Essays on Relationship between Social Networks and Innovation in Organizations Coursework

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing

The paper 'Relationship between Social Networks and Innovation in Organizations" is a good example of business coursework.   Social networks are virtual communities that exist on the internet. These communities come together to socialize and in the process get to learn new ideas and exchange these ideas among their peers. The rate at which ideas are generated and dispersed is extremely fast. Fast enough to bring about noticeable change, in whatever medium they are applied more so if correctly implemented. The vast majorities of individuals who spew these ideas are either professionals or academics in the fields of sciences and arts.

Through their training and backgrounds these professionals have the wherewithal to impact on innovations in organizations. This they can do through association and contribution to the various discussions that are held on the various social networks (Armistead 1999, pp. 152). These networks afford them a platform like no other. On these platforms, they are not constraint with organizational policies or regulations. Additionally, they are members of these networks voluntarily. Because of these loose ties, they are able to give edge cutting technological contributions to products or services in development in various organizations.

Indeed, as a strategy to stay a step ahead of the competition, some firms in the wireless industry have literally taken their research and development to these social networks on the Internet (Barney 1991, pp. 113). This they have done by opening up their development platforms. The catchphrase “ Open Source” has been the in-thing for quite some time now. For example, Google in collaboration with other industry players has in the development of the Android smartphone. To make the phone as smart as it looks, Google simply opened up the development of its operating system.

With this single strategic move, there is already talk of the Android smartphone rewriting the rules of the industry (http: //www. accenture. com “ Android Smartphone” Retrieved on 20th May 2010). Innovation is the enhancement of an idea or objects technologically. Simply put, it is making an object or idea superior to what is presently in existence. In the information and technology world, change is intrinsic. Ideas become obsolete no sooner than they are stumbled on. The pace of change is ruthless even for the most innovative mind.

Organizations boasting the most talented human resource are still greatly challenged with the pace of change in the industry. The daunting task which invariably is to find ways of sustaining innovation in this knowledge-based service industry is partly answered by the social networks. It is the integral loose relationship between social networks and organizations that drive and sustain innovations in those organizations (Huseman & Goodman 1999, pp. 31). Ho w does this happen? Human capital is the most critical resource any knowledge-based service organization has.

A well educated and trained human capital is expensive to acquire and sustain (Klaila 2000, pp. 139). Moreover, professionals especially the young ones no longer work at one firm for a period of more than three years. Human capital turnover is destabilizing for most firms. So, how do medium-sized organizations stay innovatively afloat in their respective fields? Social networks come to their rescue. Unlike physical organizations, these networks have no rigid rules. There is no code of regulation to adhere to. No organizational culture to sustain. No deadline to beat.

No boss to harangue you. The best thing about them is, you are your own boss! You decide to come in if you so wish. If you don’ t, you owe no one an explanation. No memo lands in your mail seeking explanations. In such circumstances, people are the most innovative. They are able to make contributions without fear of reprisals. They are able to better focus on the problem without the anxieties of or inferences to deadlines or budgets (Sveiby 2001, pp. 352).

Bibliography

Armistead, C. 1999, ‘Knowledge management and process performance’, Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 143–54.Baets, WJR 1998, Organization learning and knowledge technologies in a dynamic environment, Kluwer Academic Press, Boston, MA.

Barney, J. 1991, ‘Firms resources and sustained competitive advantage’, Journal of Management, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 99–120.

Huseman, RC & Goodman, JP 1999, Leading with knowledge: the nature of competition in the 21st century, SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks.

Klaila, D. 2000, ‘Knowledge as a transformation agent’, Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 138–44.

Lambooy, J 2000, Learning and agglomeration economies: adapting to differentiating economic structures, Edward Elgar, United Kingdon.

Lave, J & Wenger, E 1991, Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

McKenzie, J & van Winkelen, C 2004, Understanding the knowledgeable organization: nurturing knowledge competence, Thompson, London.

Newell, S, Robertson, M, Scarborough, H & Swan, J 2009, Managing knowledge work and innovation, 2nd edn, Palgrave, Hampshire, New York.

Porter, M 1985, Competitive advantage: creating and sustaining superior performance, Free Press, New York Press.

Quintas, P 2002, ‘Managing knowledge: an essential reader’, in S Little, P Quintas & T Ray (eds), Managing knowledge in a new century, Sage, London, pp. 1–14.

Roos, J, Roos, G, Dragonetti, NC & Edvinsson, L 1997, Intellectual capital: navigating the new business landscape, Macmillan Business, London.

Rumizen, MC 1998, ‘Report on the second comparative study of knowledge creation conference’, Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 77–81.

Segal Quince Wicksteed 1985, The Cambridge phenomenon: the growth of high technology industry in a university town, Cambridge, Cambridge.

Sheen, P 2004, Managing intellectual property and licensing: a study on cooperative research centres, PhD Thesis, Queensland University of Technology. Pp. 5-15

Sullivan, P 2000, Value driven intellectual capital: how to convert intangible corporate assets into market value, John Wiley & Sons Inc., New York.

Sveiby, KE 2001, ‘A knowledge-based theory of the firm to guide strategy formulation’, Journal of Intellectual Capital, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 344–58.

Wenger, E, McDermott, R & Snyder, W 2002, Cultivating communities of practice, Harvard Business School Press, Boston.

World Trade Organization 2000, International trade statistics 2000, p. 25, WTO Publications, Geneva, viewed 24 April 2001, .

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing
Contact Us