Steward, bring me another web tool please

Since I do a bit of each of event facilitation, design of engagement processes, blogging, and online community work, I get into conversations with potential clients that go something like this:

We're running an event and want to carry things on afterwards online ... or ...
We're about to start a campaign to engage our stakeholders more effectively and want to use some of the new Internet tools ... or ...
It's time we had something more interactive on our website ...

This then starts up several internal conversation for me, and I have to stop myself saying things like:

I've been working on some really good systems recently that give everyone coming to the event their own profile, space to blog, as well as places for background content and sharing development ... or ...
What you need is a good design for the overall process starting with a workshop I could run for you ... or ...
We could add in a blog so that you have a much stronger voice for the organisation ... or ... combinations of all of these

None of these solutions is wrong, and indeed I have worked on all of them more or less successfully. But in my heart I know that they all depend on something I can't provide - and that is someone within the client prepared to understand what's involved, and champion the cause with others. It depends on someone (not necessary the same person) who has the skills to weave together facilitation and introductions of new tools. As Bev Trayner wrote the other day It keeps coming back to technology stewardship:

On Friday I did a brief session with my colleagues at ESCE (a Business School in Setúbal) about Web2.0. The feedback and the sensation I got was one of anticipation, a realisation that we are onto something here with all these tools, but where and how to begin? Like one colleague said, I'm just getting familiar with Web1.0 and you're telling me there's a Web2.0.
I am, again, reminded of the need for technology stewards - people who know both the local context and needs,  who know the technology market, and know how to weave together the two.
You used to be able to teach one thing at a time - e.g.  "Now you will learn how to use Frontpage". But that strategy makes less sense now. Rather, you have to know how to use a suite of tools to make sense of any one tool i.e.  knowing about hyperlinks, tags, Technorati, blogrolls and RSS feeds makes more sense of keeping a blog.
But to know about so many things they have to make sense to you in your practice. You have to be ready to use them, otherwise you just don't (unless you've got a geeky bent). Much of a technology steward's job is knowing how and when to  introduce a tool, and to whom.  And one thing I've had to learn (with my enthusiasm) is that you have to know when  NOT to tell people about a tool.

The nature of technology stewardship is one that is exercising veteran online community facilitator and blogger Nancy White, and she let's us know about a call for papers for a knowledge management journal on the topic, due out in June this year. The call itself outlines lots of  the issues in community building, collaboration and knowledge sharing online. Here's Nancy's definition developed with John Smith and Etienne Wenger:

“Technology stewards are people with enough experience of the workings of a community to understand its technology needs, and enough experience with technology to take leadership in addressing those needs. Stewardship typically includes selecting and configuring technology, as well as supporting its use in the practice of the community .”

Bev Trayner re-inforces the need to say no to the temptation of selling tech solutions on their own ... or even training. She concludes her post:

Tomorrow I'll be at a meeting in Brussels where I will share some of my interest and knowledge about Web2.0 tools. They asked me to "do a training" and I said no. My interest is not in training people to use tools. My interest is in understanding the community, its practices and (new) literacies. And then I am interested in helping them discover the tools that could support and extend those practices and literacies. And this concept of technology stewardship has given me a handle (and a language) for being able to express that.

I very much agree with the philosophy being put forward by Bev, Nancy and others promoting technology stewardship. I think it is something I can offer (particularly with help from open source thinkers like Nancy and Bev), in between trying to be a social reporter. The problem is explaining it to clients, particularly if they are ready to spend thousands on web development, but don't yet understand that isn't any use without someone to .... what ... Drive? Conduct? Steward? Isn't that someone who brings you another drink? Sigh. It's all another world, another language. More shortly on my A-Z of social media. If I stop blogging for a moment I might get it done at least as first draft.

Previously: Collaboration with technology ... and the need for stewards

Comments

[Nancy White]

Nice weaving of things together to bring them forward, David.

I was on a chat today with two technology stewards of a community and a new element came forth.

How does the community support their technology?

[Beth]

Does the Total Cost of Ownership concept fall on deaf ears here in the UK or with communities?

TCO -- the cost of implementing technology is not just the cost of hardware and software, but the "wetware" - training, technical support, and understanding it.

Marc Osten and I co-authored a guide on this topic .. not sure if it has been published, but maybe some of our older thinking on it:
http://www.summitcollaborative.com/cwpm.html

[Beverly Trayner]

Oh yes, there's a whole social language we have to develop for talking about it with clients. And, increasingly, a social language in different languages. Lucky some of us are persistant!

[Josie]

Beth - I think what David is drawing attention to here drills down further into TCO, as it is understood and discussed in practice anyway, which usually stretches to training and support provision.

There's a useful tension here between the new accessibility offered by web 2.0 tools and services and the trials of good ol cultural change. Not wholly convinced of the sustainability of the model proposed by tech stewardship - isn't it what’s always happened - informed and enthusiastic people can progress organisations and projects, for as long as they are around and willing - maybe the question is how does this translates in terms of staff and organisational development, and more widespread HR practices?

Not keen of this use of stewardship either – this is a personal thing though, as I then to use stewardship as a concept of ownership and responsibility available to all members of a community rather than of expertise.

[David Wilcox]

Josie - you have helped surface some of the concerns and ambivalences that I was trying to get at. I'm reminded of the time when I did a lot of work on helping set up development trusts as regeneration partnerships. My task as consultant was to manage a process in which different interests came together and formed a new organiation with a clear, shared purpose, appropriate constitution, business plan, and means of communicating internally and externally. The key issues were relationships, commitment, sustainability ... and a transfer of ownership.
I was "stewarding" and help others steward ... but the whole thing only worked when the chair and executive director were in place.
As consultants we can steward - or whatever - the development of communities of practice. But do we have to stay there? Or should we be trying to grow the internal stewards - whatever we call them?
I used to reckon that setting up a development trust from first idea to staff in post was a year. Is virtual any quicker? And who bears the Total Cost of Ownership of the whole thing?

[Beth]

Josie:

There is also another term we've used along with TC0 - It's "total value of ownership" -

I also think approaches may be different in a community of practice context than in an organizational context.