Skip to main content

If information is power, why share information? (on the elusive search for transparency & collaboration)

So this is what I still don't get and I'm hoping maybe others can provide some insight. Maybe I'm just missing the obvious but...


1. If we are operating in an information economy, then information has value akin to financial currency.


Therefore it follows logically that - 


2. You wouldn't give away all your money...so what is the rational reason for sharing information, particularly information of value?


Perhaps you could argue that information-sharing is like a financial investment and:


3. You invest a limited amount of information-sharing for the sake of getting good information back - like putting your money in the stock market so that you earn enough interest to outpace inflation. 


However, there are a few powerful contravening factors in that giving away information can make you lose:


* Status/power/respect - if others are as expert as you, why do you occupy this place in the hierarchy? You may lose your mystique as people understand how you operate. And by making yourself vulnerable, others may see you as weak.


* Credibility - by showing that you've made a mistake, others may perceive that you're not worthy of the status or station that you hold


* Security - hostile individuals, organizations, or (in the case of government) enemy entities can exploit what you've shared to plan an attack on you, or use what you've said to harm you in another way.


...Not to mention that you can lurk and obtain information without ever having to share anything.


There are some arguments in response to the above but all of them seem fairly weak in comparison with social, legal, economic and physical survival:


* Social norms (everybody's sharing) - and perhaps you/your organization run the risk of not being trusted nowadays unless you are relatively open about things


* Status (people who share get respect from others and are perceived as likable)


* Self-esteem (it feels good to help other people)


The only argument one can't really argue with is 


* Legal compliance (sharing is often required)


...but even there the individual/organization may seek to change the law or comply in such a way that the information shared isn't useful or accessible.


So back to the question - if you're a self-protecting person or organization that doesn't need or want the esteem benefits of sharing and doesn't perceive it as normative, then why would you share anything beyond the bare minimum of what is legally required?


Or even further - wouldn't you try to amend the law so that the compliance requirements are fewer?


This question has so many applications, from the entire OpenGov movement to social media more broadly...comments please.

Popular posts from this blog

What is the difference between brand equity and brand parity?

Brand equity is a financial calculation. It is the difference between a commodity product or service and a branded one. For example if you sell a plain orange for $.50 but a Sunkist orange for $.75 and the Sunkist orange has brand equity you can calculate it at $.25 per orange.

Brand parity exists when two different brands have a relatively equal value. The reason we call it "parity" is that the basis of their value may be different. For example, one brand may be seen as higher in quality, while the other is perceived as fashionable.

________________
All opinions my own. Originally posted to Quora. Public domain photo by hbieser via Pixabay.

What is the difference between "brand positioning," "brand mantra," and "brand tagline?"

Brand positioning statement: This is a 1–2 sentence description of what makes the brand different from its competitors (or different in its space), and compelling. Typically the positioning combines elements of the conceptual (e.g., “innovative design,” something that would be in your imagination) with the literal and physical (e.g., “the outside of the car is made of the thinnest, strongest metal on earth”). The audience for this statement is internal. It’s intended to get everybody on the same page before going out with any communication products.Brand mantra: This is a very short phrase that is used predominantly by people inside the organization, but also by those outside it, in order to understand the “essence” or the “soul” of the brand and to sell it to employees. An example would be Google’s “Don’t be evil.” You wouldn’t really see it in an ad, but you might see it mentioned or discussed in an article about the company intended to represent it to investors, influencers, etc.Br…

Nitro Cold Brew and the Oncoming Crash of Starbucks

A long time ago (January 7, 2008), the Wall Street Journal ran an article about McDonald's competing against Starbucks.
At the time the issue was that the former planned to pit its own deluxe coffees head to head with the latter.
At the time I wrote that while Starbucks could be confident in its brand-loyal consumers, the company, my personal favorite brand of all time,  "...needs to see this as a major warning signal. As I have said before, it is time to reinvent the brand — now.  "Starbucks should consider killing its own brand and resurrecting it as something even better — the ultimate, uncopyable 'third space' that is suited for the way we live now.  "There is no growth left for Starbucks as it stands anymore — it has saturated the market. It is time to do something daring, different, and better — astounding and delighting the millions (billions?) of dedicated Starbucks fans out there who are rooting for the brand to survive and succeed." Today as …