H and I would like to book our Thanksgiving holiday flights to Chicago as soon as possible, within the next day or two actually. I've done all the research in terms of airlines and flight times but I am stuck when it comes to getting to and from the airport.

We are going to fly United Airlines out of either LAX (Los Angeles International Airport) or SNA (John Wayne Airport). That's the easy part. Now we need to find out the most economical and logical airport to fly in and out of. We've narrowed things down to the following ...

• We could drive ourselves to the airport and park in a long term lot - This is certainly the most convenient option but it also has the opportunity to be the most expensive. We've left our car in lots before when traveling, and while I prefer our vehicle to remain in our secure parking area here at our residence, we are not adverse to some good old fashion park 'n fly. A quick search told me long-term rates at LAX are $8-10 per day while SNA will set us back $14-17.
• Shuttles or public transportation - I have to give some major props to Chicago on this one since we would often take a bus to a train or a train to a train right into Midway or O'Hare - $2.00 for the entire trip, $4 to get there and home. I'm aware of the FlyAway service from Union Station to LAX which would cost us $13 each round trip. Not exactly the bargain rates of Chicago but not terrible all things considered. Getting to and from SNA seems to be more difficult however. As far as I can tell public transportation will get us to a station approximately 10 miles from the airport which doesn't really solve the problem.

So good people of Los Angeles ... Ideas? Suggestions?

• NOTHING is perfect!

• NO ONE has the answer!

• EVERYONE wants CHANGE!

Perhaps that is why marriages don't last, churches are biligerently different, businesses aren't profitable, cities aren't hospitable, politics have replaced statesmanship. and governments aren't friendly.

If we all seek 'answers' - then there must be 'questions' from which answers would of course result. Instead, we are often busy seeking ways to be heard - rather than listening. And if listening for the best answers is the better approach, shouldn't we be seeking the BEST 'questions' (like that one for instance)?. For anything to change, some things have to be decided first:

• Who gets to decide (representation)
• How will they(we) decide (objectivity)
• Who gets the benefits of the change (impacts)
• When will the changes take effect (priority)
• And, there are certainly more questions...

In their recent book 'How The Wise Decide', authors Aaron Sandoski and Bryn Zeckhauser provide six fundamental principles that are consistently used by the successful leaders whom they studied. Their observations confirmed that these six concepts are both true and useful for anyone, universally:

• Go to the Source
• Fill a Room with Barbarians
• Conquer the Fear of Risk
• Make Vision Your Daily Guide
• Listen with Purpose
• Be Transparent

If those are true for business, how would they work for government, city councils, non-profits, fraternal or religious groups, or even our individual thought patterns? That is another good question. How would our relationships, communities, or nations work if we were consistently guided in those principals, in that process, and toward the proven benefit of 'success'? What core questions can give us those answers, those results?.

The conviction to find those questions is a challenge I embraced after reflecting on broken conversations, broken relationships, broken processes, broken companies, broken churches, broken governance, and the broken lives that lay in the wake of all those patterns of broken thinking. Again, I do not wish to lay claim, just reflect that in my own parallel experience I too am a believer, witness, and recipient of the missed opportunities of the past.

However, I am also now aware of the unlimited power that is possible in the future by these truths and the 'profound' questions that could change our way of thinking - about our beliefs, about each other, about our world.

Turns out that it may take only six simple and familiar questions to change our way of thinking - for good. Since four questions form the core process, I have called it ASK4™ - for now. The other two questions relate to us as people - on which the process depends and for whom the benefits accrue. The questions can be used as a way to:

• Make Vision My Daily Guide - goal-focused (hurdle-aware)
• Fill a Room with Barbarians - relish others' opinions
• Conquer the Fear of Risk - allow for unlimited outcomes
• Go to the Source - drop my 'because'/get to the root cause
• Listen with Purpose - retain vision while allowing for options
• Be Transparent - accept my limits and seek the highest good

