Collective Intelligence Best Practices

Governance forum lightning talk (updated)

(video)

Jim Whitescarver (jimscarver)

Originally RChain Governance Forum 2018-02-17

Collective Intelligence / hive mind

“the ability of a group to develop better problem solutions than the best individual solution in the group.? - Turoff-Hiltz

​

Common principles, goals and specialized roles and tasks allow the emergence of collective being when the group obeys behavioural norms, habits, processes and structured communications sufficiently such that the group identity exhibits collective behaviour that exceeds the contribution of the individuals

​

'fifth voice' or 'ghost soprano'

​

Collective intelligence best practices

• Smaller teams work better reporting to larger groups (4 together)
• facilitation/leadership - Identify agreement and put opposing views together
• Seek win-win-win solution consent (out of love rather than fear - John Kellden)
• Experimentation over planning - test alternatives, objective criteria
• Equal participation, e.g. Soliciting concerns and objections from everyone
• Working out loud
• Common habits/norms/processes
• Delayed choice
• Engaging expertise (up to five experts)
• Organic specialization
• Serendipity
• Gamification, anonymity,

Some findings of the NJIT EIES Legacy era

• without structure, the larger the group, the worse the decision
• up to five experts can improve a group decision
• on-line groups do at least as well as face to face groups
• face to face groups tend to be dominated by one or two (usually male) participants
• participants on on-line groups participate equally (gender independent)
• participants will collaborate only if they believe their privacy and control is protected
• competitors will collaborate only with respect to established shared principles
• the ideal initial group size is two. larger groups can be made most effective by maximizing the effectiveness of individual pairings and decomposing activities into smaller groups down to one on one activities.
• 25% of on-line group members get addicted to the system and apply it beyond its intended use, another 25% use it effectively, 25% use it due to group pressure, and 25% never use it. Success often demands including the absent.
• Anonymity and pseudonyms aid forth right communications, improving decision, particularly in hierarchical organizations.
• Tailoring a system for a group imparts a feeling of ownership and improves utilization beyond the added value of the tools provided.
• On-line asynchronous collaborative learning is as effective as the traditional classroom without the time and place constraints.

​

Silos

​

​

Cooperations

​

Slide taken rom: Daniel Robles ASCE Challenge

Capitalize on maximal distribution of power with effective global coordination. �Each individual is a center of a sphere of influence approximating a hypersphere

​

.�

Person Centralized + Decentralized + Distributed → Holographic Network

Chaordic organic structure including all perspectives on disorder in a holographic manner.

Anti-fragile Sociocratic Polyarchy → collective intelligence

...

Decentralized Governance

Stakeholder decision making

Representing all stakeholders

Delegation of authority

Interlinked autonomous teams

Collective intelligence+AI

Purposeful transparency

Creating a sociocratic polyarchy

​

RGOV - liquid trust network governance

• Individuals and groups use voter trust ratings to weight alternatives along with liquid democracy (affirmative trust).
• Groups and individuals are self governed according to peer to peer agreements.
• Standards for communication and exchange of capabilities (property)
• Optional cooperation components
• Decision tools - multisig,, multi stakeholder voting
• Asset pools - budgets, crowdfunds, staking pools
• Budgets awarded to teams divided how they decide
• Chat channels for distributing communications and capabilities
• User programmed
• Users can save and share actions with others

Consent

​

collectiveintelligencecollaboratory.com