Theo Priestley on Social #BPM

  • April 14, 2010
  • Scott
  • 0 Comments

Theo Priestley on Social BPM (vs. Traditional):

“The simple answer is that hierarchy is good for repeatability and measurability, whereas self-organizing networks are better at invention,” Gabe said, “There are a lot of side effects and consequences. The lack of titles (roles) is primarily an internal signaling tool.”

“The alternate answer is that organizations that think they are hierarchical actually don’t gain advantage by it (they actually have hidden networks), and that the hierarchical appearance is the result of rent-seeking.”

So can we not design and define an enterprise on the same principles and see the same effect but on a much grander scale ? Is there a half-way house where both ideals can co-exist until we are ready to throw the shackles away for good?

Why not?

Related Posts
  • July 18, 2018
  • Ariana
  • 0 Comments

We're pleased to announce all of the sponsors for Driven 2018. Automation Anywhere Camunda Bizagi ...

  • July 16, 2018
  • Ariana
  • 0 Comments

Driven 2018 is coming up quick and we wanted to share some of our most anticipated sessions with you. You can ...

  • July 15, 2018
  • Scott
  • 0 Comments

From nearly the first year I began writing this blog on behalf of BP3, pundits and commentators have predicted...