However, my research is finding that there are “cross-border” training motivated by customer needs and wants, professional standards, external reference groups (including political, religious, and cultural groups), shareholders, and internally, the group, department, organization, and even individual. What I am trying to tease out is which knowledge and learning is accessed in which situation and who determines what knowledge is relevant when. I’m seeing some powers. But I think many organizations wrongfully ignore the power of the external influences. These are then the influences that social media/networks drive.

My larger question, framed within the above context. is do you really think that organizations can create (maintain and continually improve the efficiency of) these learning networks – even if hierarchy, power (of course within limits) and authority are more equitably distributed – given all other social contract changes? Or is this notion far less universal and reserved for only certain types of workers?

A notion of connectivist learning theory (pressed into service within the organization) and employee engagement (the engaged employee willing gives discretionary effort that they might not otherwise have done) intrigues me… there seems to be a link here… like the useful creation of a common sense, Are these process normative or transformative? My sense is as I read a series of blogs on the topic I get the sense that the authors are expounding a new transformed world, I fear it may be a creative re-invention of Taylor, Mayo and others – normative.