By viewing the world through the simple 6-question lens, it is possible to easily and consistently engage these principles in any situation to:

• Normalize the perspective – to enable any participant at any level in any culture/language to describe THEIR situation/need/or offer
• Formalize the process - for collecting everyone's feedback so that forward progress can be initiated/tracked/completed/measured
• Legitimize participants – by evaluating and then endorsing those thought leaders who cooperate to craft viable solutions
• Recognize the contributors - reward champions for their support
• Optimize performance – engage, manage, and enhance a continuous improvement process and monitor its pertinent results
• Organize involvement– so that everyone can share in the creation of viable solutions

- so that we all can...

• Realize - these same cooperative benefits, globally

As now defined ASK4™ is useful as a tool for process improvement. It can also become a powerful online tool for 'crowd-sourcing'. It does change our conversations, it will change our collaboration, it can change our consensus, or even CHANGE - our world.

We'll see...

What’s about YOU? - care to comment?

- dare to COOPERATE?

Opinions are important - and so are outcomes!

That's why information is so important to making critical decisions. Ask anyone and you will get an opinion - or two. Then ask for the reason behind their opinion and you will eventually uncover some vested interest, the true desire that is being leveraged 'because..' that need is what is REALLY wanted. We need to be on the critical path toward the actual benefit. Instead, we waste our energy on misplaced efforts based on some mis-stated intentions.

What's the 'carbon footprint' of misinformation?

Why wouldn't it be better to actually 'state' the real issue, identify the real cause, address that real need, and create real and lasting solutions? If information is the 'vehicle', then perhaps it has to do with how we're 'driving'.

Who is at the wheel, and where are 'they' taking us..?

Imagine getting on a bus marked 'Downtown' and arriving instead at the dead end of some country road. Recent interest in 'The Press' has begun to uncover the accidental if not intentional collusion of those who would 'suppress' or overlook important insights, invite us on board with their 'weighted' opinions, and then wrongfully take us to uninformed conclusions, ineffective decisions, and unintended results. What information leads us to global decisions that lead us to wars? What influences are behind the efforts to place troops in harms way - or even call them home again, perhaps before ultimate victory? How could Hillary have lost to Barrack? What insight has been 'overlooked' that perhaps even now could change results - if it was uncovered, remained unbiased, and then made public to everyone's benefit?

Whether personal, secular, religious, political, or governmental, any incremental 'white lie' (or mis-statement that we might overlook as just 'spin') always aggregates to a larger mis-perception, and eventually to some level of 'tyranny'. Unfortunately, our personal DECISION processes, including our political systems and voting choices, ride on this broken vehicle, delivering us to unintended locations and even greater peril.

It has to stop - and today is the ONLY time we are alloted!

Tomorrow we will have already been mislead by managed news channels, today's biased pundits ('spin doctors'?) and their misplaced or intentional beguiling. Our destiny may already be some unintended location from which there may be no easy return.

We can't stop some global tyranny without addressing personal responsibility - OURS (not theirs). We (each) need to know the truth and share the truth so we can each act in our individual and collective interest.

We can not collectively get to the truth by being 'politically correct' and agreeing to overlook those little 'unimportant' nuances that serve the other person 'because...' that's where they want us to go - for their self-interest.

Our challenge is always 'to challenge'..! The truth will surface.

Clearly, obviating the truth can result in lack of clarity, confusion, or even powerful propaganda to re-direct the minds and decisions of those who 'count' (or vote). Are you impressed, suppressed, depressed - ?

• Whose opinion shapes your decisions?
• Whose 'bus' are you riding -where is it REALLY going?
• Why aren't YOU 'driving' your own thought processes?
• Where are you currently - need a ride back 'downtown'..?

Maybe it's time to ASK4™ it..

What’s about YOU? - care to comment?

- dare to COOPERATE?

