Rebel Alliance Empowering
  • Home
    • In synthesis
    • Contact
  • About | index
    • 1\\About
    • 2\\Preambol
    • 3\\Towards a digital cinema
    • 4\\Empowerment at the basis of cooperation
    • 5\\Supply chain and networking
    • 6\\As an Holonic System
    • 7\\Business Model
    • 8\\Conclusion
  • What We Do | index
    • RAE | video sample
    • The Alliance
    • VMUST
  • Knowledge Bank | index
    • e-Zine
    • Glossary
    • Visual Effects' Glossary
    • Document download >
      • cognitive science
      • circular economy
      • creative industries
      • change management
      • strategy
      • storytelling&transmedia
    • Video
    • References & Additional Bibliography

e-Zine

R.A.N.K.E.D.
knowledge bank index

Holonic network: Rebel Alliance an Holonic System

29/5/2014

 
Reti Oloniche & Rebel Alliance 

Rebel Alliance Empowering è un programma/progetto che definisce un “Sistema a Rete Olonico ”  in continua evoluzione e tendenzialmente in espansione pensato in termini di capacità organizzativa potenziale per  favorire l'aggregazione rapida di imprese finalizzate allo sfruttamento di opportunità  di business.
Per spiegare sinteticamente cosa è un Sistema Olonico, prendiamo spunto, anche,  da alcuni punti di una relazione del Prof. Saccani.
Il sistema Rebel Alliance Empowering e' dunque  un’entità globale organizzata di interrelazioni tra unità operative (imprese) e Soggetti ( professionisti)  ad alto livello di autoregolazione e capaci di cooperare tra loro (ossia di condurre vari tipi di transazioni efficaci) mantenendo la propria autonomia in vista di risultati condivisi o di finalità comuni.  I confini di tale sistema non sono limitati e superano per estensione geografica i confini territoriali operativi di ogni singolo Olone e per rapporti gerarchici quelli di una filiera di decentramento produttivo. Infatti le imprese sono tenute insieme da un insieme complesso di legami che governa di fatto i rapporti tra esse in uno spirito di partnership globale.

Lo scopo fondamentale di questo sistema non e' quello della semplice accumulazione di conoscenza, ma piuttosto quello della creazione di una base di conoscenza condivisa, di competenze specifiche e di capacità di auto- organizzazione che guidino e modellino il sistema di percezione degli stimoli esterni, la loro diffusione rapida all'interno del Sistema e la loro trasformazione in azioni finalizzate al business. Il modo di fare business di questi sistemi pertanto è caratterizzato da una continua e articolata interazione reciproca, non traumatica, tra un gruppo di imprese e l'ambiente circostante.

Come un organismo vivente il sistema olonico non è  una semplice aggregazione di imprese, di parti di esse o di processi elementari, quanto piuttosto una gerarchia integrata di sottosistemi autonomi costituiti a loro volta da sottosistemi e così  via.

Ciascun sottosistema persegue un proprio obiettivo autonomo, ma è in grado di allinearsi con tutti gli altri nel perseguire un obiettivo comune.

Il sistema olonico non è un'alleanza tattica o un consorzio tra imprese per affrontare insieme questo o quel problema specifico quanto piuttosto un'alleanza di natura strategica che coinvolge un vasto numero di soggetti all'interno di un determinato sistema di business e garantisce loro la massima autonomia operativa con il supporto di una base superiore di conoscenza a livello sistemico.

In un sistema olonico non è  la struttura a rimanere invariante nel tempo, fornendo a esso la identità , quanto piuttosto il sistema di interrelazioni che si ritrova a tutti i livelli della gerarchia.

Le unità  funzionali a ogni livello della gerarchia sono a due facce in quanto agiscono:
a) come totalità quando sono rivolte verso il basso;
b) come parti quando sono rivolte verso l'alto.


Ogni sottosistema viene denominato "olone" in quanto presenta sia le proprietà  autonome che lo distinguono dalle altre parti del sistema sia tutte le proprietà  che distinguono il sistema, nella sua totalità ,  da altri.

Descritto in questo modo il sistema olonico presenta analogie molto forti, almeno nei principi fondamentali con l'idea di federalismo. Parafrasando ciò che l’economista Charles Handy afferma parlando di federalismo,  il sistema olonico "cerca di essere grande in certe cose e piccolo in altre, di centralizzare in alcuni casi e di decentralizzare in altri. Cerca di operare localmente attraverso molte delle sue decisioni, ma di dare ai propri obiettivi un carattere globale. Si sforza di massimizzare l'indipendenza, tenendo conto che esiste comunque una certa interdipendenza; di incoraggiare le differenze ma entro certi limiti; cerca di mantenere un centro forte ma al servizio delle parti; può e deve essere guidato da quel centro ma deve essere gestito dalle diverse entità.  All'interno di un sistema olonico il piccolo può  influenzare il grande e i singoli possono esercitare la loro influenza".  L'idea di sistema olonico, elaborata per descrivere alcune strutture organizzative diffuse nel mondo della natura (ad esempio: stella marina), può  essere applicata anche al mondo delle imprese come modello di riferimento per descrivere una configurazione sistemica fortemente flessibile, reattiva e adattativa.

I sistemi di produzione olonici, derivano la loro architettura dal modello del sistema autonomo distribuito essendo il controllo delegato alle singole unità periferiche, ma con un meccanismo di coordinamento tra di esse che agisce attraverso la cooperazione. Per ottenere la coordinazione e la cooperazione all’interno del sistema è indispensabile l’esistenza di un obiettivo comune che sia in grado di indurre i diversi elementi del sistema ad unirsi ancora prima del manifestarsi di una immediata necessità. Questo può essere ottenuto anche mediante di politiche di comunicazione organizzativa che, attraverso strumenti come la vision e la mission aziendali, infondano nella componente umana dell’olarchia il senso di appartenenza e di equifinalità del sistema.

Rebel Alliance &  Holonic Network

Rebel Alliance is a program/project which can be defined a “Holonic Network System”, continuously evolving and expanding, thought in terms of organizational and potential capacity to ease firm’s quick aggregation aimed at the usage of business opportunities. The Rebel Alliance Empowering System is a global entity, so, is a global entity organized in cross-relations between operative units (firms) and Subjects (professionals) characterized by high levels of self-regulation and capable of operating mutually (which means developing a number of efficient transactions) keeping their own autonomy toward the achieve shared results or collective aims.

