the role of formerly known ‘opinion leaders’ in the new world

One of the fundamental thrusts behind new forms of organizing, that is radically de-centered, pluralistic, and dynamic, is the reduction of communication and information search cost due to the use of digital information technologies. The use of these technologies has changed the relationship between the consumers and producers as it has reduced the information asymmetry between them. We see consumers become more informed and educated. More informed and educated consumer then directly participate in the production of various forms of contents for peer consumption. Such phenomenon have been observed in books like Wikinomics, the Startfish and the Spider, the Future of Work, the Wealth of Networks or Democratizing Innovations. In most cases, these books are focusing on the new roles that consumers (or employees) take in shaping these very different form of organizing. Stories about Orange Revolution, Korean Presidential Election in 2002, the peaceful demonstration in Philippine in 2002, and many other similar political movements all shows how the use of SMS and other information technologies have enabled ordinary individuals to mobilize massive collective actions. We hear how open source communities work. In all of these stories, the focus is often how to mobilize seemingly unlimited reservoir of intelligence from so-called Smart Mobs.

What is not being discussed as often as it should is what are the roles of those who are previously known as ‘producers’, ‘opinion leaders’, and ‘gatekeepers’ in this new era of Smart Mobs? How should professional producers of various forms of contents (politics, economic activities, education, culture, etc) react to this massive sea change and re-establish their roles? In the classroom of students who have ready access to Google with the latest breaking news and stock price, I confront this issue all the times. Before I finish my sentence, many of my students often race to their laptop and fire up Google to verify what I just said and often add / modify / correct what I just said.

Various news organizations are experimenting with new digital technologies like Blogs, User Created Contents, and Web 2.0 sites (like CBS is publishing their contents on YouTube). Others engage in furious legal fights in order to protect their turfs and rights. They are argue that this type of new forms of organizing is nothing but the rule by the mob in the digital world. They worry about the degrading quality and accuracy of contents when it is not carefully guarded by the gatekeepers (Wikipedia vs. Encyclopedia Britannica). The participations by ‘consumers’ in these processes are not new at all. We always had some level of feedback from those who consume these various forms of social contents. What is new here is the massive increase in their volume relatively to what they were before. In some sense, this can be nothing short of a civil war with different ideas about the future. It is a competition of ideas about who has a better idea about the future. Yet, it does not have to be a war. There are so many issues that need to be sorted. Different types of social institutions need to be created. Old institutions need to be repaired. New social and technical infrastructures need to be designed. These are the roles of current generation gatekeepers and opinion leaders. They should set the stage for others to produce. They succeed when they recede into the institutional background. They can still participate in the production. Of course, they will have more privileged voices and authorities than others for some time to come. They will have to participate in the competitions with Smart Mobs.

The same discussion needs to take place inside organizations who want to adopt this type of new technologies. The leaders of those organizations must realize that when they introduce these new technologies, they are introducing more than technologies. They are introducing new organizing logic that can be potentially at odds with the current dominant organizing logic. And they will soon find that they cannot get the full benefit of these technologies unless they start they own revolution inside the organization. That means, they will need to give up their monopoly of control. That will be pretty hard to swallow for many of them.

Professor | Writer | Teacher Digital Innovation, Design, Organizational Genetics Case Western Reserve University

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: