The previous section briefly introduced some of the findings from empirical biological research as presented by Camazine et al. (2001). The next thread of the synthesis presented in this paper is that derived from the sociometric literature. In order to develop some appreciation of the knowledge sharing system considered so central to insect nest life, it is perhaps necessary to discuss this literature, or at least one part of it: the small-worlds literature.

The small-worlds phenomenon emerged as a result of Stanley Milgram’s experiments (Milgram, 1967), and was later captured in the play and film ‘Six Degrees Of Separation’ (Watts, 1999). The idea proposed is that it appears that any two people picked at random are connectable via a chain of, on average, six intermediate acquaintances. This seems counter-intuitive given that, for most of us, frequent direct two-way conversation only occurs with fewer than 20 people; our small- world cluster. In sociometric network terms, this suggests an overall population network that can neither be described as ‘everyone knows everyone else’, nor, at the other extreme, one where local clusters of socially interactive persons have no means of contacting other clusters. The reality is a mix of the two, with imperfect knowledge shared between clusters. In rather simplistic terms, a small world network can be illustrated as in Figure 10.1, “Small-worlds.”. If one cluster were pressed to send a message to another, it would be possible to find a ‘weak link’ between the clusters; someone who can carry a message between them. In Figure 10.1, “Small-worlds.”, if A wants to send a message to F, whom he does not know, then first he would ask friends in cluster 1. B says she knows someone, C, in cluster 2, who may be able to pass the message on. When C gets the message, she asks her friends, and D suggests E, who does know F. Solid lines represent knowledge sharing between people who talk to each other very frequently and dotted lines are between people who talk very infrequently.

The small-worlds phenomenon provides a way of seeing knowledge sharing between small groups of ants working one particular project cluster, and occasional sharing with other groups of ants working within a different project cluster. It is perhaps predictable from the knowledge-sharing theory literature (Hare, 1976), which highlights that we can only have direct two-way knowledge sharing with a limited number of people. This is due to the exponential growth of knowledge sharing channels as the number of people involved increases. When three people wish to communicate with each other freely, there are only three knowledge sharing channels that need to be kept open (A to/from B, A to/from C, and B to/from C). For four people there are six, and for five there are 10 channels that need to be serviced. For people, that may mean exchanging pleasantries, as well as being able physically to get to and from the others at the same time and in the same place. Having to service a lot of channels becomes time consuming.

So with an ants’ nest it is possible to imagine a situation where an ant responds to the ants immediately around it, obeying self-organisation driver number one (I do what you do), and joins in doing whatever they are doing; for example building a new passageway. When a problem arises with the harmony of this activity, no individual in the ant’s immediate cluster knows what to do. One of them communicates to an ant nearby that was not involved in the passage building, an ant from another cluster it only knows weakly. The weakly known stranger may communicate that it is very busy collecting food. This then stimulates the passage builders to start collecting food. When a crisis occurs in this task, the ants look around for previously weak messages about other tasks.

The small-worlds research (Killworth and Bernard, 1979; Watts, 1999; Matsuo et al., 2001; Richardson and Lissack, 2001; Buchanan, 2002) extends the social network research (e.g. Mizruchi, 1994; Scott, 1996; Durrington, 2000; Cross et al., 2002) by suggesting what network shapes have self-organised in human groups, in the natural environment, in written communication and in biological systems. Management literature increasingly regards knowledge management as a social networking problem. Hansen (1999), Roubelat (2000) and Reagans and McEvily(2003) have studied management issues related to knowledge sharing using weak links.

To summarise, the discussion above suggests that small-worlds networks allow for effective knowledge sharing both in times of routine and when a strategic response is required. This further suggests that anyone responsible for designing the knowledge-sharing network in their organisation might use this lens to evaluate their communications systems.