Task 3b: Concepts of the Professional Network

I have studied the many different concepts relating to Professional Networking and believe that, although initially it was a lot to take in, following time studying, researching and reflecting I understand the views put forward will provide valuable in helping me develop my own professional networks.

Firstly, I feel it best to clarify the meaning of “Professional Networking”. This will help me relate the theories to my own experience of networking within both my personal and professional life. Professional Networking is defined as a 'work related community held together by either close working affiliation or more distant but common work interests or needs'. A network is not simply restricted to work colleagues it can take many shapes and forms, for example, close relationships or more distant acquaintances, friendships created in an informal setting or work affiliates who share the same profession or interests. Whatever the setting, an effective network requires time and effort in order to carve a career within your chosen profession.

The main concept of Co-operation is asking when a person should co-operate, and when they should be selfish in order to succeed. It is described as the “will and way to win” (Alan Durrant, Reader 3 BAPP). The main person to research this topic is Robert Axelrod, an American political scientist whose focus was the evolution of cooperation. In 1984 he identified the need for cooperation until you reach a “point of maximum benefit” (Axelrod, R. (1984) The evolution of cooperation. London: Penguin). This raises the debate: do we need others within our network to aid our progress or should they be seen a threat to our career?

When relating this concept to my networks, I believe a different attitude should be taken towards employment and self-employment. As a teaching assistant I had to apply and interview for a job. This required a selfish approach to the situation - in order to beat off competition, I needed to see all fellow applicants as a threat to me achieving my goal. There would no personal benefit in cooperating with other applicants in this instance, however starting my business as a dance teacher is a different matter. In order to start a business from scratch many new relationships need to be formed including people involved in hiring the required space, those involved in advertising and, of course, new customers. Cooperation was required to get the ball rolling and get the business on its feet, maybe not all initial plans were possible but compromise was essential in making sure the foundations had been laid. Once the business is established however the owner starts to develop the power to become more selfish. Maybe they don’t need others just as much and so cooperation isn’t as essential as it once was, decisions are made with the goal of the business in mind. This may not have always been the case, and personally I haven’t found the need to cut off anyone in my network but I can see how it can occur when one feels they have reached the “point of maximum benefit”.

The issues raised with the concept of cooperation are linked to the type of person who is involved. A person who has a high level of affiliation and need for social stimulation is less likely to come to the point of maximum benefit within a network. Networking is a natural social process in which people “form close relationships” (Crisp, J & Turner, R. (2007) Essential social psychology. London: Sage) of support that will help when in need however the level of affiliation desired may differentiate from person to person; this can be described as being ‘introvert’ or ‘extrovert’. This simply means that the level of need for affiliation is directly linked to the preferred level of privacy which is, in turn, linked to the level of social stimulation required by a person to be content in their networks, both professional and personal. Whether introvert or extrovert, the concept of affiliation also includes the principles of homeostasis – the need to keep levels of contact stable at a desired level. People want to be in control of how close they get to certain people, for example, I endeavour to keep all my networks in a certain place: family and friends close to me whereas colleagues, parents and pupils and work acquaintances at more of a distance. This ensure I have a gap between the people who know me personally, all my thoughts, opinions, beliefs, doubts, flaws and goals, and the people who know me professionally, who may not need to know me on the same level. For those who do not enjoy socialising, but prefer to remain private and introvert, a network may still be necessary to help their professional career, likewise, those who have established successful careers and are happy with their jobs often still have large professional networks. But why? Following some reflection on why people who do not enjoy socialising or affiliating themselves with others, I have come to the conclusion that all people have a sense of “just in case”. The smallest doubt in the mind can lead to people maintaining contacts within networks, just in case they need the support in the future- the potential is enough.

