Revisiting Large-Scale Disruptive Collaboration
in the Age of Social Media
Azad M. Madni
Ann Majchrzak
Viterbi School of Engineering
University of Southern California
Marshall School of Business
University of Southern California
2013 CSSE Annual Research Review
University of Southern California
March 14, 2013
Copyright © 2013 Azad Madni and Ann Majchrzak
Outline
■
■
■
■
■
Disruptive Collaboration
Impact of Social Media
Transdisciplinary Collaboration
Complexity-Driven Tradeoffs
Provocative Conclusions
Copyright © 2013 Azad Madni and Ann Majchrzak
Large-Scale Disruptive Collaboration
■ Occurs when a large number of people work together to develop
new ideas that change business models, sources of revenues,
product trajectories, and technology roadmaps.
■ Invariably implies “paradigm shifts”
 cloud computing: from in-house IT infrastructure to “purchase by
the yard”
 agile development using SaaS: from in-house SW development to
outside SaaS capabilities leverage (buy SW, in-house crew provide
“glue”)
■ Need more of it!
Copyright © 2013 Azad Madni and Ann Majchrzak
Social Media Proliferation Affecting Nature
of Collaboration
■
■
■
■
■
■
Twitter
LinkedIn/Facebook-like Social Media
Chatter
Skype Screenshare / GotoMeeting
Kickstarter
MetadataTagging/pinning
Copyright © 2013 Azad Madni and Ann Majchrzak
Virtual/Hybrid?
Completely Virtual
Entirely Hybrid
Person Next Door
Copyright © 2013 Azad Madni and Ann Majchrzak
Multiple Collaboration Platforms
Copyright © 2013 Azad Madni and Ann Majchrzak
Traditional Teams No Longer Idea Sources
■ Crowdsourcing
 information acquisition
 e.g., Goldcorp (find gold deposits by making property info public)
■ Open Innovation / Expert Sourcing







Idea generation and evolution
attributed to Chesbrough, UC Berkeley
no longer develop ideas in-house;
develop ideas collaboratively with “strangers”
e.g., buy / license inventions and processes
e.g., expose own inventions through licensing, spin-offs
e.g., InnoCentive (global web community for open innovation)
Copyright © 2013 Azad Madni and Ann Majchrzak
Social Media Provides More Opportunities for
Transdisciplinary Collaboration
Research
Types
Comparison
Factors
Intradisciplinary
Multidisciplinary
Collaboration
Scope
 Among individuals within a
discipline
 Among individuals from
different disciplines
Specific Focus
 Deeper understanding
 Achieving compatibility in
within a research field (e.g.,
complex problem solving
quantum physics within
through collaboration
physics)
Key
Characteristics
 Generally, study same
“research objects,” (e.g.,
multiple branches of
modern physics)
 Tend to have
methodologies in common
 Tight communications
 Mostly speak a common
language
 Add to the body of
knowledge (BOK) of a
branch/ discipline
Interdisciplinary
Transdisciplinary
 Among disciplines through
collaborators
 Across and beyond disciplines
without regard to disciplinary
boundaries
 Creation of integrative
solutions potentially
resulting in mutual
enrichment of disciplines
 Finding hidden connections among
knowledge elements from different
disciplines
 Harmonize multiple,
 Development of shared
occasionally incompatible
concepts, methods,
aspects
epistemologies for explicit
 Integration limited to linking
information exchange and
research results
integration
 Susceptible to
 Can produce an entirely
misunderstanding
new discipline
(specialized languages)
 •Specialization causes
 Collaborators occasionally
knowledge fragmentation,
unsure about final
occasionally contradictory
resolution
knowledge
 Challenge the norm and generate
options that appear to violate
convention
 Look at problems from a disciplineneutral perspective
 Employ themes to conduct research
and build curricula
 Redefine disciplinary boundaries and
interfaces
adapted from Madni, A.M. “Transdisciplinarity: Reaching beyond Disciplines to Find Connections,”
Journal of Integrated Design and Process Science, Vol. 11, No. 1, March 2007, pp. 1-11.
