原文: Social Fluency

After Nancy White pointed me to Chris Lott's articles on Northern Voice, and on love, and Chris replied to my Tuesday post on how easily we unintentionally hurt each other through our actions, I did a bit more research on Chris' work and discovered the remarkable chart above on Information Fluency. Chris put this together a couple of years ago for an IT audience and has since expanded on it, but for me it produced an immediate aha! Our professional 'value' really is a function of the extent of, and our ability to integrate, our knowledge, our thinking competencies, and our communication competencies. Insight depends on our ability to apply critical thinking to what we know. Reportage is the application of our communication skills to what we know. Rhetoric is the articulation of our thinking. And the ability to do all of these things in an integral way is what Chris calls 'information fluency'. I think this is brilliant, and it got me thinking about how this model could be broadened to represent our social fluency -- our ability to function socially in the modern complex world, to be of use socially to others in our communities. The chart below is what I came up with. What this chart says is that: Our social value to others is a function of (a) the extent of our knowledge, our thinking competency (critical, creative and imaginative), and our communication skills (conversation, presentation and demonstration), and (b) our ability to integrate these three things. This ability to integrate these three things gives rise to insight, ideas and new perspectives (application of thinking competency to knowledge), reportage and stories (application of communication skills to knowledge), rhetoric and provocation (articulation of our thinking competency), and art (the expression of thinking competency applied to knowledge). Chris and I love the addition of art, in its broadest sense (the representation of reality), to the model. This ability to integrate is social fluency. If we represented individuals' different social fluency graphically, those with high levels of fluency would have larger circles (more knowledge, greater thinking competency and communication skills) with greater overlap (better integration of these three things). In thinking about this further and reading Nancy White's blog, I realized that what was missing from the model was learning. I realized that the model was from the perspective of the actor (presenter, demonstrator, creator, artist) and not the perspective of the reactor (audience, listener, student, learner). It occurred to me that since social activity is like a dance, there should be a 'mirror' set of attributes for effective response-ability (responsibility). My first cut at these is in red brackets above: Our ability to derive social value from others (to learn) is a function of (a) our openness to others' knowledge and ideas, our learning competency (ability to learn) and our attention skills, and (b) our ability to integrate these three things. This ability to integrate these three things gives rise to understanding (openness to new ideas and knowledge, and the learning competency to process it), appreciation (openness to new ideas and knowledge, and the attention skills to be aware of them), and self-change (attention skills to be aware of change opportunities, and the learning competency to be able to apply them). The reactive counterpart to art is improvisation. Social fluency requires not only the ability to integrate knowledge, thinking competency and communication skills as an 'actor', but the ability to integrate openness, learning competency and attention skills as a 'reactor', a learner. That's precisely what improvisation is about. What's interesting to me about this is that some people are terrific 'artists' (they re-present reality well, as teachers, painters, presenters etc.) but not very good 'improvisers' (they are closed-minded and not open to new ideas and new learning). This is a terrible shame -- such people are underskilled for a peer-to-peer world where social exchange is two-way. Likewise, there are some great 'improvisers' (people who have learned a great deal) who are unskilled at expressing that learning, 'passing it on'. It would be interesting to see a social network map that depicted individuals not just as dots (nodes) but with their six circles. This could show what people value in others in their networks/communities, and what they offer, and how that effects both their 'popularity' and the strength of the community as a whole. So what can we do, as individuals, to improve our social fluency -- to become better artists and improvisers? I think the first step is self-knowledge -- to know what our strengths and weaknesses are in each of the six circles. And the second step is practice, with others who are both better and worse than we are at each. What do you think of this model? Have I overloaded it? Is it useful? Is it missing something? Where does presence fit into it? Whre does love fit?. Category: Social Networking

译文: 社会影响力

      在Nancy White让我关注Chris Lott的关于北方之声和爱的文章后,Chris答复了我在周二提出的问题:我们的举动有多容易无意识的伤害他人.我对Chris的工作做了一些研究,发现了以上这个显眼的关于信息影响的图表.在一些年前,Chris作为一个IT指导,把这些放在一起,并且扩充它.但对于我,它为我带了突然的惊喜!

     我们所谓的专业"价值"实际是一个关于我们的结合能力,知识,思考能力,交流能力的一个功能范围.洞察力依托于我们把主要想法实践于所知的能力.报告是将我们的交流能力于我们所知的实践.修辞是我们思想的发音.整个过程中做这些事的所有能力,Chris称之为信息影响力.

     我觉得这很棒,这让我们思考这个模版是如何传播开来以描述我们的社会影响力--我们在现代复杂世界中发挥作用的社会能力从而使社区中的其他人得益.以下的图表是由我提出的:

图表讲的是:

      我们对于别人的社会价值是一个关于(a)我们的知识,思考能力(关键的,创造性的和想象的),交流能力(对话,呈述,示范),以及(b)我们结合这三件事物的能力.

     结合三件事物的能力指的是洞察力,想法,新观念(想法于知识的实践),报告和故事(交流能力于知识的实践),修辞手法和激发作用(思考能力的发音),艺术(思考能力的表达于知识的实践),Chirs 和想把艺术,广义的讲(实际表达)添加到这个模板.

     结合能力即社会影响力,如果我们用图象陈述各自不同的社会影响力.那些有高度影响力的人有更大的圈子(更多的知识,更优越的思考能力和交际能力),并且有更大交叠部分(更好的结合这三样事物的能力)

     在进一步思考和阅读Nancy White的博客时,我意识到从这个模版不具备的是学习部分.我知道这个模版是根据行为人的各个角度(陈述者,示范者,创造者,艺术家)制定的,而不是从反应人的角度(观众,听众,学生,学者).

     自我知晓这个图表后,觉得社会活动就好比跳舞,应该有面"镜子"性质,给予有效的反应(责任能力).以上的表格中,我用红笔在空白处标出.

     我们从他人处获得(学到)的社会价值,是关于(a)我们对于他人的知识和想法的开放力,习得力(学习的能力),注意力,以及(b)我们结合三样事物能力的功能.

     结合三样事物的能力指的是理解力(向新想法和知识开放,进程学习能力),鉴赏力(向新想法和知识开放,意识到自身的注意力),自我改变(意识改变机会的注意力和用以实践它们的学习能力)

     对艺术的反应部分称为即兴.社会影响力不仅需求作为一个行为人,结合知识,思考能力和交际能力的能力,并且需求作为一个反应人结合开放力,习得力,注意力的能力.这是何为即兴的确切说明.

     我对那些出色的"表演家"(他们复述能力很好,比如老师,画家,陈述者等等)感兴趣,但不是很好的即兴表演者,(思想封闭,无法容纳新思想新学识.)这非常可耻--这类人的低能只能作为世界的对立面.社会交流有两个面.例如,杰出的即兴发挥者(博采众长的人),"飘过者",那些没能力表达学习的人

      我很想看一张社会脉络图,不把个人描绘成点(节号)而是关于他们的六个圈.这展示了人在他们的脉络/社区内对别人的价值.他们提供了什么,在他们的"流行度"和整个社区的精神层面上如何发挥作用.

     因此,我们作为个人该做点什么以提高社会影响力,成为更好的表演者更好的即兴者呢?我觉得第一步就是自我觉醒,明确这六个圈各自的强处和弱处.第二步是实践,和那些和我们不分上下以及比我们差的人一起.

      你对这个模板有什么看法么?我让它超负荷了么?这些有用么?有什么补充部分么?驱动它的陈述在哪?驱动它的爱在哪?

                                                                                                      栏目:社会传播网