occur. So, when conceptmapping some PhD thinking today I came up with this branch (I have to admit that this is not a generic case, but reference to my own research):

So, what shapes my own blogging practices (these are different angles of the same thing):

Contexts where blogging has to fit: my personal practices (e.g. those of dealing with information, technologies or time), practices of people around me (e.g. norms of communication) and practices of the organisation I work for (e.g. regarding confidentiality).

Communities I belong to (this overlaps with the previous category - have to think what to do with it). Those shape at least two aspects - themes that run through my blog and ways of doing things. Theme-wise I’m influenced by topical communities (e.g. KM vs. learning vs. technology), but there are also differences at the level of doing (e.g. researchers vs. practitioners).

Another way to look at blogging is it’s position on the edge between public and private - it has elements of control and safety of my own space and exposure of being in public.

Finally, research-wise my weblog is used in several ways: blogging is a way to participate in the communities I study, it’s an instrument for collecting and analyseing the data and it’s a publication medium. Normally those things would be separated (at least by time, space and audiences).

Semi-related earlier posts (the list is mainly for myself since suprisingly I don’t have a tag where those things would be collected):

Archived version of this entry is available at http://blog.mathemagenic.com/2006/07/04.html#a1794; comments are here.

Tags: , , , ,

No Comments yet »

March 14th 2006

Third culture kids and research kunstkamera

It’s feels strange realising how much my PhD research is influenced by experiences in domains that don’t have much to do with my focus. Since it’s so strong I tend to think that it’s true for other researchers as well and then feel even more strange not finding much traces of those “other domains” in their published work. This, in turn, reinforces my feeling that there is always some degree of “constructedness” in research published – and the more rigorous and logical it looks the more I suspect that the logic was reverse-engineered (no offence meant - this is how I feel even if logics says the opposite :)

Anyway, back to the originally intended topic of this post… Now, getting back into my PhD research and deeper into sorting out methods and methodologies, I realise that my recent reading of Third culture kids (context) provided me with a frame for thinking about my research next to insights of more personal nature.

Between other things the book stresses the influence of growing up between cultures for forming TCK personalities and the world outlook. While we are growing up, our identities are forming against particular cultural backgrounds – specific norms, values and practices are picked up, tried and tested, and, regardless of their “stickiness” in our lives form who we are (you don’t need to drink vodka to be Russian – in anyway your attitude regarding it would be heavily formed by observing those who do, knowing about effects of it, rituals and “safe” good practices of drinking as well as having to deal with the “outsiders” who think that it’s a bigger part of everyday life than it actually is ;). Background culture provides scaffolding by consistent stimulators and reactions. This consistency is important – it’s like a tree that always there for an ivy to crawl around or like a firm arm of your dance partner that is necessary to lead in a way that could be followed.

Growing up between cultures means that another life could be just one flight away, and then everything is changed – the way elders are treated, food is prepared and eaten or friendships are formed. Relocating while growing up means that there is sufficiently long time to absorb each culture, but not enough to be formed by any specific one… Those culture changes bring not only broad outlook on the world, flexibility and knowing exotic languages; they also turn someone into restless and rootless, someone who is always in transition, moving, but never settling, someone who doesn’t know who he is and where he belongs.

Reading the book made the difference clear to me – despite of a few years living abroad I grew up Russian and know where my roots are. In my case multicultural values and practices, although landing on a fertile ground of growing up in a family of mixed ethnic origins, are still just add-ons to the pretty stable core.

However, being mixed up and searching for own people is part of my life – in a totally different context. I feel as “third culture kid”, restless and rootless, research methodology wise.

I guess there are two reasons to it. First, it is doing research (and being enculturated methodology-wise) in a multidisciplinary research institute rather than being a part of a university group with clear set of norms, values and practices regarding research approaches. The second has something to do with weblogs.

Some time back we played with an idea of blogging as distributed apprenticeship, articulating own practices and learning from others often transcending time, distance and disciplinary boundaries. For me blogging has been exactly that – an opportunity to lurk and learn, going beyond expertise and practices available in my immediate surroundings.

Now it bites back. For me reading weblogs of researchers coming from contexts very different from my own brought a permanent exposure to “other” research cultures while I’m still trying to figure out what are the norms and practices of my own tribe (and what is my own tribe, by the way?). In this respect I feel like a kid who moves between different cultures while growing up. I know a lot about differences, fascinating local examples, needs to adapt and to speak the right language, but I don’t know where I belong and which values to stick to. I know that whatever research paradigm you are in the consistency is important, but sometimes I wonder if I can find it wondering in my own kunstkamera* with bits and pieces of research from other worlds…

* Here refers to Kunstkamera in St. Peterburg, founded as a collection of curiousities by Peter the Great and later turned into an ethnographic museum.

Archived version of this entry is available at http://blog.mathemagenic.com/2006/03/14.html#a1738; comments are here.

Tags: , , , , , ,

1 Comment »

July 30th 2005

Connecting the dots…

It’s a strange day - connecting dots, connecting people…

On echo chambers earlier today and in my aggregator now -

Blogs shape opinions, that once formed, become entrenched. (Shel Israel and Robert Scoble)

And then two different worlds click and connect - how boundary spanning works? Back to the talk.

BlogHer dinner - connecting names and faces, blogstalkers…

And behind all this the need to associate, to belong, to be there and the need to step aside, to observe, to reflect. Wondering if this is a methodology problem or personality trait. It’s all there - interdisciplinarity, identity crisis, being a boundary subject

So, how connecting the dots works?

Archived version of this entry is available at http://blog.mathemagenic.com/2005/07/30.html#a1626; comments are here.

Tags: ,

No Comments yet »

September 28th 2004

Blog networking, blogwalking and being a boundary subject

Just a few semi-related things:

1. For my thinking on weblogs in relation building (re: one-way relations and online/offline differences): links to AOIR stories about meeting other bloggers by Jill Walker, Torill Mortensen, Anders Fagerjord and Tracy Kennedy. It’s a nice reading if you want to have a pause with a smile :)

I managed to talk to many others from AOIR 5.0 bloggers list, but my personal fun stories include:

  • turning participant badge to see if someone I suspected to be Alex Halavais was him,
  • discovering Axel Bruns because someone next to me was heavily typing on Tablet PC,
  • jumping around impatiently before I could say to Jill Walker that I was “Lilia from Mathemagenic”,
  • chasing Eugene Gorny and Lois Ann Scheidt as I knew they were there, wanted to talk, but had no idea how to find them.

But to be fair I enjoyed most the moment when Alex said that my weblog was more serious than me :)

2. BlogWalk/AOIR intro experiences: weblog title may say more than your real name…

3. An observation: while on this trip I met two groups of bloggers (BlogWalk crowd and AOIR bloggers) that have some interconnections within they seem not to be connected. I experienced two different sets of references to blogging experiences and other bloggers… Doesn’t mean that they do not have anything in common (they do, as bringing Alex Halavais and Matt Mower for a dinner shows ;), just seem to live in different parts of the blogosphere.

And, as I belong to both groups I could proudly call myself a boundary subject, which is a living version of boundary object :)

4. Of course, weblogs are good for relation building, but f2f is so much fun… What could be better than sharing food and BlogWalking around London? For those interested (before the official announcement ;) - next guided tour is November 11-12 in Umea, Sweden.

This post also appears on channels BlogWalk and AOIR

Archived version of this entry is available at http://blog.mathemagenic.com/2004/09/28.html#a1363; comments are here.

Tags: , ,

No Comments yet »

January 22nd 2004

Connecting KnowledgeBoard and blogs

Recently I promised to write about connecting existing community and weblogs using Knowledge Board case. I have been thinking about it since starting KnowledgeBoard blogroll

Problem description in more detail: Ton Zijlstra after his contribution to the KnowledgeBoard went down because of blogging (scroll here)

What I would like is to re-start contributing to KnowledgeBoard but I am not looking forward to putting in double the time to keep up with both blogging and KnowledgeBoard, especially because there is overlap in topics and readership.

Is it a useful addition to be able to ping KnowledgeBoard with relevant blog-entries, and then have them incorporated into the KnowledgeBoard, with a link to the originating blog? That is taking this blogroll one step further, namely to provide KnowledgeBoard not only with the links to more content on KM, but also with the content itself. Making it searchable within KB would be nice too.

It would be nice if Knowledge Board allowed each member to create a weblog, but I don’t think it’s feasible: it would require too much resources to develop and to maintain. So I’m thinking about simple ways to integrate existing infrastructure and blogging.

