artikel di journal Foresight Rusia

Saya tak menyangka bahwa tulisan kolaborasi metodologis eksperimentatif menggabungkan Social Network Analysis ke dalam metodologi Foresight yang dimuat di Jurnal “foresight” tahun 2009 kini menjadi banyak didiskusikan. Saya dan co-author saya, Ozcan Saritas, diundang ke banyak konferensi dan seminar untuk mempresentasikan tulisan ini. Nampaknya ketertarikan (dan kritik) banyak orang pada tulisan tersebut terletak pada dua hal: (1) bagaimana kami ‘nekat’ menggabungkan kedua metode tersebut, dan/atau (2) data yang dan temuan yang ‘menghentak’ 🙂

Report: Social media & civil society in Indonesia (updated)

DIPERBARUI/UPDATED 7/5/2011

(English version below)

Beberapa saat yang lalu saya dan mbak Shita Laksmi mempost di blog ini sebuah permintaan tolong untuk berpartisipasi dalam sebuah studi yang dilakukan bersama oleh Manchester Institute of Innovation Research (MIOIR), Universitas  of Manchester UK dan  HIVOS Netherlands Regional Office Southeast Asia mengenai media sosial dan peranserta sipil di Indonesia. Studi ini telah berakhir dan laporan lengkap bisa didownload di sini.  Laporan dalam Bahasa Inggris akan sudah dirilis di MIOIR pada hari Senin 4 April 2011 3-5 sore (silakan daftar lewat email saya) dan di Universitas Salfor hari Rabu jam 2.30-4.30 sore (silakan daftar di sini). Dalam acara rilis laporan tersebut juga akan telah dilakukan pemutaran film dokumenter  tentang media sosial dan gerakan sosial di Indoensia, @linimas(s)a, yang juga didanai sebagian oleh HIVOS. Cuplikan film tersebut bisa disaksikan di sini.

Laporan ini diterjemahkan ke dalam bahasa Indonesia oleh mas Aresto Yudo Sujono (@arestoyudo) dan diedit oleh mas BlontankPoer (@blontankpoer). Rencananya, laporan versi Bahasa Indonesia ini akan dirilis -bersamaan dengan pemutaran penuh film @linimas(s)– di Jakarta, 12 Mei 2011 dalam sebuah acara yang diselenggarakan bersama-sama oleh Internetsehat, ICTWatch, WatchDOC, AkademiBerbagi dan HIVOS di Goethe Institute jam 6-9 malam (konferensi pers jam 3-5 sore). Silakan hadir. Versi Bahasa Indonesia laporan Citizens in @ction / @ksi Warga bisa diunduh di sini.

The return of Big Brother to Indonesia?

The Jakarta Post – Opinion, 30 March 2011
Yanuar Nugroho
Manchester, United Kingdom

Advances in Internet technology have changed the way people live. For many it has brought the appealing promises of global community, democracy and openness.

Many others fear technological threats such as alienated individuals, anarchy, surveillance and repression. The House of Representatives’ proposed intelligence bill is a clear example of the latter.

The bill, if enacted into law, would give the authorities a free pass to monitor conversations and exchanges on the Internet.

Even worse, the bill would give legal justification to the National Intelligence Agency (BIN) to detain anyone suspected of threatening public security based on exchanges on social networking sites such as Twitter or Facebook.

While the very same social media have given birth of a new type of civic engagement globally, in Indonesia, in the eyes of the bill’s drafters, technology is a threat.

An innovation perspective of knowledge management in a multinational subsidiary

Journal of Knowledge Management, 15(1):71-87

1. Introduction

Organisations nowadays have been faced with the challenges of managing increasingly more complex activities in the knowledge-based economy. As Castells (2000) suggests, knowledge economy is characterised as being informational, global and networked. In his view, information and knowledge plays an important role in modern economy, giving new perspective to the works of some earlier economists who had already hinted this issue, such as Marshall (1965), Hayek (1945) and Schumpeter (1951, 1952). The consequence of this is clear: organisations working in knowledge economy cannot but conceive themselves as learning agents capable of creating and managing knowledge to achieve their purpose (Antonelli, 2008).

Exploring Knowledge Management in Civil Society Organisations

Exploring Knowledge Management in Civil Society Organisations: Sustaining Commitment, Advancing Movement

by Yanuar Nugroho and Mirta Amalia

Manchester Business School (MBS) Working Paper No. 600
Manchester Institute of Innovation Research (MIOIR) Working Paper No. 56

This paper is currently under review in the International Conference of Knowledge Management and Information Sharing (KMIS), part of IC3K (International Joint Conference on Knowledge Discovery, Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management), Valencia, Spain 25-28 October 2010, and is being revised for a journal submission.