Copyright © 2013 Azad Madni and Ann Majchrzak
Features of Transdisciplinary Collaboration
■ Goal is to work together to generate and evolve ideas and
find creative solutions that transcend disciplinary boundaries
■ Participants come together from the very start to
communicate and exchange ideas
■ Participants contribute their knowledge and expertise, but
approaches and solutions are determined collectively
■ Participants DO NOT develop their own answers to a
problem before collaboration
Copyright © 2013 Azad Madni and Ann Majchrzak
Energizing Transdisciplinary Collaboration
■
■
■
■
■
■
Ask Questions that cut across Disciplinary Boundaries
Encourage “ fluidity” and “serendipity”
Make assumptions explicit to overcome apparent differences
Set constraints aside to foster creative option generation
Actively reach out to other disciplines to make connections
Introduce a new metaphor, change level of abstraction,
share a picture or graphic to enhance sense-making
■ Focus on Idea / Problem / Goal, not Disciplinary Expertise
■ Multi-layered governance
Copyright © 2013 Azad Madni and Ann Majchrzak
Summary
■ Large-Scale Disruptive Collaboration is:
 Ubiquitous
 Multi-layered
 Complex combinations of formal and informal networks
 Ad hoc and Unbounded, as well as Stable and Bounded
 Mix of volunteerism and responsibility
 Mix of creativity and execution
Copyright © 2013 Azad Madni and Ann Majchrzak
New forms of Disruptive Collaboration
require managing Trade-offs/Tensions
■
■
■
■
■
■
Trade-off #1: Privacy vs Transparency
Trade-off #2: Squandering vs Withholding Resources
Trade-off #3: Risk Increase vs Decrease by Going Virtual
Trade-off #4: Governance vs Chaos in Collective Creativity
Trade-off #5: Stable leadership vs Temps in Governance
Trade-off #6: Platform Design vs Need for Adaptability
Copyright © 2013 Azad Madni and Ann Majchrzak
Privacy vs Transparency
■ Compromise between transparency and privacy
■ Key considerations include trust, familiarity, need for
disclosure
 e.g., how do you determine average salary or age of a
group without explicitly having group members provide
their salaries or ages?
This can be done by using secure
multi-party computation approach
Copyright © 2013 Azad Madni and Ann Majchrzak
Squandering vs Withholding Resources
■
■
■
■
Need to avoid resource imbalance
Resources are not just monetary
They include attention, willingness, information validation time
Throwing more resources at a bad idea or extraneous activity
is just as bad as providing inadequate resources for a good
idea or needed activity
Focus should be on what resources it
takes to evolve a good idea
Copyright © 2013 Azad Madni and Ann Majchrzak
Risk Increase vs Decrease by Going Virtual
■ Virtual collaboration reduces some risks while increasing
others
■ People come together to innovate and collectively lower risk
■ Individuals can also “shut down” when they have to perform in
front of others in the virtual environment
■ Collaboratively innovating is risky for some people
Potential solutions include anonymity in specific
contexts, assignment of different roles to collaborators
Copyright © 2013 Azad Madni and Ann Majchrzak
Risks
Copyright © 2013 Azad Madni and Ann Majchrzak
Governance vs Chaos in Collective Creativity
■ Need to control flexibility while encouraging creativity
■ This is a very real tension in collaboration and VOs
Collaborative Technology Functionality
1. Value Proposition or Artifact
2. Collective Wisdom
Goal Alignment
Collaborative
Processes
Disruptive
Collaborative
Innovation
Distributed
Leader Roles
Layers of Participation
4. Process
3. Governance
5. Enabling Technology
Focus on targeted, affordable flexibility
Copyright © 2013 Azad Madni and Ann Majchrzak
Layers of Participation
1
Site Evangelists
Knowledge Refactorers*
Knowledge Minor League Editors
Knowledge Contributors (“add only”)
100…1,000
Lurkers
* “Refactoring is the process of rewriting written material to improve its readability or
structure, with the explicit purpose of keeping its meaning or behavior.”
Copyright © 2013 Azad Madni and Ann Majchrzak
Stable Leadership vs Temporary Governance
■ Context determines how this tradeoff is made
■ Concept of leadership role is key
■ Need a fluid way to go from stable core leadership to organic
volunteers temporarily performing in governance roles
Disaggregate leadership roles; allocate leadership
characteristics to these roles; assign agents with specific
leadership characteristics to these roles; increase flexibility
Copyright © 2013 Azad Madni and Ann Majchrzak
Platform Design vs Need for Adaptability
■ Platform standardizes development and reduces
development risks
■ An over-specified platform will suffer from a lack of
evolvability and may have to be discarded
■ Finding the “sweet spot” is a challenge and a high payoff
research problem
Incorporate real options in platform design to exploit
potential breakthroughs w/o increasing development risks
Copyright © 2013 Azad Madni and Ann Majchrzak
Product Platform Generation and Evolution
Copyright © 2013 Azad Madni and Ann Majchrzak
Provocative Conclusions
■
■
■
■
■
■
Focus on idea generation and evolution enabled by technology, people
and organizations, not view each factor in isolation
Adopt ideas as the unit of analysis, not exclusively focus on
resolution of conflicts among collaborators
Exploit context to rapidly evolve ideas, not impose constraints to
prematurely prune them
Focus on collaboration behavior, not virtual organization structure
View organizations as organisms with attributes (e.g., people, culture,
motivation) that can be exploited, not as a constraining function
Focus on maintaining requisite variety over time, not just “success”
Copyright © 2013 Azad Madni and Ann Majchrzak
References
■ Madni, A.M. “Transdisciplinarity: Reaching Beyond Disciplines to Find
Connections,” Journal of Integrated Design and Process Science, Vol.
11, No. 1, March 2007, pp. 1-11.
■ Majchrzak, A., More, P.H. B., Faraj, S. Transcending Knowledge
Differences in Cross-Functional Teams, Organization Science,
July/August 2012, vol. 23, no. 4, 951-970
Copyright © 2013 Azad Madni and Ann Majchrzak
Thank You!
Copyright © 2013 Azad Madni and Ann Majchrzak