The boundaries of this type of system de facto do not exist, and overcome by geographic extent the single holons’ territorial operative bounds and by hierarchic relations those of a decentered productive chain. In fact, firms are hold together by a complex ensemble of connections which actually rule the relations amongst them keeping a spirit of global partnership. The fundamental aim of this system is not merely the one of knowledge-gathering, but actually the one of the creation of a shared-knowledge base, of specific skills and self-organizational capabilities which can guide and model the perception system of external stimulus, their quick diffusion in the System and their transformation in business-oriented actions. The way of making business of this system, therefore, is characterized by a continuous and articulated mutual interaction, between a group of firms and the environment that surrounds them.

Such as a living body, the holonic system is not a simple aggregation of firms, of elementary processes, but actually it is an integrated hierarchy of autonomous subsystems built in turn by subsystems, and so on.

Each subsystem pursues its own objectives, but it is acutlly capable of building alliances with all of the others to pursue a common objective. The Holonic system is not a tactical alliance or a firms’ union built in order to face together an upcoming problem, but it is a strategic alliance which involves a big number of subjects in a determined business sytem and grants them the maximum operative autonomy supported by a superior systemic base knowledge.
In an Holonic system, it is not the structure that supplies identity to itself by staying unchanged, but it is actually the cross-relation system that can be found at any level of the hierarchy.

Fuctional units at each level of the hierarchy have a double face, as the act as follows:

  1. As a totality when they face downwards
  2. As single elements when they face upwards
Each subsystem is called an “Holon”, as it presents either the autonomous properties, which make it different from the other parts of the system, and all of those properties which mark the system itself, in its totality, by the others.

Described in this terms, the holonic system presents strong analogies, in fundamental principles at least, with the idea of federalism. Paraphrasing what the economist Charles Handy said when talking about federalism, the holonic system “tries to be big in some things and small in some other, it tries to centralize in some cases, and decentralize in some others. It tries to operate locally through many of its decisions, but at the same time trying to give to its objective a global feel. It tries to maximize independence, never forgetting about a sort of dependence; it tries to encourage diversity without exaggerating; it tries to keep a strong center, which works for all of its provinces; it HAS to be driven by that center, but managed by the different entities. In an holonic system the small can influence the big and the individuals can exercise their influence”. The idea of holonic system, built to describe some organizational structures which can be found in nature, can be also applied in the world of business as a basic model to describe a flexible system configuration, reactive and adaptive.

Holonic production system inherit their architecture for the model of the distributed autonomous system delegated to the single peripheral units, but with a coordination system which acts through cooperation. To obtain coordination and cooperation in a system, the existence of a common objective is fundamental, as it makes the different elements of the system to come even closer to themselves even before the manifestation of an actual necessity. This can be obtained also through politics of organizative communication which, through instruments such as firm’s mission and vision, build in the human component of olarchy the sense of belonging and equifinality of the system.




Immagine
struttureorganizzative_olonicovirtuali__chiavaccini_pisa_02.pdf
File Size: 1225 kb
File Type: pdf
Scarica file

approccio_olonico_e_mercati_xxi_secolo_dominici.pdf
File Size: 360 kb
File Type: pdf
Scarica file

il_sistema_evoluto_delle_reti_dimpresa_provasi.pdf
File Size: 325 kb
File Type: pdf
Scarica file

Fai clic qui per effettuare modifiche.

Digital Humanism | Umanesimo Digitale

11/12/2013

 
L’Umanesimo digitale [*]

è il risultato di una convergenza fino ad ora poco esplorata tra patrimoni culturali complessi e una sfera sociale che non ha precedenti. Questa convergenza , invece di limitarsi a formare un legame tra l’antichità e il presente,  ha ridistribuito  concetti,  categorie ed oggetti , così come i comportamenti e le pratiche a loro  associate,  il tutto accade in un nuovo ambiente . L’Umanesimo digitale è l'affermazione che la tecnologia attuale , nella sua globalità , è diventata  una Cultura , in quanto crea un nuovo contesto , su scala globale . E' una Cultura , perché il mondo digitale , nonostante abbia un grande fattore di sviluppo costituito dall’elemento tecnico -  che deve essere costantemente interrogato e controllato (perché la tecnologia costituisce  l'agente della “volontà economica”), sta diventando il fattore di sviluppo di una nuova Civiltà  che si distingue per il modo in cui  l’Uomo inizia ad avere una nuova visione degli oggetti , delle relazioni e dei valori,  caratterizzata  dalle nuove possibilità che vengono apportate nel campo dell'attività umana  dalle tecnologie digitali.  Il mondo digitale è una Cultura perché ci dimostra che sapere come vivere insieme e come imparare a comportarsi sono parte integrante di questo socialità emergente , questa nuova  ibrida socialità  costituisce il palcoscenico per un nuovo approccio  alle obbligazioni , ai corpi e alla mobilità.
Digital humanism [*]

is the result of a hitherto non-experienced convergence between our complex cultural heritage and a technology that has produced a social sphere that has no precedent. This convergence, instead of simply forming a link between antiquity and now, has redistributed concepts, categories, and objects, as well as behaviours and associated practices, all in a new environment. Digital humanism is the affirmation that current technology, in its global dimension, is a culture, in that it creates a new context, on a global scale.
It is a culture, because the digital world, despite its having a large technical element that needs to be constantly questioned and monitored (because it is the agent of economic will), is becoming a civilisation that stands apart for the way in which it affects our view of objects, relationships and values, and which is characterised by the new possibilities that are being brought to the field of human activity. The digital world is a culture because it shows us that knowing how to live together and learning how to behave are integral parts of this emerging sociability, this hybrid sociability that forms the stage for bonds, bodies and mobility
*  definition by prof. Milad Doueihi,  titulaire de la chaire de recherche sur les cultures numériques à l’université Laval (Québec)
About Digital Humanism
Article  by  Milad DOUEIHI  •  Published 16.07.2013  •  Updated 16.07.2013

Digital technology is changing the actual notion of territory as well as that of knowledge and habitat. Digital humanism is then a way of perceiving this new reality.


