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.
