Network expert Pati Anklam (author of Net Work) asked for the current thinking about adding a virtual space (a social networking site, a document repository) etc. as a role in a value network map. This question comes up frequently. There are different schools of thought on this. From the Help Library in the ValueNetworks.com application comes the following:

Why can’t a Role be a computer or a database?
Work is a social activity. Humans may create technologies that mechanize certain tasks, but machines do not make their own decisions about which activities they engage in. Only people make those decisions, determining what activities and transactions are important, and assigning the tasks either to real people, or technology enablers such as applications that can complete the tasks.

But don’t applications sometimes take the place of humans to play Roles?
Yes, they can and do. As technologies become more sophisticated a software program may well be capable of filling a Role. An example might be using an online reservations program to book airline travel. In that case the technology supports fulfillment tasks by acting in the Role of “travel agent” or “reservation service provider.” So even though a software program is capable of filling that Role it is fulfilling it based on the way a real human would typically behave in that Role. The technology is merely a mechanism for a Role to be executed. Focus on the Role first; then consider what might be the most effective mechanisms to support the Role activities.

So, given those guidelines the “role” of a social networking site is really the role of “community organizer” That role is supported by the technology of a social networking platform. But the platform itself does not make decisions – it only does what it is told by the real human “community organizer.” We program applications according to how a real human would execute the role.

Databases are very tempting for people to identify as a role or node in a value network. But the database is just a mechanism to support information deliverables moving from one role to another. From the standpoint of the network it is irrelevant whether the message “your order is in” is delivered by telephone, text message, a website, a face to face meeting or a nod of the head. The deliverable of the message itself is what is important – that it happens between two specific roles.

What happens when people make the database a role is that it becomes a “dumping ground” for all the information and knowledge deliverables that people really don’t want to think through carefully. A common justification is “we just put that in the database for everyone to see.”  My position is that if you are posting something for everyone then you are posting it for no one. Until you have indentified the specific kinds of information that must be exchanged between specific roles you have not really considered the real value (or user) of that deliverable. People do sometimes create a role called “database” but once they start to really go deeper into the analysis it becomes problematic pretty quickly.