For anthropologists, modern means of communication, while intensifying relations, increase the lack of authenticity in those exchanges by bringing in a layer of bureaucracy, a sort of distancing and fragmentation that are part of a framework that is both administrative and global. In L’anthropologie face aux problèmes du monde moderne, Claude Lévi-Strauss, identifies this condition as being political because it characterises modern relations between citizens and the powers that be. This is in part what explains his interest in the first communication theory founded by Norbert Wiener and John von Neumann. The global scale of communication structures and what we chose later on to call the information society invites anthropologists to rethink, at least partially, the concepts and the main categories of his work. The terrain, the method, the forms of exchange and especially the ways social links are formed are to be reviewed. So, we are not surprised to find out that anthropologists are more at ease in a village or even in an area of a town than in a large city. Why is this? Because, Lévi-Strauss tells us, “[...] fifty thousand people do not form a society in the way that five hundred do. In the first case, communication is not established primarily between people, or on the model of interpersonal communication. The social reality of the “emitters” and the “receivers” (to use the language of communication theorists) disappears behind the complexity of “codes” and “intermediaries”.”[+] The personal link remains a key element of what is specific to the way an anthropologist views matters. They scrutinise, through so-called authentic societies, the expression of myths and their contributions to modes of thinking. In this context, contemporary intermediaries (communication systems, technology, etc.) deepen the abyss that separates myth and history, authentic and inauthentic societies.

 This perspective also explains why Lévi-Strauss considers anthropology to be a humanist discipline, and first and foremost the culmination of the humanist modes of thinking that have placed their stamp on history and on the changes that have taken place in Western societies. Anthropology is not a new science or a recent discipline. Back in 1956, in a note written for UNESCO, he identified three kinds of humanism in the conclusion to his analyses of the relationships between the sciences and the social sciences. According to Lévi-Strauss, these three forms of humanism have always been anthropological. The humanism of the Renaissance, based firmly on the rediscovery of classical texts from Antiquity, exotic humanism, associated with the knowledge from the Orient and the Far East, and finally democratic humanism – this latter form where the anthropologist calls upon all human activities in society for his analyses. We should stress that these three kinds of humanism are linked to discoveries: in one case that of texts; in others that of cultures and the many ways they are expressed; and finally, that of all human phenomena as a subject of study (myth, oral communication, etc.). In each case, new fields of investigation have resulted both in methods and in the questioning of values associated with documents and cultural and scientific practices. As regard the first kind of humanism, we simply have to evoke the case of Valla and his philological demonstration[+] about the Donation de Constantin. In this case, thanks to philology, we can replace one concept with another, making it possible to produce a transformation of the very first order (a move from the apocryphal and the authentic towards the establishment of the truth of the terms on critical and objective bases). From the authenticity of a document to the truth of what it says, there is a huge gap. But we should not forget the diversity of the languages (Greek and Latin) which provided the essential comparative basis for the development of critical methods. Mastery of languages, knowledge of history and internal criticism weaken the authority of an institution as powerful as the Church. Exotic humanism - Eastern cultures - by fostering comparative studies, gave rise to new sciences and new disciplines (linguistics, etc.). The third kind of humanism - that of anthropologists - gave rise to, among other things, structural method.

 These three kinds of humanism also correspond to political development: the first is aristocratic, because it is limited to a small number of privileged people; the second is bourgeois, because it ran alongside Western industrial development; and the third is democratic, because it does not exclude any people or cultures and importantly, no human phenomena or behaviours. So, the history of anthropology as a discipline is also the history of modern Western civilisation, with all its ambitions and tribulations. Anthropological humanism is universal because it draws upon all disciplines for its methodology, while working together reconciling man and nature. It is indeed this universal dimension that prompted me to put forward a fourth kind of humanism, digital humanism.

 Digital humanism is the result of a hitherto non-experienced convergence between our complex cultural heritage and a technology that has produced a social sphere that has no precedent. This convergence, instead of simply forming a link between antiquity and now, has redistributed concepts, categories, and objects, as well as behaviours and associated practices, all in a new environment. Digital humanism is the affirmation that current technology, in its global dimension, is a culture, in that it creates a new context, on a global scale. It is a culture, because the digital world, despite its having a large technical element that needs to be constantly questioned and monitored (because it is the agent of economic will), is becoming a civilisation that stands apart for the way in which it affects our view of objects, relationships and values, and which is characterised by the new possibilities that are being brought to the field of human activity. The digital world is a culture because it shows us that knowing how to live together and learning how to behave are integral parts of this emerging sociability, this hybrid sociability that forms the stage for bonds, bodies and mobility.

One single example would suffice: that of the status of the body in the digital environment. In this case, we should refer to the analyses of Marcel Mauss is his essay, “Les Techniques du corps”[+]. The works of Mauss shows that there is a link between the position of the body - that is to say the way in which the body is deployed in the social space - and the nature and the functioning of these cultural objects. In this context, we can say that digital culture is undergoing great change. Until now, it has been a sedentary culture, an office and chair culture, whereas now it is starting to turn into a mobile culture. This move from immobility to mobility appears to be taking place alongside the hybridisation of objects, of time and of space. From this we can deduce that cultural practices have also changed: gestures, writing, reading and communication. In the analysis by Mauss, technology plays an essential role, passing on a bodily technique, often prompting imitation and changing local culture depending on the existence and the accessibility of the technical tool. The familiarity and the uniformity of the practices and of the behaviours are in this case, at the core, identified in the relationships between the cultural specificities and the ability of the technique to transform them and to hybridise the cultures. We are no longer in a civilisation that is purely technical; we are also in the heart of a digital culture.

 Lévi-Strauss speaks of the “totality of the inhabited earth” to identify the field of anthropology – an expression that evokes that which at one time seduced utopians and their avatars, “the known world”. As for his method, it can only reproduce this universalism: it “brings together all the processes that come from all forms of knowledge ...[+]”. Digital technology, however, modifies for the first time the actual notion of terrain and territory as well as that of living space. Virtual worlds, sharing, participatory activities, although they often call upon well-known dynamic processes, also bring forth a series of associated practices that are in fact the loci of changes regarding the identity and representations and its links both with genealogy (blood) and geography (earth). A question is therefore raised: what is the situation with the anthropology of this new inhabited earth, these new digital territories that are flexible, fluid and constantly moving? How should we think about them, analyse them, especially since geolocation and smart citiescannot be dissociated from our daily lives? Digital humanism attempts to provide answers to such changes.

 Digital technology is certainly a Western product, but it is now a global reality. The models on which digital technology are based are all or almost all derived from Western experience: documents and the changes and values associated with them, the notion of an individual and that of identity, the concept of heritage and archives, visual representations of manipulations and their symbols (icons, etc.).  All these elements that have become the vulgate of our everyday experience, even the notion of simplified friendship that has been turned into an agent that is part of digital sociability, are products stemming from the technical exploitation of Western historical and socio-cultural categories. Given this context, how could we possibly think of changes to the digital environment from another perspective - along routes that are not just those of the West - and of its concepts and its categories? Even democratic practices appear to have been changed by digital technology, such as in the case of the Arab Spring (or at least its reception).