While that is serious enough, there is a parallel universe of contenders, in business. Their habits of 'excess' have positioned them in exactly the same place where their ability to compete is diminished. They are too top-heavy in management or carrying too large a 'spare tire' of unproductive personnel who follow antiquated 'training', inefficient processes, and the like. While some struggle and defend their inability to loose this 'poundage', others have found ways to trim budgets and become 'lean' and more 'agile' in their practices. Most have done so by returning to a proven diet of basic 'food groups' of business importance. And in an interesting parallel, many of those same thought leaders have also realized the business benefits of that same healthy approach in the lifestyles of their personnel. They have all found that common basic solution. rather than giving up and quitting.

Seth Goodin in his book - 'The DIP' looks (perhaps as one-of-a-kind) on the subject of 'quitting'. Having been trained on a diet of "try-try-try", the mere subject made me reluctant to consider its contents. What became clear after listening to his video interview - is that

true Olympians don't practice everyone else's sport.

They first consider their chances - and then focus on ONLY their own skill - to its excellence. Individually they can be at their best, and collectively as a team they can then rack up more 'gold' than competitors.

We need that Olympic reminder every four years. Somewhere along the way to life's 'games', many have abandoned some of those principles - in favor of letting everyone 'train' everyone else to 'eat' whatever they want, letting anyone 'participate', and then giving everyone a 'medal'. What that may be leading to is not only unhealthy individuals but also

unproductive companies and even indefensible nations.

As we enter the new relationship economy, the online global competition can uncover every possible flaw in our 'routines', openly, in front of the entire world, and in a matter of seconds. While we may prefer a quick fix or cosmetic surgery cover-up, the new transparency of the internet will expose how out-of-shape we truly are - individually and collectively. It will dynamically measure how we adjust to each other as team members and our global standings as well.

The challenge - and the opportunity - all lie in how we accept our individual responsibility to become 'fit' for this global competition.

We will all participate. We will all be judged. And...

Someone will win!

The question is:

How can we train to qualify - so we can at least compete?

ASK4™ CAN BE…

(THE QUESTIONS THAT FIND…)

THE ANSWERS YOU NEED!

PLEASE NOTE: While this website is my personal initiative, the ASK4™ approach is a participant-managed collaboration platform and the U-Netted Nations™ is the result of our ‘Collaboration On Purpose’. My voice becomes one in a million - immediately.

WHAT ABOUT YOU? - CARE TO COMMENT?

- DARE TO COOPERATE?

]]> http://unettednations.wordpress.com/?p=312 Sun, 10 Aug 2008 06:33:40 +0000 gsbigger http://unettednations.wordpress.com/?p=312 Piled high on the heap of human experience is the visible evidence of our misplaced effort and ineffective decisions. Perhaps forgotten are the words of prophets and sages.

Visible to those who will look closely are the patterns of information, insight, consensus, and initiative that resulted in each set of historical conditions. Taken as a model, that sequence can afford the incremental benefits that can aggregate to sustainable progress. Ignored, the results will testify to individual ignorance, global waste.

No matter what the situation or condition or issue, certain core things are common and can easily be described, evaluated, proposed, adjusted or initiated, and then considered again to ensure forward progress. Since each such structured approach creates a resulting end-point, other similarly structured components can be leveraged off that prior foundation. Repeat that consistently and your incremental insight becomes organized infrastructure, enterprise management, global value.

Let's convert that to reality. In his book 'Business School for People Who Like Helping People' - Robert Kyosaki presents his tetrahedron model of the learning pyramid. It is composed of four elements of information or facets of knowledge. Ever wonder why a university was comprised of four colleges - that have attendees that also represent four personalities?  Perhaps each person (type) is a ready-made component that can assimilate well in one of four dimensions but share a convergent quest to better serve together in their aggregated world.

Do they want group consensus - help them find and share individual insight. Want them to launch large initiatives - help them manage each of their individual activities. There has to be a model and it must be effective in its smallest dimension to have integrity at its ultimate aggregated infrastructure design.

