Collaboration - it's Strengths and Weaknesses

I've had a very interesting day, listening to Don Tapscott, Geoff Cape and Mike Evans at Toronto's Evergreen Brickworks T.H.E. inaugural event. A fascinating presentation about the power of collaboration and the role of technology in the health and environmental movement. A hundred new ideas flooded my brain, and I've felt inspired in many of my existing projects.

There was one interesting discussion in the session based on a question raised on the validity of an article written by Malcolm Gladwell in the current New Yorker magazine. It's here and the thesis of it is that the social networks of today have 'weak ties' that don't support social activism as we've known it. Mr Gladwell, a reknown author who was not present at the THE event seemed to offer a divergent view from Mr. Tapscott and when asked about it, the view of the panel was that Mr. Gladwell was wrong in his assertion - indeed social collaboration tools and possibilities can change our world, and they offered a number of compelling examples.

In thinking about this since I left the Brickworks today, I don't think I agree and here's why.

The heart of the argument Mr. Gladwell makes is that while we can collaborate around an idea, the extension of that is to place oneself at risk (physically, financially,) and this is required for real activism, and he offers examples from the US civil rights movement and a few other moments in recent history. He then cites a series of examples where Facebook or Twitter are credited for having a role, and debunks those statements. While I can't speak to the credibility of his evidence, there does seem to be some merit to the claim, and I'd offer examples from the creation the Brickworks and the social communication vehicles Dr. Evans has created to validate this.

Evergreen Brickworks was created as a result of the vision and desire of Geoff Cape's Evergreen organization to reclaim some of Toronto's past, and give the city an urban green space where history, community and nature meet. It's an admirable dream, and one that's been achieved over 8 long years of work convincing many people and groups to take part. Full credit to the Evergreen organization for marshaling this monumental effort that has resulted in millions invested to revitalize an abondoned industrial site into an urban playground. Was it easy ? I think the answer is clearly no, and it didn't happen off the back of millions of individuals each offering $1 - rather a small number of committed individuals saw Geoff's vision and helped make it a reality, and that in turn helped get other Government, corporate and other benefactors onboard. These first visionaries are Gladwell's social activists in this sense - they placed themselves at risk (financially) in order to reap certain social rewards in a manner others weren't willing to. Altruism at it's best.

Dr. Mike Evans showed some of the great work he's doing, leveraging social media tools into healthcare to be health-proactive and creating collaborative networks around those with similar cares. He had a great quote - "Stories trump data and relationships trump stories". This is the foundational element in creating a video series for cancer victims as they take on the disease and offer insights for other victims - a community aligned around a shared issue. But these victims have clearly done this as they are at risk - and wanted to help other cancer victims - I can't think of a closer analogy to civil rights pioneer's motivation. While these newly created social healthcare groups leverage collaborative tools, they aren't dependent upon them as a means to 'friend' or 'follow' one another - they are doing more, and helping each other directly and tangibly.

The last insight I'll offer comes from Toronto's recent hosting of the G8 and G20 summits - 'the summer of protest' that largely was unsuccessful. (Canadian's tend to apologize after rioting ). Arguably, the authorities defeated the protesters as they'd tapped into the protesters social communications networks and literally planted police amongst these groups. The groups were out-smarted by the police that used (in some cases) very rough means to enforce a sense of calm and peace. This was real social activism in a recognized sense, and it was defeated by the very social collaboration tool set it tried to leverage.

So - is Don Tapscott incorrect in the value of collaboration - not at all - it's a huge advancement and one that may well rock our world as we know it with group think overcoming old, outdated structures. But that doesn't mean it's all powerful, or that it will do everything well. The magic I might point to will be finding the way to get people committed, to get them to place themselves at risk physically or financially using these networks. We're not there yet, but it's the pot of gold at the base of the collaboration rainbow.