Submitted by staff on Mon, 2012-05-21 16:18

The platform has now 614 members, and still one month to go for the Digital Agenda Assembly.
One of the purpose of the platform is to facilitate the self-selection of participants to the Assembly. Up to 40 places will be given to the people who receive most "interesting" votes to their contributions.
Based on our statistics, the most voted people to attend the assembly so far are, in decreasing order:
Axel Schultze
Thierry Nabeth
Michele Cimmino
Gianluigi Cuccureddu
Stephan Engberg
Paul Miller
Lorne Mitchell
Andrew Ferguson
richard brown
Ian Clifford
Oscar Wijsman
Marita Roebkes

Go on, bring more evidence and inspiring examples to the debate, and you might climb the "interesting" rankings and get a ticket for the Digital Agenda Assembly!

Comments

Participation to the DAA

Submitted by michele on Mon, 2012-05-21 16:44

Dear Staff, when will it be decided/communicated who is going to be invited to attend the Digital Agenda?

In the week of June 4th

Submitted by staff on Wed, 2012-05-30 06:52

In the week of June 4th

Bizarre rules

Submitted by elji on Wed, 2012-05-23 23:27

So in essence, it's about posting several times a day and then you'll get invited to the party - quantity over substance?

I kind of agree with you, but what should we do?

Submitted by nabeth.thierry on Thu, 2012-05-24 18:48

I agree with you. We should be looking at forming a group that is the most effective. Which means finding the good combination of participants, and in particular: * that make a good covering of the domains & disciplines * That generates a good interaction dynamics. E.g. having the good combination of different social roles (Supporter, Protagonist, Attacker, Neutral) and task roles (Orienteer, Giver, Seeker, Follower). Having say that things are however complicated here. How do you select this "dream team" (not the self proclaimed win team, or the ones that are very skilled at generating buzz, or the ones that are already "in power" and that may be satisfied by the status-quo) that is the most effective in generating results (innovative and doable)? Suggestions welcome! *** A little bit of theory *** My apology in advance for this "lecturing", but this is a way for me of thinking loud :-). I would like to mention that the forming of teams is something that has been the object of research (cf. group dynamics & collaboration), and we could get some input from specialists here. Concerning roles, for instance in his theory on small group, Robert F. Bales proposes task roles (orienteer, giver, seeker, follower) and group roles (attacker, protagonist, supporter, neutral). Alex "Sandy" Pentland mentions some risks in the composition of groups in some experiments. - several attackers may lead to more extremes & polarized results; - if there is only one protagonist/leader and everyone else is a supporter, group members just follow the leader without exploring the whole range of options. Some references: The Hard Science of Teamwork by Alex "Sandy" Pentland http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2012/03/the_new_science_of_building_gr.html Modeling Group Discussion Dynamics (April 2009) MIT tech Report 628 http://hd.media.mit.edu/TechnicalReportsList.html Roles In Groups The many forms of leadership and participation http://www.context.org/iclib/ic09/fcl/