Here is the thread where we talked about Value Network Analysis: https://www.loomio.org/d/XgZktJyH/gathering-12-june-10-2021-collaborating-on-a-generative-process

Yesterday I had a conversation with a fellow volunteer at The Post Growth Institute. I asked to speak with Naryan because he knows how to conduct network mapping. I participated in a workshop that he offered on the subject a few weeks ago. I wanted guidance on network mapping for our crew.

It came a delightful surprise to learn that Naryan actually is working with a crew. It seems his crew is already doing what our crew hopes to do. They have formed a coherent working group of five people, within a larger cohort of 50 people. The metaphor Naryan used was a slime mold. Apparently slime molds exist as independent cells when food is abundant, but when food is more scarce the free cells come together and function as units to find food and help deliver it to each other. In the past few weeks, Naryan's crew has formed and begun working as an intelligent organism. He shared with me that after this short period of time, his crew has successfully identified so many ways to bring opportunities for work for each other that they couldn't possibly take advantage of them all. I found the conversation encouraging.

I recorded the last 30 minutes or so of our conversation. I missed the first 45 minutes because I didn't think to record it. Here are some notes on what he shared about being a crew, at least the kind of crew he is in.

1. The most important skills for his crew are social skills: how to develop a truly collaborative culture. This is hard work. He referred to adult development and authentic relating. These skills are needed in order for a collective consciousness to emerge. Trust between members is required.

2. Also important is systems thinking, and being able to identify which level of thinking and relating is active in the moment, otherwise people talk past one another.

3. Record relevant conversations so other members of the crew can learn from them.

4. If there are side conversations between crew members, report back to the crew anything that is important for other members to know.

The last 30 minutes of the conversation was about network mapping. He shared with me how network mapping is useful to a crew and what tool he uses to do it.

Robert and I made a first pass at creating a network map, which also can contain experiences, passions, knowledge areas, and skills, using the tool Naryan told me about: kumu.io. Robert will share about the map in a post after this one.

Here is the recording of the last part of my conversation with Naryan.

https://vimeo.com/647015305/cb11435bbf

On Slime Mold :)

https://radiopublic.com/SYSK/s1!7d0b4

Thank you @Jennifer Damashek for taking the time to explore this with Naryan and for sharing the notes and the recording.

Some initial thoughts:

1. As with "offers and needs" I believe that this needs to be a (continuous) process and not a (one-off) project ... for numerous reasons.

2. I am superficially familiar with kumu.io (played with a couple of times). It feels like a good tool, but I got the impression that it may have performance issues when scaling. I believe that Obsidian has similar (at least basic) capabilities that can be explored if we wish to continue to work within our newly established environment.

3. I believe that "not placing yourself" on the map is a (critical?) error as it allows for a gods-eye-view which is, in my opinion, risky (if not delusional).

4. I have a feeling that there is an information-architecture challenge here that could radically increase the leverage of such intuitive efforts.

5. I get the impression that mapping is somewhat of a fashion but I have not yet encountered (personally, directly) an effective application of this kind of mapping.

6. The relational network mapping does not seem to systemically address offers/needs which makes me feel that the mapping is incomplete.

7. IF (and that is a big if in my mind) this kind of work can be effective then I feel that individuals or crews creating separate maps is wasteful since the more enmeshed the network becomes (which is what seems to be happening) the more people will be working on separate maps which are the same map. This feels like it should be a collaborative effort on a larger scale.

8. I believe that such "living maps" can be an emergent outcome in the Digital Space. There, instead of mapping being a retro-active documentation effort it can be a dynamic (living, responsive, ever-changing) outcome that comes from relationships forming (without any additional explicit work).

Here are a few points in response to comment by @Ronen Hirsch and @Josh Fairhead.

1. My proposal is really just an experiment to allow us to get to know each other better, while exploring the circles, resources and connections we have to help with steps like the crowdsourcing initiative the crew discussed today. In that regard, it might help us shape our outreach communication.