Do they want better government and (less 'politics') - help them to choose STATESMEN (not mere politicians). Do they want democracy and liberty for all - help them prevent individual anarchy. Anarchy ignores the model of cooperation, and its lack of ethics treads on the rights of others - at all levels.

The model itself can also become tyranny - if it is not kept true to form at the basic design element level. Each decision has to be both formalized and co-managed by ALL those it is designed to represent. Nothing can be added to or taken from its core structure or it no longer fits everyone - or works for anyone.

What is that minimal structure that can:

share divergent insight objectively

represent all stakeholders equitably

find uniform consensus on root cause

spawn initiatives that are sustainable

and above all, prevent the tyranny of excess constraint?

There are only four questions that apply to the incremental level and they can be scaled to the aggregate infrastructure level as well. Used as a way of thinking, I will gain insight. Shared as a means for our discussion, we can create a vision. As the basis of our collaboration, we can find a consensus. Mapped to our activity, it gives us focused direction. Polled against our initiatives it measures our progress. And should anything occur that is not to our individual or group liking, we can all check it against its own core design for clarification, resolution, and convergence into our co-managed decisions and self-improving results. It supports meaningful change - 24/7/365.

It' so simple that anyone could have thought of it - and some may already have. What they may not have noticed is that it has a familiar approach. The only rules are that WE must all 'ASK4' it.

ASK4™ CAN BE…

(THE QUESTIONS THAT FIND…)

THE ANSWERS YOU NEED!

PLEASE NOTE: While this website is my personal initiative, the ASK4™ approach is a participant-managed collaboration platform and the U-Netted Nations™ is the result of our ‘Collaboration On Purpose’. My voice becomes one in a million - immediately.

WHAT ABOUT YOU? - CARE TO COMMENT?

- DARE TO COOPERATE?

La teoria havia nascut amb la intenció de saber quants intermediaris calen per connectar dos persones qualsevol del planeta. Dos persones que mantenen un llaç estan a un grau de distància. L'amic d'un amic nostre està a 2 graus de distància. I així consecutivament.

Evidentment, els 6,6 graus de distància són una mitjana. Algunes persones estan a distàncies molt superiors, mentre que altres ho estan a només 1.

L'estudi ha establert que entre dos contactes qualsevol es crea un llaç quan han intercanviat una conversa (de text). Una manera molt més correcta de fer-ho del què ho han fet altres amb el Facebook. Perquè allà el llaç entre dos persones és més dubtós, donat que dos contactes poden no haver intercanviat mai una conversa, ni saber qui és l'altre.

Pareix que les successives proves que s'han fet per comprovar els graus de distància entre totes les persones del planeta, ja siga per correu postal o per correu electrònic, se situen entre els 6 i els 7 graus de mitjana. És clar, mesurant-ho amb correu electrònic, xarxes socials en línia o missatgeria instantània, queda exclosa la major part de la humanitat. Per exemple, els meus pares no tenen cap connexió amb mi, segons l'experiment. I això que hem compartit alguna menjada ;) Suposo que els graus de distància de la generació messenger són molts menys que els de la generació dels seus pares. Així que en realitat el valor de 6,6 deu ser molt superior... Però val la pena veure estudis així.

• Notícia original al Washington Post: Instant-Messagers Really Are About Six Degrees from Kevin Bacon
• Notícia molt ben explicada a Alt1040
• Notícia a RTVE: El Messenger demuestra la teoría de los seis grados (Vigileu, a la notícia parlen de la teoria dels sis graus com d'una llegenda urbana)

Foto de BigBlue

This 'tennis' commercial for The Ladders (online resumes) depicts job search as a tennis match - with few if any rules, and everyone getting in on the game - ALL at once.

Imagine yourself somewhere in this picture. You are...in the game - and someone's at fault!

This metaphor has many more applications, like showing the current state of the internet - social networking in particular. Everyone wants to be on the court - serving up their opinion or offering, standing behind the net that separates them from the 'other side', or trying to referee others who have served up something that is clearly out of bounds - "FAULT!!"...

