INFOAXIOMS infoaxioms NAUTILUS INSTITUTE

1. INFOAXIOMS www.infoaxioms.orgNAUTILUS INSTITUTE

2. INFOAXIOM 1www.infoaxioms.org Common Knowledge Network effects Early entrants win Information Feedback Loops Standard setting is market power Do You Know your users’ needs? Gatekeepers and Intermediaries Information Distortion “Revenues” The best information is free

3. INFOAXIOM 1www.infoaxioms.org Common Knowledge Effective public policy electronic networks will: transform the information milieu create stocks of common knowledge that are the basis for cooperative engagement

4. INFOAXIOM 1www.infoaxioms.org Common Knowledge Effective public policy electronic networks will: transform the information milieu create stocks of common knowledge that are the basis for cooperative engagement

5. INFOAXIOM 1www.infoaxioms.org Consensual Knowledge and Public Policy What information frames the public policy issue and how can we transform this information milieu? What stocks of consensual knowledge are needed for cooperative engagement in this issue area?

6. INFOAXIOM 2www.infoaxioms.org Network effects As the number of nodes in a network increases, the total value of the network increases as well. To develop a policy network, member aggregation is paramount.

7. INFOAXIOM 2www.infoaxioms.org Network effects As the number of nodes in a network increases, the total value of the network increases as well. Not only what you read, but who else is reading it that matters

8. INFOAXIOM 2www.infoaxioms.org How do we achieve network dominance? What fraction of the key players (individuals, institutions, countries, sectors, etc.) must become addicted to our e-services to be the authoritative, reference site that auto-generates the network? And what moves them?

9. INFOAXIOM 2www.infoaxioms.org Common Knowledge and Networks Speed of diffusion varies by weak-strong links (less processing, less distance, fastest communication in weakly coupled networks) More powerful effect on proximate problem-solving Profile Directory Network mapping Analog: business networking: http://www.ryze.org/

10. INFOAXIOM 3www.infoaxioms.org Early entrants win Weak lock-in: users are compatible with themselves and don’t want to change Strong lock-in: using our service is incompatible with other services in some way so they can’t change even if they want to

11. INFOAXIOM 3www.infoaxioms.org Early entrants win The longer you wait to enter the field, the more difficult (and expensive) it will be to pry members out of existing online communities due in part to lock-in of already-committed users

12. INFOAXIOM 3www.infoaxioms.org Early Birds, Latecomers? If we are the early bird, in which core information services must we be world-class leaders? If we are latecomers, what are the unique niche needs that we can occupy and parlay into strength? Who are our collaborators in both instances?

13. INFOAXIOM 4www.infoaxioms.org Information Feedback Loops Users seek peer-sanctioned information dissemination services, and therefore, are more likely to learn about a commonly used network than one with few previous users. Hence, networks that win market share early gain an information feedback advantage.

14. INFOAXIOM 4www.infoaxioms.org Exploiting Information Feedback Loops Who are the opinion leaders and are they registered users willing to: appear (write for) validate (say something strong about relying upon the service) or introduce other users to us (by recommendation upon registration)? Are we hyperlinked to other sites/services?

15. INFOAXIOM 5www.infoaxioms.org Standard setting is market power The technical and legal standards underlying the internet are path-dependent. Due to network effects, they tend to have a winner-take all quality, with one standard becoming dominant. Devotees of other standards are left stranded.

16. INFOAXIOM 5www.infoaxioms.org Standard setting is market power What standard of service is critical to being dominant? Are we setting the standard or following? Examples: responsive to individual need (eg modular email), timely (daily, if so, what time of day in what time zone?), analytic (opeds from diverse, antithetical viewpoints), reasonable (offer agendas that are consistent with conflict resolution without war), two tier (email and web based) etc.

17. INFOAXIOM 6www.infoaxioms.org Know your users’ needs In policy information networks, consumer utility is maximized when the product is short, timely, and of high quality Due to low switching costs, less-than-best service will rapidly lose dominance

18. INFOAXIOM 6www.infoaxioms.org Do You Know your users’ needs? Is the product is short, timely, and of high quality--what do these terms mean in your issue area (guidelines please!) How do you know your network user’s needs? Have you asked a sample? All of them (survey)? Inferred from others’ service? Is your registration growing exponentially? If not, why not?

19. INFOAXIOM 6www.infoaxioms.org Do You Know your users’ needs? how do you combine deep research and analysis with timely, succinct, broad, information service, and with dialogue that promotes diversity and difference in search of common knowledge?

