From the original post it took three clicks to actually read the document, and that includes a form asking for my name and email for spamming purposes. But I'm interested in networks and I wanted to see what they had to say about evaluating networks. I could probably have stayed with the original post, although the case studies casebook is a substantial document. My main issue is that, although they are using the word network, what they are actually evaluating are consortia or collaborations. Why do I say this? Well, there's the presumption of a common objective, limited or closed membership, rules and processes - all the hallmarks of a single cohesive organization, and not a distributed entity such as a network. I'd point to their definition or account of what a network is, but they don't have one; all they have are very standard and very ordinary evaluation criteria that would be familiar to any hierarchical organization.
Today: 1 Total: 22 [Direct link] [Share]
View full size