Problem is (in WEB 2.0), there is no pre-qualification, no boundaries, no rules for winning, no game plan. Consider the Infosphere of the internet in which anyone can utter those words that pre-announce our fateful demise: "Here, hold my beer and watch this...". Seen the latest idiot's 15 seconds of infamy video?

Online I can out-shout you, can out-rant you, can out-perform you,,, ad nausea and etcetera. In the freedom that came with this self-publishing world, anyone can say anything, anytime, to anyone else - often with little positive effect. While rushing to have a say in the infinite open space of the web, we forgot to notice that total democracy can equate to total anarchy.

Who's at fault for all that - WE are.

But 'we' can't change that - unless 'I' choose to do so - and come to understand and appreciate and adhere to at least a few simple agreements.

How can "I" change all that? One insight at a time! One conversation at a time! One consensus at a time! One decision at a time! One initiative at a time! Then having done that, one re-consideration at a time!

Are you that 'ONE' ?

The realization that content is only as useful as its relevance is now at the forefront of the Semantic WEB 3.0. We are now advancing (back) to the structured approach that partitions our conversations and sequences our steps toward progress. Any database architect or project manager could have seen this dilemma coming and offered an insight if not a solution, if anyone was paying attention. Its hard to be heard as an 'official' when (virtually) everyone (else) is also in charge. For now there is no universally recognized approach. That will have to be one of the first things to change, and then keep changing.

It is nice to want to give everyone some playing time. But to do so at least requires a defined court, a defined manner and time to play, some means of determining official results so the next players can take the court as well.

• Who should define that? - WE should.
• Who should get to play? - WE should.
• Who should call foul? - WE should

What will that new 'game' look like? (in terms of WEB 3.0)

• Imagine a single portal through which you can express yourself freely
• Imagine an awareness of everyone's ideas within a global perspective
• Imagine an economy in which your needs and expertise are valued
• Imagine a community in which your relationships are enhanced
• Imagine a self-correcting process of self-governance, globally
• Imagine everyone adhering to and benefiting from cooperation
• Imagine cooperation coming from consensus, shared insight
• Imagine shared insight coming from objective collaboration
• Imagine just enough structure to co-manage conversations
• Imagine that all you had to do was "ASK for it"...
• Imagine yourself as a U-Netted Nations citizen
• Imagine consistently getting what you need
• Imagine supplying what others desire
• Imagine who could win? - WE should!

Game On..?

ASK4™ CAN BE…

(THE QUESTIONS THAT FIND…)

THE ANSWERS YOU NEED!

PLEASE NOTE: While this website is my personal initiative, the ASK4™ approach is a participant-managed collaboration platform and the U-Netted Nations™ is the result of our ‘Collaboration On Purpose’. My voice becomes one in a million - immediately.

WHAT ABOUT YOU? - CARE TO COMMENT?

- DARE TO COOPERATE?

Collaboration on Purpose - PRICELESS

What's the difference? - YOU. Unless there is something in it for me (YOU), I don't particularly care (do you?). So the results of my search must be relevant to me - to where I live, to what I'm doing, to whether that is working, or if I'm going to become successful, or even just survive.

If I am going to make any progress in my efforts, I need to know:

• if an answer already exists (or needs to be created)
• if a solution has been tried and proven (research)
• if there is a support group to assist me (team/company/NPO)
• if I can speak to someone about it (expert/community of practice
• if what I'm about to do will be acceptable to others, or sustainable

But instantly I encounter the same old problem I have always had - it takes 'too long'. I can search - then I have to sort through the hits- and follow a link - that leads to a WIKI that re-defines my problem - that leads me to new links that lead me back to another search engine - that leads me to a blog that belittles my ignorance on the subject - that leaves me upset and even more anxious - as I grab my cellphone and text my friend for help since he isn't answering my call. So I dredge out the yellow pages - and look for an out-call computer tech and a local psychologist - and I read my dictionary while I await their eventual 'treatment' for the computerized benefits that are virtually driving me crazy.