20. INFOAXIOM 7 www.infoaxioms.org Gatekeepers and Intermediaries “Information overload leads to a scarcity of attention.” Increasingly attention is becoming a scarce resource Those who can distinguish valuable signals from white noise gain power

21. INFOAXIOM 7 www.infoaxioms.org Gatekeepers and Intermediaries Are you serving key public policy decision-makers (at all the levels and sectors needed for dominance in an information milieu)? Have you gone the extra mile to get the service to the key leaders having identified them?

22. INFOAXIOM 8www.infoaxioms.org Information Distortion As they process and forward upwards information, big organizations condense it. The final output at the top will be very different in quality from the original input In short, significant distortion will occur. The goal of non-profit information networks is to bypass these information-distorting channels.

23. INFOAXIOM 8www.infoaxioms.org Information Distortion What strategies do you employ to bypass the information-distorting channels and effects of big organizations that you are aiming to affect? Personal networks Introductions from right people Use of home email address Extreme summaries for busy people vs longer reference material for researcher types (eg DR vs weekly summaries)

24. INFOAXIOM 9 www.infoaxioms.org “Revenues” Excellent information is costly to produce but cheap to reproduce. Therefore you must price your information good according to consumer value, not according to your production cost Electronic publishing SAVES cost The right revenue for a public information good is not $ but valuable information about users and creation of consensual knowledge

25. INFOAXIOM 9 www.infoaxioms.org “Revenues” Who in the donor world cares about the information and might be willing to pay for creating a free public information good? Are you collecting useful information about users during registration that can be used in the networking/advocacy phases? What missing information/analysis is needed to create consensual knowledge sufficient for a cooperative engagement strategy to unfold in a conflict situation? Can your network supply it or do you need to bring in new players/analysts?

26. INFOAXIOM 10www.infoaxioms.org The best information is free Excellent e-information is more valuable when it is abundant Excellent e-information is cheaper as its value increases due to abundance The most valuable e-information is ubiquitous and free

27. INFOAXIOM 10www.infoaxioms.org Is your information the best and free? Does your network generate abundant information that is tailored to user need? Does it get cheaper to produce excellent information as your network achieves dominance? Have you minimized (close to zero or positive as possible) the registration cost to the user?

28. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Old Information Hierarchy High Perceived Importance Low Liberal Conservative

29. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Old Information Hierarchy High Routine Diplomatic Reporting Routine HUMINT Reporting and CIA Analysis Arms Control Analysis from ACDA and the Labs Perceived Importance Routine DIA Reporting and Analysis IAEA Reporting “Liberal” US Press “Centrist” US Press and Electronic Media Activist-Grass Roots NGO Information Conservative US Press Foreign Press: FBIS and JPRS Low Conservative Academic Analysis Liberal Public Opinion Conservative Foundation Generated Reports Typical Track II Diplomacy Most Belt Way Bandit Analysis Liberal Academic Analysis

30. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Old Information Hierarchy High Policy Advice from “Serious” Allied Governments or World Statesmen Policy and Budget Advice from “Serious” Members of Congress Sensitive HUMINT Reporting (Colored Border) Sensitive State Department Diplomatic Reporting (NODIS) Perceived Importance Restricted Data DOE/National Labs and Technical Analysis Executive Branch Initiated Track II Diplomacy “A Team” DIA Reporting Recommendations of Respected Former Gov. Officials Perceptions of Fully Cleared Exec. Branch Staff With Formal “Need to Know” Elite DOD Funded Think Tank Analysis Low Liberal Conservative

31. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Old Information Hierarchy High Final US President Recommendation From Select Heads of State Policy “Choice Candidates” and Recommendations from Intimate Presidential Advisors, Cabinet Secretaries, and Select Senior Policy Makers Eyes-Only Information from the Soviet Union and Advice from Associated Experts NSC-DOD Dominated Inter-Agency Tasking, Decision Memos and Advice from Select Senior Staff “Hard” SCI Intelligence Data: COMINT, ELINT, Photo-Reconnaissance, Environmental Sampling Perceived Importance Low Liberal Conservative

32. Emerging New Paradigm Information Hierarchy Two-Hat-Plus Innovators 1 One Percent, One-Hat (Career-Track) “Pros” 2 3 Two Hat Plus Establishment Gatekeepers 4 Two-Hat Traditionalists Radical Republican Isolationalists 5 One Hat Implementers 6

33. information axioms Bibliography http://www.infoaxioms.org

34. information axioms Bibliography http://www.infoaxioms.org