Nowadays, the village has become global, and means of communication have become universal. Digital technology is changing cities and villages; it is drawing up a new space that is shared between the real and the virtual. The hybrid space of digital culture constitutes a new way of creating society, with its myths, its new concepts and its utopias. Digital humanism is a way of envisaging this new reality.  Lévi-Strauss already dealt with these changes in his own way when comparing the West and Japan. In the chapter entitled “Sengaï. L’art de s’accommoder au monde”, he remarks: “In today’s France, the only ones worthy of being referred to as calligraphers are the authors of inscriptions called “tags” (or graffiti), that can be read by those in the know on walls and carriages of the underground.” New authors, and new forms of calligraphy that are borne by changing signs and modes of interpretation. It is indeed this play-off between society and the individual that is today at the heart of digital humanism.

If we are looking for a philosophical take on this form of humanism, we have to reread in the current context, the text of Husserl announced in 1935 with the (English) title of “The crisis of European humanity and philosophy”. The argument of the “Krisis” is based on the issue of three forms of humanism: the founding form of humanism that is abstract and theoretical, and which stems from Greek knowledge and philosophy; theoretical humanism that is derived from the Renaissance and its savoir-faire; and finally, European humanism (but we should take this to mean Western), the form that pertains to the crisis of the first half of the 20th century. Husserl, however, in his own way, raises a fundamental issue, one that concerns us today, with regard to digital culture and its universal ambitions: the three forms of humanism evoked by Husserl identify the crisis as a divide that is growing between the so-called exact sciences and the sciences of the mind. In other words, the gap between the paradigms of precision and measurability and their forms of rationality, and cultural values.

 The analyses of Husserl question the universality of scientific and technical rationality, and we should add, today, digital universality, reminding ourselves of the founding role of community in the production and sharing of knowledge. This explains his conclusion, referring the reader to the Greek Paideia, in the most simple, but most eloquent sense, and as far as we are concerned, the most relevant: passing on knowledge which theoretically removes a lack of knowledge: teaching as a collective form of responsibility that is an integral part of the actual structure of the polis; an education that prompts us to take a fresh look at the links between sciences and cultures and to consider what I have chosen to call digital humanism.

 This conversion of our societies requires new skills and new forms of literacy. It is no longer enough to be able to read and write; rather we now need other forms of knowledge and teaching methodology - knowledge that stems from digital technology and its emerging criteria and its own points of reference.  It is indeed possible to see digital technology as another example of convergence between humanity and technology. In this case, we are not talking about the convergence referred to as a singularity and which expresses, through various discourses and transhumanist theories, a form of utopia of progress. Far from it. In this case, we are dealing with pragmatic and political thought: accepting changes brought about by digital technology and insisting on the inalienable link between our values and access to content are merely the first steps of the adventure we are embarking upon with this new technology that has become an integral part of our lives. Digital technology is a new way of creating memory and interpreting it. In this sense, we are forced to rethink our relationship with already formed memory, as well as thinking up new ways of keeping and using our purely digital creations. The stakes are very high, for we are living through a transitional period, during which managing this memory, our written records and our identities is blurred and undefined. The challenge we are faced with is to work together on the modalities of a new form of managing memory, identity and knowledge, and to instigate an ethical framework.

This ethical framework, it seems to me, remains to be invented, for it is located between two ethical models, as identified by Max Weber: that of political humans and that of the scientists. Two kinds of ethical model: one motivated by conviction; the other by responsibility. Authority and legitimacy conflicts, just like practices stemming from the code, encourage us to find a third way. Indeed, this is the job of digital humanism.

Translated from French by Peter Mos

Humanistic Management | Management Umanistico

18/5/2013

 
Management Umanistico [*]

Il management Umanistico
un modello operativo e cognitivo che definisce l’assetto dell’impresa rispetto alla sua trasformazione in organizzazione sociale, fondata su:
  • l’apertura dei confini dell’organizzazione. All’interno per abbattere le divisioni funzionali; verso l’esterno  per coinvolgere attori quali clienti, partner e fornitori;
  • la creazione diffusa e partecipativa  (co-creation) di contenuti e conoscenza;
  • la collaborazione  tra le persone indipendentemente da gerarchie e schemi organizzativi predefiniti, basata sulla fiducia reciproca e scambio metadisciplinare;
  • l’approccio non riduzionistico alla complessità, basato su velocità e  flessibilità nel cambiamento continuo  di ruoli, processi di lavoro e sistemi informativi;
  • la convivialità centrata sulla valorizzazione delle community virtuali indipendentemente dalla localizzazione fisica e dagli orari di lavoro, coniugata ad una diffusa “socialità offline”;
  • uno stile di leadership convocativo;
  • una visione etica forte e coerentemente agita.

“Per capire il presente e  guardare al futuro occorre promuovere apertura mentale, autoanalisi e riflessioni individuali, coniugate alla capacità di trovare continuamente soluzioni originali, attraverso una maniacale attenzione al contesto, a ciò che sta fuori”.
Ed è proprio il concetto di “apertura” il primo principio della nuova economia social, intesa anche come apertura dei confini organizzativi, fondata su trasparenza, condivisione di informazioni, opinioni ed esperienze con tutti gli stakeholder: clienti, partner, dipendenti, fornitori, comunità locali, associazioni, fondazioni.
Presupposto per l’applicazione di questo principio, è un modello di management che annoveri  la metadisciplinarietà fra le competenze diffuse nell’organizzazione.

L’Apertura è anche uno dei 4 cardini della Wikinomics, descritta da Dan Tapscott nel suo bestseller del 2006.  Il libro si apre con la case history di Goldcorp, una azienda mineraria in crisi che è diventata la più importante azienda nel settore dell’estrazione dell’oro, dopo aver deciso di divulgare i dati relativi alle proprie mappe geologiche e chiedendo su Internet a chiunque ne avesse la capacità di interpretarle per avere nuove indicazioni di ricerca. In settori meno hard, Amazon, Google, E-bay sono tutte imprese che hanno deciso di aprire le loro infrastrutture e le loro applicazioni di successo allo scopo di sviluppare vasti ecosistemi di business.

