This task involved researching theories and ideas that pre exist about professional networking, stimulating ideas so that you can attain knowledge that will hopefully engage you in similar types of practices/networking situations.
How do I think about the different concepts of professional networking from research I've done?
How useful is it to me?
The concepts featured in Reader 3 have definitely shed light on new and knowledgeable ideas surrounding networking. I really got a lot of benefit from reading part 3, it has influenced me immensely. I now feel better prepared and more knowledgeable about professional networking and how to go about it.
To begin, I didn't even properly know what a professional network meant, once I realised what it is defined as it brought with it an understanding. I then could relate and work out all the current professional networks I engage with. It was interesting to learn that one opinion of professional networking was that 'your effective engagement of your professional network may well impact on your success, promotion and development, your sense of worth and fulfilment, and even enjoyment in working life'.
I am already starting to see benefits of putting into practice networking and the different approaches. For instance, I attended an event last night called 'Where fashion meets dance' and engaged with various people, retrieved two business cards and today have contacted them both.
Discovering game theory was an interesting concept for me, I had to read and research upon it before understanding and grasping its theory. Being all about co operation it occurred to me that in actual fact you are better off when you co operate as opposed to betraying, even though it rewards more. You run a huge risk by betraying and 'defecting' as oppose to co operating. Its all about sussing out other 'players', for instance if they wanted to betray and use you selfishly for the sole purpose of benefiting themselves; would you really want to work with this person anyway? This also poses the greater notion of 'would the world be better off if we co operated with every encounter in the first place?'. That would be an interesting research in itself! But getting back to the reader, I'm unsure whether I like Axelrod's idea and of co operating 'until you reach the maximum point of benefit, and then to defect'. This seems selfish and rather heartless to me. I do see the benefits and I would perhaps use this against people and companies who do not appreciate me or have respect for my work and efforts. To use this theory against a supportive, honest and good hearted person/employer to me is totally wrong. However, I suppose another view is that the dance/entertainment/arts industry functions in this way and always has, I guess I would just be following procedure/code and convention.
I liked the affiliation section in the reader, one explanation initiates that it provides us 'with a network of support that will help us when we are in need' this is important to our networking skills as it suggests that the more people we stay connected to, the more chance of help and support would be offered when we would need it. Lack of affiliation may have a lasting negative impact, some people are more inclined than others to seek out affiliation. This is our how differ in our engagement, which is due to Homeostatis. This is the difference between the extrovert and the introvert, an open or close person. This is determined by our biological and cultural differences. This made me realise that by considering myself as an extrovert I'm more liable to engage with people more comfortably than perhaps considered the introvert personality. In the Reader it poses a question: 'is professional networking an extension of our innate capacity and need to affiliate to develop our careers?' I think if you are a much more openly confident person this would help with professional networking. This is a 'psychological need' in all of us, we all do it, it just varies to what depth and extent in which we each do.
The theory of connectivity and social constructionism is very probing, from what I gathered from this theory is that life is what we make it, our reality is being constructed in and out of interaction between human beings and their world. It is developed and transmitted within an essentially social context. It is through our interactions that our existence lives, this is why associating in large groups is very important.
The theory of connectivism is special and central to our course on BAPP. This is all about ideas and information being spread through the use of the internet. The tools we use technology wise are now defining and shaping our thinking and in turn, our learning. Learners are now actively attempting to create meaning, this goes back to the very start of our learning in Reader 1 and the ideas behind Web 2.0 tools. Linking this to a professional network suggests we can construct our own network and engage actively in interactive learning.
Communities of practice is how we come together as social groups, we organise and determine our grouping based on shared interest and vision. As we are engaging in larger groups it provides us with access to variation, vision and views and in turn builds a wider learning base for us all. Introducing Web 2.0 tools enforces communities of practice onto an even bigger platform as ideas and topics of discussion are presented to the world, across cultures and moral upbringings, religion and ethical consideration. What is now suitable to post to the wider world? What can we share that all will be willing to engage in? We must think of this while making decisions to share, promote and connect our chosen networks.
I have inherited a great deal of knowledge and understanding on professional networking, from concepts and ideas to things to consider and be aware of before and whilst attempting and proceeding to do so. I definitely get provoked and more determined from learning and experiencing networks whilst reading/researching and being in the midst of networking myself.
No comments:
Post a Comment