tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-312551883381829534.post8200425647411710017..comments2023-10-30T16:27:31.215+01:00Comments on infoarch: IBM and the NumeratiAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14145886833443377887noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-312551883381829534.post-4792367070970101982012-06-09T11:27:41.167+02:002012-06-09T11:27:41.167+02:00I am very pleased to find this blog. I want to tha...I am very pleased to find this blog. I want to thank for your time for this wonderful read!!! Keep Sharing, I'll surely be looking for more.Brandon Piercehttp://anthonycamp.tumblr.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-312551883381829534.post-30926451714606174272009-06-05T13:02:43.673+02:002009-06-05T13:02:43.673+02:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-312551883381829534.post-82154127800592414472008-12-02T21:58:00.000+01:002008-12-02T21:58:00.000+01:00Hi Samuel! Very well written blog post, indeed! Gl...Hi Samuel! Very well written blog post, indeed! Glad you brought it into your blog and developed the topic at large. I must say I completely agree with Ton on the approach. It is so much against Web 2.0! Why? Because *I* am not in control of what I share, when I share it and with whom I share it. As soon as a system like that kicks in I lose that control of my own privacy, which *I* define, not the company. I find it much more rewarding that the business value and trusts me for doing the professional job I was hired for, and as such it should understand as well there are some things I would want to share and others I wouldn't want to. That initiative mentioned in the book doesn't certainly indicate there would be choice, which I think is what Web 2.0 nails it down to all along. <BR/><BR/>Which is the main reason why I created that blog post sharing a few thoughts from myself as well as some other thoughts from IBM itself and how it stands to it. Yes, I haven't read the book yet, all of these are my two cents from reading the preview, further extensive reviews on the book and other bloggers commenting on the subject. I may be able to read it soon and provide some insights, but thought I would share these comments over here as well. <BR/><BR/>Thanks again for this lovely blog post!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-312551883381829534.post-25916695649176569132008-12-02T20:33:00.000+01:002008-12-02T20:33:00.000+01:00It does sound scary, yes.You ask: Isn't this part ...It does sound scary, yes.<BR/>You ask: Isn't this part of what the web 2.0 world is showing us?<BR/><BR/>My answer it is completely unlike web2.0! <BR/>In Web2.0 I decide what to share, and with whom, and after I have shared I remain the visible owner of that which I shared. What I share serves me personally firt and foremost: it strengthens my relationships with others.<BR/>What you describe reads more like doing 'a Taylor' on your employees: looking in minute detail at what a person is doing and derive your process and efficiency gains from that. It may create transparancy in a sense, but not of the voluntary kind, the transparancy created is not owned by the originator of the data, and it seems only meant for a couple of people to use. This is more about creating a power difference based on an information advantage than it is about transparancy and sharing information.<BR/><BR/>All just from the gist of your description, and <A HREF="http://www.cognitive-edge.com/blogs/dave/2008/09/reducing_your_employees_to_num.php" REL="nofollow">Dave Snowdens response</A> from september as well as <A HREF="http://www.elsua.net/2008/10/20/the-numerati-reducing-your-employees-to-numbers/" REL="nofollow">Luis response</A>, not from reading the actual book.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com