Il team di  “Management 2.0 Hackathon” approfondisce ulteriormente il concetto: apertura è “la volontà di condividere informazioni e fare affari alla luce del sole. Sul web, le informazioni viaggiano velocemente e liberamente. L’informazione non si può nascondere e il Web non dimentica mai. I confini tradizionali del business si stanno rapidamente disintegrando, cambiano la natura di ciò che significa essere un dipendente, cliente o concorrente. 

Organizzazioni disposte a sfocare le linee di ciò che sta dentro e fuori l’azienda potrebbero ottenere un netto vantaggio”.

Questo principio si articola in tre sub-principi ovvero:
  1. Inclusione. L’apertura a tutti permette di acquisire le migliori idee attraverso la loro selezione naturale;
  2. Open Innovation. E’ il paradigma in base al quale si assume che le imprese possono e devono utilizzare le idee esterne così come quelle interne. Caratteristica chiave  di questo paradigma è la sua somiglianza con la pratica del mash-up, [...]  “we now see –scrive uno dei partecipanti del Forum di Hackathon -  that nothing new is really new and most often some idea has been taken and reformatted to produce something better, at best, disruptive. So key is to be open to ideas and sources of innovation that can come from anywhere”.
  3. Abbattimento dei silos aziendali. Comporta la rottura delle barriere fra sub-culture d’impresa e l’abolizione di prassi lavorative di tipo strettamente divisionale, quali la  rigida suddivisione di uffici, reparti, gruppi di lavoro in base a competenze specifiche e non interconnesse.
Humanistic Management [*]

Humanistic management, a cognitive and operative model which defines its company asset in comparison with its transformation in social organization, is based on:
  • The opening of organization boundaries. Inward, to destroy functional divisions; outward, to involve actors such as clients, partners and suppliers;
  • The extended and collaborative creation of contents and knowledge
  • The non-reductive approach to complexity, based on speed and flexibility and on the continuous change of roles, work processes and information systems;
  • Collaboration between people, independently from hierarchies and organization systems, based on trust and metadisciplinary sharing;
  • The valorization of virtual communities, no matter the physical localization and the work hours, conjugated to an “offline sociality”;
  • A convocative leadership style
  • A strong ethical view.

“ To understand the present and start looking at the future, we have to promote openmindness, self-analysis and individual thinking, together with the possibility of finding original solutions, towards a great attention to the context, to what’s outside”.

And this “opening” concept is the first principle on which the new social economy;  as for opening we are also referring to "opening of organization boundaries, transparency, information, opinion and experience sharing with all of the stakeholders": clients, partners, employees, suppliers, local communities, associations, foundations.

As an assumption for the application of this principle, we have a management model which carries the principle of metadisciplinarity amongst the competences in the organization.

“Opening” is one of the 4 pillars of Wikinomics, as described by Dan Tapscott in his 2006 bestseller. The book starts with Goldcorp’s case history, a mining company in a critical state which has become the leader in its segment after deciding to divulge its data referring to their geological maps, and asking the community to interpret them so to supply new research indications. In softer segments, Amazon, Google, Ebay are companies which have decided to open their infrastructures and successful application so to develop amazing business ecosystems.

The “Management 2.0 Hackathon” team studies in deep the concept of opening: “the will of sharing information and make transparent business. Through the web, information move rapidly and freely. Information cannot be hidden and the Web never forgets. Traditional boundaries are quickly disappearing, changing the nature of what is meant to be an employee, client or concurrent. Organizations which are aware of this change and are willing to support the destruction of these boundaries have a distinct advantage.

This principle is articulated in three sub-principles:

  1. Inclusion. Everybody can reach the best ideas through their “natural selection”
  2. Open innovation. Is the paradigm over which companies can use external and internal ideas on the same plan. Key feature of this paradigm is its resembling to the mash-up theory [...] : “we now see that nothing new is really new and most often some idea has been taken and reformatted to produce something better, at best, disruptive. So key is to be open to ideas and sources of innovation that can come from anywhere”.
  3. Destruction of company’s silos. It is practically the destruction of the companies’ sub-culture and the abolition of rigidly divided working practices, such as workspaces, workgroups and zone partition on the base of specific knowledge and without any interconnection.

* Tratto da  "Il Manifesto dello Humanistic Management ... " di Marco Minghetti  (Docente in Humanistic Management  - Laurea triennale CIM - “Comunicazione, innovazione, multimedialità”  Università di Pavia)  http://www.marcominghetti.com
domenec_mele_the_challenge_of_the_humanistic_management.pdf
File Size: 88 kb
File Type: pdf
Scarica file

mix_management_2_0hackathon_report.pdf
File Size: 2887 kb
File Type: pdf
Scarica file

Transmedia Storytelling | Narrazione Transmediale

13/11/2012

 
"I think that it's important now for people coming into the entertainrnent or pop culture business to know that all bets are off,  
 .. We don't necessarily know that filmmaking as we know it will exist in few years.
We don't know that gaming is going to look the way it (now) looks or
TV is going to look the way it looks. There is no doubt that there
is
 convergence happening through these various media"
Alex McDowell [1]  

Immagine
Narrazione Transmediale

Una narrazione transmediale è un insieme di storie che si declinano su più piattaforme mediatiche e per le quali ciascun medium coinvolto dà il suo contributo specifico ad una migliore comprensione del mondo narrato. 

​La narrazione transmediale  rappresenta per l'audience un potente strumento a sua disposizione per approcciare con una metodologia più integrale (rispetto ai modelli basati sui testi originali e sui prodotti ausiliari) il Contenuto di Base che glie viene sottoposto attraverso lo sviluppo e la distribuzione di un franchise transmediale. 


Secondo il sociologo Jenkins [2] , si tratta di "un processo nel quale elementi integrali di una fiction vengono sistematicamente dispersi su molteplici canali di distribuzione con lo scopo di creare una esperienza di intrattenimento unificata e coordinata. Ogni medium, idealmente, offre il proprio specifico contributo allo sviluppo della storia". Questo processo è arricchito e complicato dalla produzione di contenuti da parte dei fan. Questi contenuti talvolta potenziano, talvolta complicano l'idea di "esperienza di intrattenimento unificata e coordinata".