Somehow I need to be able to make instant use of instant answers.

Somehow I expect nothing less from my new instant world on the internet - that seems to be changing my life - by the instant. If my new reality is to be 'virtual', then I want to have the same 'say-so' as virtually everyone else in its global customer suggestion box. I don't want your dated 'WEB 2.0 sticky note' answer - posted somewhere in a he-said-she-said discussion thread on some blog 'bulletin board' - that I can't seem to find.

I may need answers virtually anytime day or night. I don't want to have to engage a consultant to teach me how to search-and-rescue what you have already saved - and could offer to me at fair market value. The carbon footprint of that lost time could be important - to both of us - and NOW would be none too soon for some issues that need a relevant answer - TODAY!.

My request:

• I want my own personal portal to the WORLD(-WideWeb)
• I want to search in the context of my local PROBLEM
• I want answers in the context of global CREDIBILITY
• I want to share what I NEED - and what I KNOW
• I want to be served, and be well REPRESENTED
• I want to help create sustainable SOLUTIONS
• I want to be PROACTIVE - not REACTIVE
• I want YOU in that equation with me

Perhaps now, because we are ALL relevant to each other, we can ALL realize the efficiency of scale made possible by our cooperation - and enjoy the mutual benefits of an enterprise 3.0 viewpoint - a shared perspective from ALL across our U-Netted Nations.

Perhaps within this new 'inter-operable' paradigm we will find that if we:

Question Prior Answers - it’s Liberating!
Answer Current Questions - it’s Empowering!
Create Future Solutions - it’s Fulfilling!
Share these Benefits - it’s SUSTAINABLE!

Now, how KOOL is that? - and how 'relevant' ? (- and how Priceless..?)

What’s about YOU? - care to comment?p

- dare to COOPERATE?

F. David Peat, relates it this way, that we will have to become - "...well adapted to the quantum world, for this is a world less about objects in interaction than about transformation, superposition, flux, and the inseparability of observer and observed”

OK, so what do we do now, or prepare for next? How can we become both the observer and the one experiencing the results of our observations and decisions? In that rhetorical question lies the obvious answers: 1 - we already are. 2- we need a constant feedback loop. 3- we need a 360-degree viewpoint from multiple representatives. 4 - we must cooperate through that shared insight. Then, how can we leverage our collective past so that WE can mutually survive?

Perhaps we have finally reached a tipping point and are ready to LISTEN... between the words of poets and prophets and rappers and rebels for that thread of value that can be woven into the fabric of tomorrow. Perhaps the rank of our social positions will matter much less than the nature of our social interactions - the LEVERAGE of our 'collaboration on purpose'. Perhaps we are ready to LIVE beyond the coercive walls of cultures, organization charts, and political boundaries in a dynamic environment of sustained progress and mutual benefit. Perhaps that will both introduce and require a quantum shift in our approach.

Indeed, that quantum shift has already begun and it is happening at the speed of light - projected through the screens of our computers, cell phones, and multiple other devices that enable and capture that experience in real time. Don Tapscott, author of 'Wikinomics' reminds us that our 'smart' appliances have already joined us in these quantum dimensions of inter-operable communication, reacting to our online prompts, or prompting us in turn.

What are we learning from our past, experiencing in our present, and encapsulating for our future - if there is one?

What data, conversations, collaboration, insight, consensus, and cooperation are now needed? What are the resulting conditions that we are creating and experiencing - and re-considering and then changing?

And who controls all that? ...'WE' do..!!

The capsule IS being loaded - what is to be YOUR contribution?

And who cares?

What’s about YOU? - care to comment?

- dare to COOPERATE?

This led to a paper that is worth looking at to see how they extracted the data for the network analysis.