Abstract

Civil society organisations (CSOs) have recently attracted much research attention, as they have become more central in social as well as economic and political dynamics, challenging and shaping the work of the state/public organisations and of the private institutions. Despite the fact that they are actually knowledge-intensive organisations, CSOs –like any other organisations– are faced with new challenges due to the advent of knowledge economy. Knowledge-capital in CSOs is highly diverse and this affects both the organisational performance and the civil society movement within which they are part of. Most of the knowledge in CSOs that has been driving and characterising civil society activities and realms is tacit in nature and is largely unmanaged. Consequently, in the long run, the organisations and their movement often become unstable despite efforts to manage their activities. We use the works of Polanyi and Nonaka to help address this problem and conceptualise the corpus of knowledge in CSOs. To anchor this conceptualisation, we feature the case of Indonesia where CSOs in a latecomer economy have been significantly influencing the work of public and private sectors. We find that managing tacit knowledge has been crucial to sustain the engagements with beneficiaries and networks. We propose taxonomy to understand different types of knowledge in CSOs and suggest a guiding principle to strategically manage it.

Full paper
available for download from here

Comments are most welcome! 🙂

Knowledge Management in Multinational Subsidiary in Indonesia: A lesson learned

Last year, among the students I was supervising, was a brilliant student from Indonesia who finally got her MSc with distinction: Mirta Amalia. Her dissertation explored and investigated the ways in which a multinational company susbsidiary devised and implemented the knowledge management strategy. It was a very interesting dissertation. She found fascinating empirical data on the importance of “enabling session” which was arguably vital in the process of tacit knowledge transfer within the company. However, she noted that this scheme was at large at risk as there had been no clear prioritisation.

I can keep on and on and on talking about her dissertation, but I’d better stop here. Contact her directly if you want to read her intriguing dissertation. What I want to say is that the way she formulated and wrote the dissertation was quite sophisticated and I thought the dissertation should not stop there. So I encouraged her to build on that work and write papers.

The Internet and mobilisation of direct action

Among the strategic uses for the internet that Indonesian CSOs carry out is mobilising direct action. A salient example of this is the campaign against violation of human rights, forced disappearances, repression towards labourers and trade unions and campaigns for promoting gender equality, women’s rights, environment sustainability amongst others. The targets are typically government, companies and military bodies. In general, the campaign is performed by submitting an online protest on the web or circulating the issues through various mailing lists asking for support to pressurise government, parliament, military and/or companies to reconsider their actions.

What are the strategic uses of the Internet in Indonesian CSOs?

The word ‘strategic’ is among the most frequent used terms found in the entire fieldwork of this study. When investigating the strategic areas in which the Internet could be used, interviews, workshops and focus groups were overwhelmed with the term so much so that it is now urgent to understand what it really means in the context of this study. Interviews with Indonesian CSO leaders gives us a hint: Internet use is considered strategic when it addresses certain characteristic related to (i) properties of the tools or means being used; (ii) orientation of action for which the tools are used (iii) issues to which the action is tackling, and (iii) actors who perform and are affected by the action.

IGJ and GJU: Shaping civil society views on globalisation issues

The Institute for Global Justice (IGJ) is a research-based advocacy NGO established in 2001, facilitated by INFID and some individual members of the Indonesian NGOs Monitoring Coalition on World Trade Organisation (Koalisi Ornop Pemantau WTO, or KOP-WTO). Rooted in Indonesian social movement and aimed as a part of global civil society network, IGJ envisions a ‘global justice order through social movements’ and aims to ‘deconstruct globalisation and facilitate social transformation in order to be critical towards globalisation through research, advocacy, education and networking activities’. There are three objectives that IGJ aspires to achieve, i.e. the development of critical awareness of the public about globalisation; the existence of local, national and global policy to protect and to appreciate life values and livelihood and a new world order based on pluralism, diversity, sustainability and justice (IGJ, 2001).

Indonesian CSOs – Formal status as strategy

The survey (of 268 CSOs during this study) shows that 73.13% of respondent CSOs are formally registered organisations. While this may sound strange recognising that many social movement organisations are informal (Crossley, 2002; Davis et al., 2005; Della-Porta and Diani, 2006), interviews may be able to provide some explanation. The program manager of Yayasan SET explained explicitly that, “in legal terms, all [CSOs] are foundations. What we have [termed as] NGOs, LSMs, CSOs – they are all [legally registered as] foundations” (Kristiawan, interview, 28/10/05). Kristiawan’s explanation confirms findings from previous work. In their attempt to escape from government control, there was a period when many Indonesian CSOs felt it necessary to formally register with the notary as a foundation (yayasan) as this would provide a necessary legal basis for the organisations’ existence and at the same time ‘exempted’ them from current laws aimed at controlling CSOs’ activities (Bunnell, 1996:198; Eldridge, 1995:7-8; Hadiwinata, 2003:95-96).