 

The main principle of Social Constructivism is that humans construct their own meaning of the world through experiences of social interactions. This idea has roots stretching back to Ancient Greek philosophy, right through the middle ages, continuing to the present time. The concept discusses how your views on the world are constructed through social attitudes and objects only have the potential of having meaning, constructed by human beings. Crotty. M. (2005) ‘The foundations of social research: meaning and perspectives in the research process’ (London: Sage) uses the example of a tree. As human beings we look at a tree and understand that it is, indeed, a tree. But the word ‘tree’ and all associations we attach to it have been constructed by us, human beings. What we must remember, however, is that a tree has a very different meaning to many people, depending on where they are from, what they do and if they have any association or emotional attachment to a particular tree or trees in general.

I the same way we can relate this concept to our networks and the people within them. To me, one person may just be a professional acquaintance, someone whom I see at the occasional training day and who I discuss the latest developments within our profession. That same person, however, can be seen in a completely different way to another person, whether they are a close relative or friend. They may even come across as a different person, with their ‘professional head’ turned off and their guard down, revealing a totally different personality to the one that I see. This is same person but, using the principle of social constructivism, my views and attitudes attributed to the person are entirely different to those who have a different emotional connection.

 

Connectivism is another principle raised. This questions the idea that there is only one way of teaching: knowledge is transferred from teacher to pupil. In it, G Siemens (2004) ‘Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age’ not only suggests that learning and learning activities should now be combined but that the traditional way of formal learning should be rejected entirely. I find the ideas raised within this section very interesting as I can relate to them in my teaching; a lot of the thoughts match my personal views on developing a pupil’s knowledge, technique and confidence.

Driscoll (2000) defines learning as “a persisting change in human performance or performance potential…[which] must come about as a result of the learner’s experience and interaction with the world” (p. 11) This explains that learning should be thought of as a long term, continual process in which a person always develops and grows. For this to occur, I believe a pupil needs to be given the foundations to learning: how to learn, why to learn and the basic techniques of a chosen profession. This can prepare a person mentally and physically (in the case of dance) to start heading down the pathway of learning, giving them the freedom to grow and blossom in their own individual way through communities of practice and the freedom to evolve. Siemens states that “many learners will move into a variety of different, possible unrelated fields over the course of their lifetime” and so by giving a pupil the skills to learn they are equipped to move in whatever direction they decide and still be able to acquire knowledge. “Knowledge is negotiated through experience and thinking” (Siemens, G 2004) and just like the principle of social constructivism, connectivism states that “reality is interpreted” as a result of “experience and interaction with the world” and so as a teacher I believe it is my duty to give a student a starting point to their journey, and make as many experiences as possible available to them.

In terms of networking, Laszlo Barabasi states that “Nodes always compete for connections because links represent survival in an interconnected world.” ( This backs up the importance of networking and maintaining connections with people who have similar interests and knowledge to yourself. It also raises the point that weak connections are just as, if not more important with regards to furthering your career as they are often the ones that enable you to branch out and take opportunities that may take you down an interesting career path.

I have found this principle extremely interesting and complex and I have taken a lot of time to look into it however I do not feel I have fully understood all aspects of it. I hope to be able to reflect upon some of the issues raised and be able to develop my knowledge and opinions through time.

Finally, communities of practice has been developed in order to explain “learning as the process of engagement in social relationships rather than a process of acquisition of knowledge as an individual” (Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991) Situated Learning. Legitimate peripheral participation, Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press). It discusses the importance of social input within learning, if a person feels fulfilled and content in their affiliation to others they are more open and ready to learn. Members of communities of practice, otherwise known a networks, share a mutual interest and knowledge about a discipline, enabling them to connect as a network and develop into a social entity and share their repertoire of resources.

This occurs all of the time, however it mainly reminds me of training at musical theatre school, and the way many people of different ages and backgrounds were put together with the sole connection of a love of performing. The training was extremely challenging but the sense of teamwork helped to pull us all together to get through difficult assessments and obstacles. The lack of hierarchy, as discussed by Lave and Wegner, helped to balance the social group and maintain trust without one person feeling inferior to others.

 

I will continue to reflect upon the principles, opinions and ideas raised throughout this task as I feel there is simply too much information to be able to say I have understood it all. I have enjoyed getting my head around the contrasting and comparative views and hope to be able to discuss the issues further.