In reality, that custodian may hold a degree or have experience that exceeds the person currently assigned to any given position. When it comes to getting things done - the insight usually starts at the bottom. When it comes to initiating actions, the directives usually come from the top.

What's the Connection

That depends on the people involved, and especially those 'in charge'. For those who assume any position of responsibility, the degree of authority they accept or control will also depend on how they accept and control the communication - to and from those that surround them. One item of note, they have very little control.

They do however have ultimate control on how they choose to benefit from all that connectivity and infinite information. Their level of insight will be proportional to their information access. Their access is controlled by those who know. Knowing who knows is crucial to individual knowledge, team interaction, cooperative initiatives, and our global survival.

How do I come to know, that you already know, what he needs to know, from them? When can that be done - to solve my urgent problem - in my relationship, my charity, my business, my community, my country - or OUR world? Who knows?...

...in the U-Netted Nations...that's YOU!

The neural network of of the internet affords each of us an unlimited opportunity to become a 'U-Node', a dynamic nano-resource to an insatiable global knowledge ecosystem. The real-time connectivity currently exists in which we can offer our information to others.

The challenge lies in how we choose to accept and control that information as our individual responsibility within this informal information grid. The manner in which we can co-manage our dynamic support of each other within this global perspective is evolving, and that evolution must also be responsive, 24/7/365. Welcome to Web 3.0 - and beyond...

The control won't be held by the person who thinks they have the only answer. The solution won't come by getting the right answer from the right person. The real power will come from asking the right questions of all the right people, all of the time. Want to know more, ASK4 it...

'Who nodes' - that may be the new title for custodians of information. And for our new elevated perspective toward these 'lowly custodians'..

"Well, what do you know...?"

What’s about YOU? - care to comment?

- dare to COOPERATE?

Last Saturday, we presented our ongoing work on collaboration and citation networks in Political Science at the
4th UK Network conference held at the University of Greenwich. For this conference, we created a presentation on Knowledge Networks in European Political Science that summarises most of our findings on political science in Britain and Germany and provides some additional international context. The picture on the right shows a subnetwork of about 320 scientists who mutually cite each others' work. Watch out for the dense IR/methods cluster and the lack of (mutual) connections between the dispersed political sociology and formal methods camps.

Technorati-Tags: sna, pajek, networks, analysis, political science, citation, bibliometrics, pdf, presentation

The only thing that is missing is a proper manual, but even this is not really a problem since Pajek's creators have written a very accessible introduction to social network analysis that doubles up as documentation for the program (order from amazon.co.uk, amazon.com, amazon.de. However, Pajek has been under constant development since the 1990s (!) and has acquired a lot of new features since the book was published. Some of them are documented in an appendix, others are simply listed in the very short document that is the official manual for Pajek. You will want to go through the many presentations which are available via the Pajek wiki.

Of course, there is much more software available, often at no cost. If you do program Java or Python (I don't), there are several libraries available that look very promising. Amongst the stand-alone programs, visone stands out because it can easily produce very attractive-looking graphs of small networks. Even more software has been developed in the context of other sciences that have an interest in networks (chemistry, biology, engineering etc.)
Here is a rather messy collection of links to sna software. Generally, you will want something that is more systematic and informative. Ines Mergel has recently launched a bid for creating a comprehensive software list on wikipedia. The resulting page on social network analysis software is obviously work in progress but provides very valuable guidance.

Technorati-Tags: sna, software, political science, network, analysis, perl, citation, bibliometrics, networks, social, social networks

Newspaper Association of America (NAA )  has put together a new site, called NewspaperMedia, talking about  "Newspapers - The Mult-Medium."  It's a great tool for bringing aboard reluctant advertising prospects. The site also offers a free powerpoint download about the value of newspaper advertising. Some of the statistics included in its introductory presentation include:

NAA does not focus on community and suburban newspapers. But there is one organization that does..

Suburban Newspapers of America. SNA's online presentation is a powerful message, with testimonials, about the value of advertising on community newspapers. Here are some tantalizing statistics that clearly show consumers' preference for community newspapers, in comparison to major metros:

• For community and neighborhood news, 62% turn to community newspapers, compared with 21% to the major metro dailies
• For local youth or high school sports, 60% turn to community newspapers, compared with 24% to the major metro dailies.

For additional statistics and video testimonials that can turn advertising prospects into community newspaper advertisers visit SNA's dynamic marketing site here.

Have you heard of the Shelby (NC) Star's Star Car? Skip Foster, Star Publisher, spoke at the Newspaper Association of America (NAA) Marketing Conference about this mobile WiFi marketing product. What's most impressive  - and really why the Star Car works so well - is that the paper is only 15,000 print circulation. The idea began with University of South Carolina's Ifra Newsplex. 

The School of Journalism and Mass Communications also designed a newspaper newsroom convergence program; three instructors wrote a book on the subject. I'm headed to USC in July to find out more, in my role as Sales & Marketing Manager for Suburban Newspapers of America. You can read all the Star Car details in the USC Convergence Newsletter.  

Suburban Newspapers of America is putting together the eighth annual roundtable of recruitment advertising agency executives to meet with community newspapers. It's Monday, June 23rd in Chicago, at the Hilton on Lake Shore Drive. Community newspapers will hear from the agencies about who they are, what they do, who their clients are and the best way to approach them to sell a publications' products. They'll talk as well about what their clients need from newspapers.

Bagels and coffer are on SNA.  Sounds like a "must-attend" for community newspapers and recruitment advertising agencies.

If not, and you're a community newspaper owner or employee, you're missing out on some dynamite information and classes. The latest, Build and Engage Local Audiences Online, is a collaboration with Suburban Newspapers of America and taught by Susan Karol, Executive Director of the SNA Foundation.  The course is free to NewsU users and SNA members and is the first for the the new SNA University.

News University is a product of the Poynter Institute sponsored by the Knight Foundation. Its mission is to provide low-cost interactive courses for journalists in any type of media and at any experience level. NewsU officially launched in 2005.

For a PDF list of all NewsU courses, click on the logo above.

Editor & Publisher, MediaWeek and Suburban Newspapers of America collaborated on the third annual Interactive Media Conference in Las Vegas this past week - May 13-15. Tuesday May 13 was devoted to issues relevant to suburban and community newspapers. 100 newspaper executives walked away from that day and three breakout sessions on May 14  with many new resources, tips and tools to grow their online products.

Speakers and topics included media consultant Amy Rabinovitz, Jeff Rapson of Search Initiatives, and Jeremy Thompson of R&R Partners (the ad agency responsible for the 'What Happens Here, Stays Here' campaign for the Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority. ) This terrific threesome talked about search, and how newspapers can use local search, SEO and SEM to increase traffic, revenue and brand awareness, not only for themselves but for their advertisers as well.

Peter Zollman, founding principal of the AIM Group, delivered a powerful and helpful message to community newspapers about what they could, should or even must do to improve their Web sites. And a heated discussion on citizen journalism and the perils and opportunities of user-generated content for  newspapers took place between Dale Peskin, founder of IFOCOS and John Humenik, publisher of the Arizona Star in Tucson.

For more details on the experts and all the news, advice and tools they delivered to community newspapers, keep an eye on the site of Suburban Newspapers of America, www.suburban-news.org.

ASNA 2007 // Call for Papers
ASNA 2008 will primarily provide an interdisciplinary venue with focus on applications of social network analysis; however, submissions on theoretical and methodological issues regarding SNA are also welcome.

I don't know how many times I can bounce over to the EU in the Fall, but this looked interesting.  I have been itching for awhile to get a better handle on applied SNA.   Outside of Valdis Kreb's InFlow and Rob Cross' Network Roundtable (and The company Visible Path), I don't know much about applied SNA over here.

I should find out what kinds of meetings are over here of this nature.