[Peter] What fascinates me most is social communication. Social to indicate that communication typically fails in the long run if it is one-sided only. CoPs (I like the P for Purpose) is one embodiment of many that may serve communication. Development fails without social communication. KM (including information management) fascinates me because to me the challenge is to practice KM such that those (whomever and wherever they are) that for one reason or the other are in need of information or access to knowledge have the overview, access and know-how to use whatever that is out there. Use here understood also as a social actvity: learning and sharing, bouncing and coaching, inspiring and serving.
Hmmm making this happen, playing a small part in facilitating, is maybe coming close to what efficient and effective technology stewarding may be about? Probably not!
[Lucie] ++And my perennial pet question: how can we ensure that the focus remains on the purpose/needs/activities of a community and not on jumping on the next cool tool that pops up?++
[Neil] I agree with you. Successful dialogue for development is all about maintaining the focus on the purpose/needs/activities of the community. Technology is just one of many factors to be considered in facilitating the community towards its purpose, meeting the needs of participants, and enabling action.
[Rob] I do feel that a TS is a kind of a theoretical construction, an ideal-type that in practice nobody performs, because indeed as Riff tells us, we have no time-allocation to make this a full-time role, and the role relies so much on knowing both a bit of facilitating and of technologies.
[Adrian] I wonder whether the idea of a ‘technology steward’ might be helpful in conceptualising an important intermediary or interface role that facilitates the connection between others who struggle to understand each other?