*** do it right now, ** do when there are enough resources, * dreaming :)

Make Knowledge Board content accessible via RSS

Add RSS feeds to

  • *** Newswire
  • ** Each of SIGs and ZONEs
  • * Each article and forum threads (to monitor comments)

Support KnowledgeBoard blogroll

  • *** Make special URL for it
  • ** Aggregate KM-related blogs (at least something like “15 recent posts”, but better by topic)
  • ** Support search across weblogs in the list ** (could be done by third-party tools, but I couldn’t make it work :(
  • * Create an infrastructure to submit weblogs (e.g. a field in member profile) that automatically lists and aggregates them

Connect Knowledge Board with KM-related weblogs

  • *** Have “view RSS” code on the server and make it easy to include into exiting pages
  • ** Make all articles/discussion TrackBack-enabled

Any other suggestions?

Archived version of this entry is available at http://blog.mathemagenic.com/2004/01/22.html#a935; comments are here.

Tags: , ,

No Comments yet »

January 9th 2004

Boundary spanning

Writing previous post I realised that it would be interesting to look at “boundary spanning” activities of knowledge networkers. I know that there is some research on the topic, but I’m not familiar with it. What would be interesting from my perspective is better understanding of personal triggers and processes of boundary spanning and match-making:

  • How do you spot an opportunity to make a connection?
  • Why do you feel like connecting “related, but not connected” ideas or people?
  • How do you do make a connection (especially if it is not a single case of connecting two ideas from different fields, but a more complex case of connecting two totally different methodologies)?
  • What does it give to you?

In my case it’s much about enjoying diversity, having fun of spotting similarities and differences, feeling pity when different sides do not know about each other or don’t understand each other, even more fun of “translating” ideas and connecting people… I’m happy that I found quite early in my professional life that I enjoyed building bridges and was able to achieve results doing it, so I came to being conscious about choosing job and project opportunities that allow and require “boundary spanning”. The funny thing is that I didn’t reflect much on how I did it before writing previous post :)


Archived version of this entry is available at http://blog.mathemagenic.com/2004/01/09.html#a895; comments are here.

Tags: ,

No Comments yet »

January 9th 2004

Personal effectiveness, improvement.ru and boundary spanning

I feel like explaining how did I came to adding personal effectiveness to my “PhD mix”. It’s a very funny way - via Russian time-management community.

Some time back I discovered the improvement.ru community (btw, professionally I “belong”, mainly as a lurker, to two Russian on-line communities, this one and e-xecutive.ru). It’s a “time-management beyond time-management” community: taking time management as a starting point, its members talk about many related things, which could be anything from goal settings, scheduling and chronometric to fighting (or not) with laziness, using PDAs to organise ideas, biorhythms and healthy food. I would say, this is about things that you need to make the best of your life and a name of the web-site reflects it well.

For a few months I was lurking: reading and thinking that this would be a great space to write in Russian about weblogs as professional instruments. I’m still thinking about writing on weblogs, but at least I’ve got a bit more actionable sense getting into a time-management course, offered by the community leaders. My main motivation to start the course was about learning to make choices that would create more time to do things I want to do (link to loose ends piece). The funny thing is that I ended up with spending more effort thinking how the ideas behind this course are relevant for my PhD than in working on my time management skills :)

The course comes together with a book on time management (translated into English: Time management: from personal effectiveness to company development by Gleb Archangelsky). It’s a pity that most of you don’t read Russian, because this book connects “foreign” TM ideas with original Russian thinking on and around this topic. Between other things with methodological thinking and TRIZ, two Russian “ways of thinking” that I touched a bit in my professional life and placed into my “should learn in-depth after coming back to Russia” list. I’ll try to find more resources in English and to write more myself to add “boundary spanning” value.

I feel very funny reading this book. It’s like flying over the river with no bridge, but occasional swimmers across, spotting possible connections and thinking why/where/how to build a bridge. I guess this is because the book is very much “Russian”, building on Russian thinking around TM-related topics with only some connections with “foreign” ideas. It feels “heavily related, but not connected” with most of the things I was immersed in during last 2,5 years working abroad…

Coming back to my starting point. The book heavily uses the idea of time management as a starting point to improve personal effectiveness. And because I’m very eclectic and bring into my PhD research everything that seems to be relevant I used it once to explain why I focus on individual perspective in KM. It worked to get the message across, I tried it a few more times and then realised that it solves some of the problems with using knowledge work/knowledge worker as terms.

Archived version of this entry is available at http://blog.mathemagenic.com/2004/01/09.html#a894; comments are here.

Tags: , ,

No Comments yet »

Next »

  • Welcome!

    Like my house right now this blog is loved, but neglected space: finishing my dissertation and being a happy mom doesn't leave much energy for anything else. I'm almost there, starting to look forward to "after the PhD" life, like moving to an unknown country...
  • Archives

  • Categories