Dave Pollard has consistently kicked out some brilliant ideas and observations. I ran across this one again Link: The Psychology of Information: Why we don't share. I like it because it provides a framework to start to dig into the reasons our movement is broken and it has a nice simple definition break between data, information and knowledge.
I use the definitions of data, information and knowledge shown at right. Information means literally "to put form to" and knowledge comes from the same root as the word "cunning" which suggests application, not collection. So, for example, laboratory sample results are data, a theory of the cause of a disease stemming from that data is information, and a vaccine for the disease is knowledge. Another example: Test scores of grade three students are data, an analysis of the learning needs of those students is information, and the resultant learning curriculum is knowledge.
We don't share the polling data and the consultants assessment of what the data shows us. WE just put out talking points. Maybe we can get foundations to start to breakup the results into the 3 discrete products. Voter file data, various analysis of voter files, then let the groups build voter activation strategies and knowledge from there rather than all the groups and progressives all investing in the data and information. We want to build actionable knowledge. We need data and information. To do that we must slowly break our organizations and the movement into a cohesive supply chain feeding out incremental data and information in "the commons" and compete on knowledge.
I also like the 16 resources for failure and wanted to riff on new thinking, ideas or tools solve the problems.
1 Bad news rarely travels -- We need an (Progressive campaigns disaster team (PCDT) a NTSB for progressive campaigns. What didn't work? What are the failure points? How do you find the failure points early? What data foreshadows failure in a campaign? How can those results be shared and turned into operating guidelines for field, communications, fundraising and donors? The PCDT should have quick and unfettered access and be looking at the systems failure (sure sometimes it is the pilot but what saftey systems prevent the pilot from making personal mistakes)
2. People share information generously peer-to-peer, Create a more transparent and open process for sharing information across peer groups. Foster more peer groups (river leaders, NOI, land trust alliance, web of change, nten, etc)
3. People find it easier and more satisfying to reinvent the wheel: Give them clear done: not done lists across organizations and movements and in investment portfolios: Make more work creative commons so people can remix and remash content, images, video, etc.
4. People only accept and internalize information that fits with their mental models and frames: ... stumped...
5. People cannot readily differentiate useful information from useless information: Most people are not very good at separating what's important from what's not.: Group publication: group filtering: tagging.... There are lots of solutions emerging in this space. Publish to share. Publish so others know what you are interested in. Participate in discussions offline and online that focus on establishing group access to inforamtion and most importantly group filtering of information, data and knowledge that is important.
6. The true cost of acquiring information and the cost of not knowing are both greatly underestimated in most organizations: Shout that from the roof tops! We must design cheaper ways to collect information wikis, survey monkey, etc. (mediavolunteer.org distributed research) and movement scale software (Greenmediatoolshed.org) (benefits and network synchronizing effects built in beyond a single organization or campaign software).
7. People know more than they can tell, and tell more than they can write down: Start thinking of the web as more than a text conversation. We have jumped from text to video. We need to take a step back and think of the 200 million cell phones as a campaign channel (www.mobileactive.org) How are we thinking about story telling and voice to open new and often more powerful communication into the mix of our advocacy. Not phone as sms machine but tapping the voice of the movement to share stories and insights.
9. Most people want their friends, and even people they don't know, to succeed, and people they dislike to fail We need to build social ties across more of the movement. The social ties should be cultivated as a strategic asset.
10. People are averse to sharing information orally, and even more averse to sharing it in written form, if they perceive any risk of it being misused or misinterpreted:
Foster some secure anonymous blogs and channels for information assessment and debate. (IOWA futures market) I would love to see all grants and initiatives of over $1,000,000 placed into a market analysis and then let the community and program officers and staff bet the likely winners and losers.
11. People are generally reluctant to admit they don't know, or don't understand, something: The higher in the hierarchy you are, the more this applies. So higher-ups tend to consult with other higher-ups, leading to groupthink, and to delegate searches for information to underlings somewhat cryptically. All large institutions should have "fellows" programs shifting junior staff and diverse opinions through senior management meetings for 6-10 meetings. The reps should be able to submit anonymous group think alerts after each meeting to be mixed in with comments on group think from other management team members. This could be at a board meeting or senior staff and strategy level.
12. People don't take care of shared information resources: The poor condition of many centralized repositories -- obsolete, incomplete, and undecipherable content, and low use -- attests to the fact that the Tragedy of the Commons also applies to information.
Informaiton should be built in to start to create more data and intelligence form use and passively rather than just an "active" information system. (del.icio.us)
13. Many organizations have internal performance evaluation systems that pit employees against each other for limited promotions or bonuses 'marked on the curve'.
In the campaign context it even spreads to the incentives across the movement. . Donor and media evaluation often pits groups against each other that they want to explicitly want to work together. New evaluation metrics around network participation and network leadership should be published for sectors of interest. What resourses did you give away to help others in your sector? what percentage of your overall budget is that? How many outside events and meeting did you attend? how many one to many vs. many to many communication channels has your campaign established? Name three times you negotiated away from your original position because others had better ideas, plans, websites, or field operatives? Whose work is better than yours in this issue area?
14. Some modest people underestimate the value of what they know:
...stumped....please share ya ll.
15. We all learn differently: the format is likely to be suboptimal for most of the people involved. develop a check list for learning types and look at how the content and campaign can connect across different types of learners. How do people get hands on with the concepts?
16. Rewards for sharing knowledge don't work: Knowledge sharing must be designed to be organic, driven by a desire for success and cultural. If knowledge sharing across organizations is the key stumbling block then the organic connections, tools, metrics and culture must be crafted both inside the organizations and beyond at a macro-organizational design level. (Women's Health and Environment Initiative, Connect.us, www.onenw.org)
As a movement, we often try to share "knowledge" as finished product but we are really bad exposing data and information that all of us could use to improve our strategy and effectiveness. For example... We have lots of great how to write email guides or press guides but few places to turn to dig into the data of how many press meetings, press calls and press releases did the successful campaign send? Where is our collective data and information that feeds the knowledge of how to do better advocacy? There are small groups of nerds that share data and information on GOTV activities, direct mail, etc. but exchange is not where it should be for allied movements.
