I’ve been engaged in a blog-post discussion with Euan Semple on “The map is not the territory ”. I won’t bore you with all the details as you can read it for yourself, but I will take the opportunity to address two of his and his readers’ points in a bit more detail. The first is to do with network analysis focusing myopically on one group – this will be the subject of a later blog-post. The second, and to my mind the most important, is network analysis ethics. This is a subject that was hinted at on Euan’s blog-post, but not directly discussed. At this point it is necessary to snip from Euan’s blog-post, and some of the comments, to give some context.
Euan said – “If I felt that someone else was mapping my conversions and the relationships they represented - and wasn't prepared to have the same done to them, I would soon stop talking”.
Jon Husband commented on the quote by saying - “... or were not completely transparent about the purpose of the mapping (including attempts to enhance productivity and top-down control). People will, I think, automatically assume these are key purposes, why wouldn't they ?”
Steve Dale said – “Euan, absolutely agree with your sentiments. I detect a form of management paranoia; they don't really understand what social networking is all about, they don't want to dip their toes into what they consider to be muddy water, yet at the same they want to understand it in the only way that makes sense to them - numbers and statistics. What worries me are the conclusions they may draw from this imprecise and flawed method of evaluation!”
Now all three quotes have some legitimacy, and can be boiled down to a question of ethics, and perhaps this is where all three gentlemen have had a bad experience?!
I had the very great privilege to be head-hunted to give a presentation to the Sydney University Medical Leadership seminar. I did my damnest to pass it to someone else, but they were insistent that wanted me, and me only, to present on "