L'applicazione del concetto di narrativa  transmediale può essere sviluppato secondo i 7 principi di base citati dallo studioso:

1. Spreadability vs. Drillability
2. Continuity vs. Multiplicity
3. Immersion vs. Extractability
4. Worldbuilding.
5. Seriality
6. Subjectivity
7. Performance

Qui di seguito, lo speech introduttivo al Corso di laurea in Transmedia Storytelling & Entertainment che ha tenuto il prof. Jenkins all'University of Southern California nell'autunno del 2009, che offre un quadro completo sul concetto di Narrazione Transmediale  applicata alla produzione di progetti a Cultura Convergente:

Transmedia Storytelling and Entertainment; A Syllabus
Visto l’interesse esterno per l’intrattenimento transmedia o cross-media, ho pensato di voler condividere il sommario per il corso nel quale insegno quest’autunno alla USC.  Sono ancora incerto su alcuni dettagli, in quanto sono ancora al lavoro per lo scheduling dei relatori esterni invitati, ma tutti questi relatori in lista hanno già accettato il mio invito. Le letture sono un ottimo inizio per le persone che hanno voglia di accumulare più “materiale di pensiero” a proposito di questa area di ricerca emergente. Di qui in poi, condividerò alcune riflessioni a proposito del materiale didattico del corso che si terrà, come dicevo, durante l’autunno, dal momento che sono certo che lavorare con queste letture in un contesto universitario accederà in me la scintilla che mi permetterà di pensare a cose nuove e più fresche al riguardo. Mi piacerebbe tantissimo assistere a lezioni di altre persone che insegnano argomenti riguardanti il trans e cross-media.

Il momento storico in cui viviamo è un momento in cui ogni storia, immagine, brand e/o relazione sociale è pubblicato o “postato” sul massimo numero possibile di piattaforme modellate da cima a fondo dalle decisioni prese in sedute di consiglio di amministrazione e dalle decisione prese nelle camerette dei teenager. L’alta concertazione del diritto di proprietà dei conglomerati di media aumenta la desiderabilità dei prodotti che possono creare “sinergie” tra le diverse parti del sistema medium e “massimizzare i punti di contatto” tramite diverse nicchie di consumatori. Il risultato è stato una inflessione verso la “franchise-building” in generale, e nella fattispecie l’intrattenimento transmedia.

Una storia transmedia rappresenta l’integrazione di esperienze di intrattenimento ottenute da diverse piattaforme mediatiche. Storie come Heroes e Lost possono mutare da prodotto televisivo a prodotto fumettistico, web-based, computer-based o giochi a realtà alternata, giochi  ed altri prodotti, e così via, raccogliendo sempre più consumatori man mano che prosegue nella sua diffusione, e consentendo ai fan più dediti di andare ancor più in fondo. I fan, a loro volta, potrebbero “mutare” il loro interesse nel franchise in voci di wikipedia, fan fiction, videoclip, fan film, cosplay, game mods, ed una vasta gamma di altre modalità partecipative che estendono la storia in direzioni molto più vaste e diverse. Sia l’espansione commerciale che quella radicale degli universi narrativi contribuiscono a nuove modalità di storytelling, basata sull’espansione enciclopedica dell’informazione, che viene costruita differentemente da ciascun individuo consumatore così come viene processato collettivamente dai social networks e dalle comunità di conoscenza online.

Il corso è stato spezzato in cinque unità: “Fondamenta”, che offre un’overview del movimento attuale, teso verso il transmedia; “Strutture Narrative”, introduce il set di strumenti di base necessario agli cantastorie moderni, che approfondisce nello specifico i problemi legati alla “seriality”, e l’analisi di cosa potrebbe significare il pensare ad una storia come fosse una “struttura di informazioni”; “Costruzione di Mondi”, ha a che fare con il significato del pensiero che riguarda i media franchise contemporanei in termini di “mondi” o “universi”, che si evolvono attraverso diversi media systems; “Il Pubblico è Importante”, collega il transmedia storytelling alle problematiche di aggancio della clientela e di come si svolge, considera come i fan potrebbero contribuire con estensioni non ufficiali ai testi media preferiti; “La Storia del Transmedia”, torna indietro nel tempo per analizzare i momenti chiave dello sviluppo e dell’evoluzione della disciplina dell’intrattenimento transmedia, a partire dal tardo XIX secolo.

In questo corso di studi, esploreremo il fenomeno transmedia attraverso:


  • L’esame critico dei testi commerciali e di radice che contribuiscono ai più media franchise.
  • Sviluppo di un framework teorico per capire come lo storytelling funzione in questo nuovo sistema ambientale, con un’enfasi particolare a proposito del problema del world building (costruzione di mondi), attrattori ed attivatori culturali.
  • Il tracciamento della linea storica  che ha creato il contesto delle moderne pratiche transmedia, incluse considerazioni di figure chiave come P.T. Barnum, L. Frank Baum, Feuillade, C.S. Lewis, J.R.R. Tolkien, Cordwainer Smith, Walt Disney, George Lucas, DC e Marvel, e Joss Whedon.
  • Esplorare come gli approcci transmedia contribuiscono ai generi chiave come la fantascienza, il fantasy, l’horror, i supereroi, la suspense, le soap, ed i televisivi teen e reality.
  • Ascoltare ospiti all’avanguardia, di derivazione dell’industria dei media, che parlano delle sfide odierne alle quali sono sottoposti e delle opportunità che l’intrattenimento transmedia può offrire, passando per i casdei progetti contemporanei che hanno costituito le migliori strategie cross-strategy.
  • Mettere in pratica queste idee attraverso un team di studenti per sviluppare a calibrare strategie transmedia attorno ad una proprietà dei media già esistente.
Transmedia Narration

A transmedia narration is an ensemble of stories which are declined on more media platforms and for which each medium involved gives its specific contribution so to get the best possible comprehension of the narrated world.

Transmedia narration represents for the audience a powerful tool to approach with a more integral (if related to the models based on the original texts and auxiliary products) method the basic content that is submitted through the development and distribution of a transmedia franchise.

According to the sociologist Jenkins [2], this is a “process in which integral elements of a fiction are systematically spread on more distribution channels with the aim of creating an unique entertaining experience which will be unified and coordinated. Each medium, ideally, gives its own specific contribution to the development of the story-line. This process is enriched and complicated by the fan’s production of contents. These contents often give strength or simply complicate the idea of “unified and coordinated entertainment experience”.

The application of the concept of transmedia narrative can be developed according to the 7 main principles cited by the aforesaid sociologist:
  1. Spreadability vs. drillability
  2. Continuity vs. multiplicity
  3. Immersion vs. extractability
  4. Worldbuilding
  5. Seriality
  6. Subjectivity
  7. Performance
Following, the Master of Science in Transmedia Storytelling and Entertainment’s introductory speech held by professor Jenkins in USC (California) in the autumn of 2009, gives a complete frame about the concept of Transmedia narration applied to the production of Converging Culture projects.

