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
  • October 18, 2017
  • Scott
  • 0 Comments

The Institute For Robotic Automation defines RPA as: Robotic Process Automation (RPA) refers to automation wh...

  • October 18, 2017
  • Ariana
  • 0 Comments

Headless BPM from BP3 on Vimeo. In this video, Carmen Galicia walks through using external user interface...

  • October 10, 2017
  • Ariana
  • 0 Comments

Planning Your Project Roadmap from BP3 on Vimeo. In this video, Andrew Paier talks through getting started ...