Networks, Complexity, and Relatedness

Networks, Complexity, and Relatedness
Inquiry and learning into social networks, organizational network analysis, and the relationships among people and systems in complex organizations and networks.

This blog is MOVING: new site is almost ready: change your readers, now: http://www.pattianklam.com/blog

Friday, September 23, 2005

Albert-László Barabási, visiting scientist, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute

This just in from a SOCNET posting: Mathematician follows networks.. Barabási wrote Linked: How Everything is Connected to Everything Else, one of key books on my SNA/ONA reading list. What's marvelous about his thinking is that he sees the the isomorphic patterns of networks in natural systems (starting at the molecular level), in man-made systems (computer networks and grids), and human systems -- our social networks.

According to this article, he's just come to Boston for a year at the Dana Farber Cancer Institute, which offers him the opportunity to work closely with experimental researchers as he looks at the next great challenge: a theory of complexity.

Networks, complexity, relatedness. It just keeps entwining.

posted by Patti | permalink (click to comment)
(0) comments

Thursday, September 01, 2005

Centrality : The Relationship Capital Journal

Thanks (as ever) to Bruce Hoppe for pointing me to Centrality, a group blog with both social network analysis and social software luminaries posting on a regular basis. The former group is led by Stan Wasserman, and the latter by Stowe Boyd. The site is supported by Visible Path, and contains both industry news (about social networking sites, services, and the like), but also some fine distinctions in social networking language.

The current language topic is "degrees" as in "six degrees of separation." It is possible to trace the actual phrase to the play, Six Degrees of Separation, and to find historical reference to SNA research that came up with that magic number. However, it does not appear possible to alter the common usage of "degrees" as "number of hops" or "number of links" between people. Stan Wasserman points out (in some agony, apparently) that it should be six ties, and not degrees. Paths have lengths but only people (nodes) can have degrees. I stand corrected myself and will henceforth have a nice story to tell in my MasterClasses. The thread is worth following.

posted by Patti | permalink (click to comment)
(4) comments

patti anklam. How to make networks work.

links: networks

My ONA Page

Rob Cross
Bruce Hoppe
Valdis Krebs
INSNA
ONA-prac. The online community for learners and practitioners in the emerging field of Organizational Network Analysis.

links: blogroll

21st Century Organization
Anecdote

Dave Snowden
David Gurteen
Jack Vinson