Transmedia Storytelling and Entertainment; A Syllabus
Given the interest out there in transmedia or cross-media entertainment, I thought I would share the syllabus for the course I am teaching this fall at the University of Southern California. I am still shifting some details, as I deal with the scheduling of guest speakers, but all of the speakers listed have agreed to come. The readings are a good starter set for people wanting to do more thinking on this emerging area of research. I will be sharing reflections about the course material here throughout the fall, since I'm sure working through these readings in a class context is going to spark me to do some fresh thinking on the topic. I'd love to hear from others out there teaching transmedia or cross-media topics.

We now live at a moment where every story, image, brand, relationship plays itself out across the maximum number of media platforms, shaped top down by decisions made in corporate boardrooms and bottom up by decisions made in teenager's bedrooms. The concentrated ownership of media conglomerates increases the desirability of properties that can exploit "synergies" between different parts of the medium system and "maximize touch-points" with different niches of consumers. The result has been the push towards franchise-building in general and transmedia entertainment in particular.

A transmedia story represents the integration of entertainment experiences across a range of different media platforms. A story like Heroes or Lost might spread from television into comics, the web, computer or alternate reality games, toys and other commodities, and so forth, picking up new consumers as it goes and allowing the most dedicated fans to drill deeper. The fans, in turn, may translate their interests in the franchise into concordances and wikipedia entries, fan fiction, vids, fan films, cosplay, game mods, and a range of other participatory practices that further extend the story world in new directions. Both the commercial and grassroots expansion of narrative universes contribute to a new mode of storytelling, one which is based on an encyclopedic expanse of information which gets put together differently by each individual consumer as well as processed collectively by social networks and online knowledge communities.

The course is broken down into five basic units: "Foundations" offers an overview of the current movement towards transmedia or cross-platform entertainment; "Narrative Structures" introduces the basic toolkit available to contemporary storytellers, digging deeply into issues around seriality, and examining what it might mean to think of a story as a structure of information; "World Building" deals with what it means to think of contemporary media franchises in terms of "worlds" or "universes" which unfold across many different media systems; "Audience Matters" links transmedia storytelling to issues of audience engagement and in the process, considers how fans might contribute unofficial extensions to favorite media texts; and "Tracing the History of Transmedia" pulls back to consider key moments in the evolution of transmedia entertainment, moving from the late 19th century to the present.

In this course, we will be exploring the phenomenon of transmedia storytelling through:


  • Critically examining commercial and grassroots texts which contribute to larger media franchises (mobisodes and webisodes, comics, games).
  • Developing a theoretical framework for understanding how storytelling works in this new environment with a particular emphasis upon issues of world building, cultural attractors, and cultural activators.
  • Tracing the historical context from which modern transmedia practices emerged, including consideration of the contributions of such key figures as P.T. Barnum, L. Frank Baum, Feuillade, C.S. Lewis, J.R.R. Tolkien, Cordwainer Smith, Walt Disney, George Lucas, DC and Marvel Comics, and Joss Whedon.
  • Exploring what transmedia approaches contribute to such key genres as science fiction, fantasy, horror, superhero, suspense, soap opera, teen and reality television.
  • Listening to cutting-edge thinkers from the media industry talk about the challenges and opportunities which transmedia entertainment offers, walking through cases of contemporary projects that have deployed cross-platform strategies.
  • Putting these ideas into action through working with a team of fellow students to develop and pitch transmedia strategies around an existing media property.
[1] ALEX  McDOWELL , Alex McDowell, production designer of "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" (2005) and "The Corpse Bride" (2005), has two views of the future. He could just lock himself up in a room and  dream things up for the screen. Or  he could sit down with experts working on actual new technologies.  Add a dose of imagination,  and he will have a fantasy of the future with believabilily. That was McDowell's approach when helping to create the look of the year 2054 for Steven Spielberg's sci-fi saga "Minority Report"  released in 2002. And it's his approach this day as he studies the undulating lines projected on a screen in the MIT Media Lab, where McDowell  is a visiting artist.

[2] HENRY JENKINS  currently  Provost Professor of Communication, Journalism, and Cinematic Arts, a joint professorship at the USC Annenberg School for Communication and the USC School of Cinematic Arts. Previously, he was the Peter de Florez Professor of Humanities and Co-Director of the MIT, Massachusetts Institute of Technology,  Comparative Media Studies program.
analysis_of_transmedia_storytelling_strategies.pdf
File Size: 746 kb
File Type: pdf
Scarica file

hollywood_designer_urges_focus_mit_tech_talk__mcdowell.pdf
File Size: 500 kb
File Type: pdf
Scarica file

peter-von-stackelberg_creating_transmedia_narrative.pdf
File Size: 6101 kb
File Type: pdf
Scarica file

Convergence Culture | Cultura Convergente

30/10/2012

 
Se gettassimo via il potere del broadcasting avremmo solo frammentazione culturale.
​Il potere della partecipazione non ha origine dalla distruzione della cultura commerciale, ma dalla sua riscrittura, dalla sua correzione ed espansione, dall’aggiungervi una varietà di prospettive, poi dal rimetterla in circolo diffondendola attraverso i media mainstream”
 
Henry Jenkins, Cultura Convergente
Cultura Convergente

Definizione coniata dal sociologo Henry Jenkins [*] che descrive il cambiamento sociale, culturale, industraile e tecnologico, inerente le modalità di circolazione e distribuzione della nostra Cultura. Tramite questa formula vengono generalmente indicati:
  • il flusso di contenuti attraverso più piattaforme mediatiche;
  • la cooperazione tra imprese diverse;
  • la ricerca di nuove forme di finanziamento tra vecchi e nuovi media e il comportamento nomade dei pubblici che sono alla ricerca di nuove esperienze di intrattenimento gratificanti.
Probabilmente, più in generale, la convergenza mediatica si riferisce ad una situazione di coesistenza tra sistemi mediatici multipli, nella quale il flusso dei Contenuti è fluido.

​La Convergenza Culturale é intesa come un processo in corso in cui avvengono una serie di intersezioni tra differenti sistemi mediatici, non come una relazione stabile tra essi.

