The collaborative Web

The essence of the Web is about linking, sharing and collaboration. Productivity and value creation is driven by cooperation.

Humans love the myth of the great individual overcoming overwhelming odds to achieve incredible goals. We seem to need to know that someone is in charge; that someone is leading, directing, managing.

There is no one person in charge of the global economy. In fact, there is no one organization in charge of the global economy. In fact, it could be said that there is no one person truly in charge of any particular national economy.

Maybe in very primitive, simple societies there can be a king who knows all and sees all. But in modern economies such a position is illusionary. The modern world is simply too complex.

There is no one person in charge of language. There is no one person in charge of physics, biology or the other sciences. There is no one person in charge of literature, film making, music, or any of the arts.

When it comes to the things that define us as truly human, there is no one person in charge. We are all in charge of the global economy, of language, of the sciences, of the arts, of the societies we live in.

Sure, there are individuals who have very significant influences on things. But show me anyone who says with certainty that they know the results of their actions, and you are showing me a fool. The world is simply too complex for such predictions.

Who invented language? Who invented fire? Who invented science? Who invented the wheel? Who invented electricity? Who invented computers? Who invented the nuclear bomb? Who invented the Internet? (It wasn’t Al Gore.)

No one person invented any of the above. Many minds came together over time. Sure, there are people who can lay claim, at certain moments, to some significant breakthrough. But these people were merely standing on the shoulders of the many thinkers and inventors who came before.

The Web is a network. A network is about links. Links are about connections between people and content. The essence of the Web is about how it makes more and more interesting linkages, and about how these multitude of links create a vast, global brain; a teeming collaborative mass.

The old brain fears the stranger. The old brain thinks that what makes winning sweeter is that others lose. The old brain holds onto what it knows believing that the hoarding of knowledge is power. The old brain is suspicious and constantly on the watch for enemies.

This old brain served us well for millions of years, but that which makes us strong can kill us in the end. The world has changed radically. To collaborate and share is not a sign of weakness. To be open, sure is to be open to attack, but it is also to be open to new ideas, new partners, new opportunities.

Linking is the grammar of the Web. To build links-both within, and to and from your website-is to build roads, motorways, arteries, lines of communication. Thinking linking is thinking collaboration, sharing, cooperation, wealth creation.

Every link that is built on the Web strengthens the Web and strengthens all of us involved in the Web. Nobody is in charge of the Web. We all are. And we all can link.

 

9 responses


  1. Mr. McGovern:

    I have to come to greatly appreciate your ideas, but I have to make a comment about your off-handed comment on Al Gore, which looks a lot like a put down. Al Gore never claimed to invent the Internet. Snopes has a concise summary of the facts here:

    http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp

    I’ll also add this from my own experience at CompuServe during the days of online services such as CompuServe and AOL. I still remember a company wide meeting in 1996 when our the president of CompuServe online services, Dennis Matteucci, said:

    “I don’t care what Al Gore says about the Internet - We’re going to survive”

    Famous last words, of course, but Al Gore’s impact on the explosion of the Internet will always be remembered by me.


  2. Dear Gerry,
    Wonderful piece again…
    Linking is really significant and functional thing.
    I agree. But the thing is I feel so unhappy when they are broken in due course… Or the source is changed. For instance the links that I used to give to “NUA” like in the following articles:
    http://www.webdekultursanat.com/2002_01_01_wksarchive.html
    But I feel happy when I noticed that my some broken links are copied without permission!
    Well, this became a weird comment too…
    Best wishes


  3. These Grand Statements on who owns or invented what are a little off-topic. Are they there to serve the topic of linking on the web, or is it the other way around? And I am not sure that the bold “The old brain thinks that what makes winning sweeter is that others lose” statement is scientifically correct.

    And the misplaced “that which makes us strong kills us in the end” statement… Does that apply as well to the strength in shared knowledge we gain with the WWW?


  4. Brilliant analysis once again. The Internet is transforming the human race the way speech and tool making did. And, yes, “that which makes us strong kills us in the end” is true, if we cling to the old things that once made us strong. It’s simple dialectics.


  5. Hi Gerry,

    Love your work but must admit I don’t quite accept the old brain vs. new brain concept, or the rose-coloured view of the “we’re all in this together” web.

    Surely it was “old brains” that invented the Internet and the web? The need to link and share is thousands of years old.

    Interdependence opens as many opportunities for the bad guys, or just the old-fashionedly competitive ones, as it does for the good guys.

    Linking comes with risks as well as benefits. The challenge is not just to learn how to become more open in our thinking. It’s also about how to strike the right balance between openness and caution.


  6. David, that was a bit of a cheap shot on my part about Al Gore. A bit silly and I shouldn’t have done it.

    RD, actually I read a report on a study in Time a couple of weeks ago (which I now can’t find!) about winning/losing, and about how it was found that the winner generally felt better if they knew there was a loser.

    Every strength has a flipside, as you suggest. The strength of the Web–linking–can also become a weakness, though as yet I’m not sure exactly how.

    James, I agree with you–linking comes with risks. And I didn’t mean to make it “we’re all in this together.” But rather that we’re in a network and when in a network, you need to network.


  7. Gerry,

    Thanks for responding. I attended your Marketing Profs webinar yesterday. It was great stuff- relevant, easy-to-understand, and highly applicable!


  8. I feel obligated to point out the suspicion that is raised when I read these kinds of succinct sweeping generalizations followed by qualifiers.

    As a previous individual pointed out, the statements about “the old brain” do not hold any weight scientifically, indeed I’d say they are quite far off the mark. There is no categorical ‘old brain’ which fears strangers and seeks the downfall of ‘others’. History is replete with examples to the contrary. Early human collectives would not have been possible without altruistic tendencies, the democratic sharing of knowledge, and adherence to agreed ethical principals.

    If the author wishes to pin-point the source of our roadblocks to openness, and the roots of close-mindedness, I would suggest research into the various human-created institutions from which aggression and fear have been focused into organizational weapons; religion, myth and superstition, not some strange idea of an old brain.


  9. Actually, the old brain, also called the Reptilian brain, is fixated on 4 needs: fight, flight, survival, and sex. Coincidentally, but probably not so much, that’s what has been bred into us by the powers-that-be and misguided corporations who seek to guard their flanks.

    I worked in large corporations in the 90s and remember well the the obsession with secrecy, control of information, and ‘protecting’ the company. The customers faced outages with not even an apology offered.

    This past fall, Dell Computers faced the onslaught of a social networked army flaying the company about it laptop batteries that were crapping out. The network had risen up, seemingly from nowhere, to assert itself. People linked to other people of similar disposition were exerting unprecedented pressure. Dell adroitly decided to share more information with its customers, even inviting people to suggest quality control measures and new ideas. The result: they contained the damage and their stock price went up. The network had spoken and demonstrated the power of linking.

Leave a Reply