2. Since Kumu is entirely data-driven, no one needs to actually look at the visual relationships if they don’t find that helpful. Kumu has an option to both view and edit the data directly, as well as doing so visually.

3. In addition to CSV/Excel and Google Sheets integrations, Kumu has a JSON-driven import/export mechanism import into Kumu (used internally for backup and transfer), so it’s possible that an Obsidian linkage could be established.

4. I want to state that gathering this data for myself, at least in terms of projects and connections was a lifesaver in one instance a couple of years ago when I got let go from a large consulting firm and had to free lance it for a bit. That’s why I had the data for the Kumu test handy, and it was easy to reformat it to import into Kumu. Just to note - we’re not stuck with Kumu as the data can be exported in the same ways discussed above.

5. I fully agree with Ronen that the network mapping has to be collaborative and the content will evolve dynamically. In fact, I have envisioned the identification of dynamic correlations and potential connections/collaboration opportunities as a valuable service in and of the digital space that we could approach at some point through integration with AI. @Josh Fairhead and I discussed this a little in our visit earlier this week.

6. The free version of kumu fully supports team collaboration, editing and extension. What it doesn’t support is automatic notification of changes. Jennifer and I had hoped to build this collaboratively, but if anyone is hesitant at using kumu, we can take the raw data (perhaps through a spreadsheet or form) and put it into kumu.

I hope this helps clarify the proposal’s intention.

Thanks,

Robert

Regarding point 4 - I am curious @Robert Damashek about your experience of revisiting your network:

1. was actual mapping (as in graphically/visually using a tool like Kumu.io) a part of the experience you had a couple of years ago or did you use some other tools such as a document/spreadsheet?

2. If it did not include graphic mapping, reflecting back on what you did do a couple of years ago, do you feel that visual mapping would have made your effort more effective?

3. If so, how?

@Ronen Hirsch When I did my actual mapping, I was using a freelancing company’s tool that used a spreadsheet metaphor, and it didn’t have an explicit visualization component. Instead it focused on analyzing the depth of a freelancer’s experience and comparing that with active opportunities. It also generated excellent reports that were useful for resumes.

Given that exercise and my subsequent use of the knowledge I gathered for research in conjunction with LinkedIn, I do think that the visual mapping of relationships would have been extremely useful in that research to help identify existing or new relationships and potential consulting opportunities.

That’s why I think it would be helpful to the crew to do the same for potential crowdfunding opportunities.

@Alex Rodriguez if your response to the Kumu.io proposal includes "I don't mind anyone playing with this in sacrificial spirit", should it not be an "abstain" instead of "object"?

In my mind "object" is a blocking signal that indicates that you are not OK with this moving forward.

What I hear you saying is that you are not interested in investing in this, but that you are OK if others want to move forward with it without you. Is my understanding correct?

Thank you @Ronen Hirsch for trying to clarify the response from @Alex Rodriguez . I was unclear how to proceed with an outcome from this poll, particularly because the crew had already approved the poll submitted by @Jennifer Damashek to map out our networks in support of identifying potential connections for either generating income or crowd funding. If this is indeed a block, then does someone want to submit a proposal for an alternative way of capturing the map? I’m definitely not stuck on using any specific tool. Kumu came up in a meeting @Jennifer Damashek and I had with an acquaintance from another solidarity community, and I was every impressed with the usefulness of the map he had built for that community. In fact, developing these kinds of maps is one way he makes a living as a consultant. After I tried Kumu out and figured out the import mechanism, I personally found it really easy to use. I would just like to move forward with gathering the data and building our network map.

Hmm, it seems that we aren't all on the same page about what the signals in Loomio polls mean. I voted "disagree", not "object", because I wanted to signal that although I wasn't personally sold that this was the best tool for the job, that I did not intend to block it moving forward. Had I objected, I would have voted "block." In any case, I think it is important that we establish some protocols for how we make decisions moving forward. This seems especially relevant to our scope this cycle around working with money.