La causa principale dello sviluppo dell’emergente fenomeno della Convergenza Culturale -  così come intesa  nelle scienze sociali e negli studi culturali,  è  la cosiddetta Convergenza Digitale che ha portato alla convergenza dei media
Converging Culture

Term coined by the sociologist Henry Jenkins [*] who describes the social, cultural, industrial and technologic change, referring to the modes of circulation and distribution of our culture. Through this formulation we generally indicate:
  • The flow of contents through more media platforms
  • The cooperation among different companies
  • The research of new forms of funding between new and old media and the nomad behavior of the users which are continuously looking for new and gratifying entertaining experiences
Probably, in general, media converging is referred to a situation of co-existence between multiple media systems, in which the flow of contents is continuous.

Cultural Converging is to be understood as a process which is now taking place, in which we can find a series of intersections between different media systems, not a stable relation.

The main cause of the development of the emerging phenomenon of the Converging Culture – as it is intended in the social sciences and in the cultural studies, is the so-called Digital Convergence which has led to the media convergence.

* HENRY JENKINS  currently  Provost Professor of Communication, Journalism, and Cinematic Arts, a joint professorship at the USC Annenberg School for Communication and the USC School of Cinematic Arts. Previously, he was the Peter de Florez Professor of Humanities and Co-Director of the MIT, Massachusetts Institute of Technology,  Comparative Media Studies program.
jenkins_henry_the_cultural_logic_of_media_convergence.pdf
File Size: 96 kb
File Type: pdf
Scarica file

conte_georgia_cultura_convergente.pdf
File Size: 506 kb
File Type: pdf
Scarica file

Videomapping

9/5/2012

1 Commento

 
Proiezione in mappatura

Video-Mapping (o Proiezione in Mappatura) è una tecnica impiegata per la diffusione di immagini statiche o dinamiche (filmati), che rientra in quell’ampio elenco di applicazioni utilizzate per la creazione di Realtà Aumentata (Augmented Reality).  

E’ una tecnologia di proiezione utilizzata per trasformare Oggetti, spesso di forma irregolare, in una superficie utile alla visualizzazione di proiezioni video.  Questi Oggetti possono essere: Paesaggi Industriali, Edifici, Monumenti, Sculture o gli stessi corpi umani, in tal caso si parla di Human Body 3d mapping. Il processo si implementa utilizzando del particolare software specializzato che riproduce gli Oggetti ricostruiti in computer grafica (bi o tridimensionale) “mappandoli” sul programma virtuale che imita l'ambiente reale sul quale avverrà la proiezione.

Il software interagisce con un proiettore per adattare qualsiasi immagine desiderata sulla superficie dell’Oggetto scelto come superficie di proiezione.  Questa tecnica è utilizzata da artisti, direttori artistici, registi che possono aggiungere componenti virtuali all’Oggetto, illusioni ottiche e quant’altro vada a modificare la Realtà pre-esistente degli Oggetti, per questo motivo si parla di tecniche per la creazione di  Realtà Aumentata.

In una performance Video-mapping, le immagini  sono comunemente combinate con effetti audio, composizioni  musicali  e/o voci allo scopo di creare lo Storytelling, narrazioni  audio-visive composte in una sintassi che caratterizza  un nuovo linguaggio artistico mutuato dal linguaggio Cinematografico
Videomapping
1 Commento

Storytelling

10/2/2012

 
Storytelling
Storytelling

Con la parola Storytelling si intende il trasporto degli eventi in parole e immagini, che talvolta si presentano in forma improvvisata, altre con enfasi estetica.

L’Uomo ha sempre condiviso le Storie in ogni Cultura come mezzo di intrattenimento, istruzione, conservazione culturale e per infondere valori morali.

Gli elementi cruciali delle Storie nella forma di uno Storytelling comprendono la trama, i personaggi e il punto di vista narrativo.  Attualmente lo Storytelling si caratterizza per alcune nuove prerogative; infatti, andando oltre le forme tradizionali che si sono andate sviluppando nel corso della storia dell’Uomo  (come ad esempio: le fiabe, i racconti popolari, la mitologia, le leggende, le favole, etc), nei tempi moderni il concetto si è esteso a rappresentare non solo la Storia, ma anche altro, come ad esempio:  la Narrativa personale, il Commento politico o le Norme culturali in continua evoluzione.

Lo Storytelling contemporaneo si sviluppa oggi con nuovi linguaggi, anche con il supporto delle nuove tecnologie creative di produzione e di fruizione digitale, ed è anche ampiamente utilizzato allo scopo di perseguire obiettivi educativi. Nuove forme di media stanno creando nuovi modi per l’Uomo di registrare, esprimere e consumare le Storie. I VideoGames, l’Augmented Reality nelle sue varie forme d'applicazione, il Teatro digitale con l'avvento delle scenografie virtuali e l'introduzione delle performance olografiche, come le altre piattaforme digitali come quelle utilizzate nella fiction interattiva o per lo Storytelling web e mobile based di genere Documentaristico utilizzano tecniche di “Narrative Storytelling” anche allo scopo  di comunicare informazioni in grado di attivare processi di "Cultural Placement".

E' in questo nuovo scenario di produzione/consumo che si fa strada il concetto di  “Storytelling transmediale”,  che definisce ed elabora strumenti per la comunicazione di gruppo asincrona in grado di fornire per gli individui un ambiente narrativo in continua evoluzione,  capace di riformulare o ridistribuire singole storie in storie di gruppo nell'ottica di "Cultura Convergente".  

    Author

    Milad Doueihi
    Henry Jenkins
    Marco Minghetti

    Archives

    Maggio 2014
    Dicembre 2013
    Maggio 2013
    Novembre 2012
    Ottobre 2012
    Maggio 2012
    Febbraio 2012

    Categories

    Tutto
    Convergence Culture
    Cross-media
    Cultura Convergente
    Cultura Digitale
    Holonic System
    Humanistic Management
    Media Convergence
    Storytelling
    Transmedia
    Transmedia Storytelling
    Umanesimo Digitale
    Videomapping

    Feed RSS

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.
  • Home
    • In synthesis
    • Contact
  • About | index
    • 1\\About
    • 2\\Preambol
    • 3\\Towards a digital cinema
    • 4\\Empowerment at the basis of cooperation
    • 5\\Supply chain and networking
    • 6\\As an Holonic System
    • 7\\Business Model
    • 8\\Conclusion
  • What We Do | index
    • RAE | video sample
    • The Alliance
    • VMUST
  • Knowledge Bank | index
    • e-Zine
    • Glossary
    • Visual Effects' Glossary
    • Document download >
      • cognitive science
      • circular economy
      • creative industries
      • change management
      • strategy
      • storytelling&transmedia
    • Video
    • References & Additional Bibliography