Are women key to better collective intelligence?

Are women key to better collective intelligence?

The idea that some people are possess a higher level of general intellect than others, that some people are simply smarter than others, has been accepted in psychology for more than a century. But the new question has become, does this principle apply to groups as well? Are some groups simply smarter than others? If they are, imagine the ramifications for our legal system. Are some juries smarter than others? A group of MIT researchers set about to investigate this question of the relative intelligence of teams. They found that on average, groups that did well on one task did well on others as well. This is the same logic behind the finding that some people are generally smarter than others. If someone has a wide vocabulary, they are more likely to be better at math despite the two tasks being considered independent. Basically, some of the teams were smarter than others. It would follow then that teams with more smart people are smarter as well, right? Wrong. When the researchers began to dissect what exactly it is that makes some teams smarter they whittled it down to the following three factors: All members contributed equally; no one or two people dominated the conversation Members of smarter teams scored higher on tests that evaluated the ability of people to read complex emotional states from images in which only the eyes were visible Teams with more women tended to outperform teams with fewer women. Notably, equity among genders wasn’t desirable so much as having the most women possible. Basically, emotional intelligence and social sensitivity are the two key drivers behind...
Direct democracy

Direct democracy

This week we’ve been working hard on the launch of our collective intelligence software, Assembl. We have a few large projects kicking off and the preparation has got us thinking about its applications for direct democracy. It turns out many people aren’t aware of the concept or how it can be applicable to them in their lives. We wanted to share this video to help spread the word!     What do you think of direct democracy? Let us know in the comments below! Merci de partager autour de vous...

Michelin interviews bluenove CEO Martin Duval

President & CEO of bluenove Group MCB: BLUENOVE HAS BEEN A PRECURSOR IN TERMS OF OPEN INNOVATION. COULD YOU EXPLAIN WHAT OPEN INNOVATION IS AND WHAT YOU HAVE DEVELOPED? Martin Duval, President & COO of bluenove Group MD: The Open Innovation movement originated in the United States in 2001, through a project developed by Procter & Gamble and their “Connect & Develop” portal, an interactive platform aimed at publicizing their issues and recruiting participants. This concept was formalized in 2003 by Henry Chesbrough, Professor at Berkeley, and it rapidly attracted numerous adepts. The Bluenove company, precursor of Open Innovation in France, was created in 2008, at the convergence of three trends impacting companies: 1/ the context of a burgeoning financial crisis and budget constraints, 2/ the difficulty of keeping up with the increasing pace of technology, including the digital sector and 3/ the imperative need to integrate the factors of sustainable development further upstream of the innovation process. In addition to these three factors companies were frequently asking themselves about the perimeters of their core business: and therefore the areas where they had to innovate but with less means. Open Innovation therefore aims to mobilize through a participative innovation approach all the actors worldwide in the company’s ecosystem: external clients, suppliers, startups, labs, etc. and in-house all the employees. The Open Innovation approach is based on two fundamental questions: Are the arrangements in place for mobilizing collective intelligence sufficient? Namely the stakeholders – suppliers, clients, startups, employees, etc. and have they been well identified and are they sufficiently involved? Are the collaborative processes with and between these actors efficient...
Engagement hors norme – Pourquoi 1 intrapreneur vaut mieux que 100 employes ‘engages’ …

Engagement hors norme – Pourquoi 1 intrapreneur vaut mieux que 100 employes ‘engages’ …

Chez bluenove, nous considérons qu’un des facteurs clés qui permet aux entreprises de traverser cette phase si fragile et aléatoire de l’idée à l’innovation réside dans le niveau d’engagement des porteurs du projet … les INTRAPRENEURS. Cet article de Forbes l’illustre … On apprend dans un document de Gallup qu’aux Etats-Unis 30% des employés sont impliqués dans leur entreprise. En conséquence, au fil des ans, les professionnels des ressources humaines dépensent beaucoup de temps, d’énergie et d’argent à essayer de réimpliquer les 70% restants, avec un succès modéré. Cependant, impliquer les personnes désengagées pourrait ne pas être le bon objectif. Au lieu de cela, ils devraient envisager d’impliquer à un niveau supérieur les 30% d’employés déjà engagés. Ce niveau supérieur est le paradis pour les intrapreneurs, où non seulement ils veulent mais ils sont aussi capables de créer de la valeur inattendue. On peut créer davantage de valeur en transformant ne serait-ce qu’une personne impliquée en intrapreneur, plutôt qu’en amenant un nombre important de désengagés à rejoindre les impliqués. Niveau d’implication Etat d’esprit de l’employé Résultats organisationnels Intrapreneur Il a une vision d’ensemble, incluant les objectifs stratégiques, les désirs des clients, les menaces concurrentielles et la nécessité d’amélioration continue. Il se comporte en leader en créant de la valeur via des innovations permettant de réduire les coûts et augmenter les revenus. Engagé Il est lié émotionnellement à son entreprise et il ressent qu’il a les ressources et le soutien nécessaires pour réussir Il répond correctement aux attentes de son poste et soutient les leaders. Non engagé Il est détaché émotionnellement de son entreprise et a tendance à faire à peine plus que ce...