When it comes to problem solving and innovation I have always thought "thinking outside the box" was the best way to proceed. After reading into decision 2.0 I find the beauty in it to be that no one person must think outside of their own box, but rather they must rely on everyone else's diverse background to create an entirely new and unique box for them to think in. I find that group collaboration is definitely a great way to tackle obstacles in the world, yet I find groups to have certain limitations in their goals and make up.
In order to be even more effective I think that groups should focus on improving an existing idea, product, etc. instead of trying to develop something new. I believe that groups are better suited towards fixing, improving, or adapting something that exists already instead of creating something new because people's expertise can be focused. If a group were asked to develop something new even with some objective, their immense knowledge would be as unwieldy as their numbers. When it comes to development a select few should initiate the project then throw it to the group for continuous rounds of refining and redevelopment.
In terms of the people that make up groups I imagine two groups: those who knowingly participate and those who do so unknowingly. The group that knowingly participates is described in the decision 2.0 article and consist of those who intentionally join to solve a problem. The second group I imagine are those who contribute data with their actions to the servers of companies they patronize. These people give companies their thoughts and wants without ever opening their mouths or clicking a mouse. All they have to do is buy the things they need or want and the patterns emerge. I find this second group contributes data to companies that lead them to their most important actions and changes. The data these people offer give insights into the future and into the things that they do not presently need, but cannot live without once they have them.
Well thats all for my first blog, I feel it is only appropriate for the comments of the group to determine my future writing style, length, etc.
(7/10)
Hey Charlie -
ReplyDeleteReally great post! I especially liked your point about how wisdom of crowds would be best used to improve existing ideas and products. I agree that using so many people of diverse backgrounds and expertise can cause more chaos than actual productivity, but there's a growing trend that big companies like EA (Electronic Arts) is starting to use their own employees to innovate new and upcoming games. They feel like they would be a good gauge for what would be the next best or most popular game. Other companies like Pitney Bowes poses high level managerial decisions to their own employees to solve a problem and have come out with great results. Maybe if the crowds are given certain parameters to innovate in, they can produce great ideas.
Also, I enjoy your writing style. It's very analytical and made me notice some points I didn't think of while I read the article.
-Simone
I like your connection to people buying things as giving information to companies. It reminded me of several articles I have read on loyalty cards and privacy. Every time people use a loyalty card their purchases are tracked and used for various sales purposes. The issue arose with being a somewhat unwilling contributor to the company, but it can be very valuable for targeted coupons and marketing decisions.
ReplyDelete