An Bui, Spelled An With 1 N

This post is the tenth (and last!) in a series of my interpretation of Social Media Principles.

Associations are inherently good:

I’m not sure I believe that they are inherently good. I’m leaning towards associations are agnostic - it’s the value you add that make them good.

When Jim Benson and I first started this series on social media principles, Jim asserted that associations are inherently good.

Jim writes:

Social media teaches us that our associations make us stronger.  The number of followers we have on Twitter, the number of friends on facebook, the number of connections on LinkedIn all increase our “reach”…

Organizational Structure

So let’s focus on the positive: social media is about linkages, and ideally, reciprocal linkages. If reach is about the number of people who will potentially see our message, then of course associations are inherently good. The corollary to that is we also increase the number of people whose message(s) we can receive, thus increasing our ability to gather information.

The information exchange facilitated by these associations is then a positive thing - it builds trust within an organization, it empowers individuals to be confident in the decisions that they make and also allows new, interesting thoughts and ideas to surface.

The associations don’t automagically lead to information exchange. Associations are necessary, but not sufficient to exchange information. There’s also an underlying assumption that the information exchanged is TRUE.

What if associations are used to spread disinformation? The information recipients will need to spend time filtering and validating the dissonant data. This could possibly lead to information overload and increases the noise factor.

What if individuals don’t do anything with the information? Where is the value in that? If the information received is not actionable or action-worthy is the association that spawned access to it good?

When true, actionable information exchange is facilitated, associations are good.

There’s a cost to everything, including managing relationships, no matter how weak the link. There’s no such thing as free lunch, just lunches for which the cost approaches free.

This post is the ninth in a series of my interpretation of Social Media Principles. More to come in the near distant future.

Pouring Water from Flickr User bfurnace

Context is fluid:

Things change more often, as does your frame of reference. Think about the information you have at various points and look at developments along a continuum.

One attribute organizations look for in its people is flexibility. You see multiple job ads saying:

Ability to manage the ambiguity and multiple priorities inherent in a fast-paced environment…

Able to work under pressure, and deal with the unexpected and ambiguity…

Flexibility, independence and ability to multi-task, setting priority to each with little or no direction…

These ads came from a variety of verticals - legal, education, and nonprofit.

Why do these roles address “ambiguity” and “flexibility”?

Because people need to make decisions all the time. For employers, discovering someone with these qualities enables managers to trust that members of their team are on track with their projects and can reprioritize in light of new information. This requires organizations to have:

1. Clear, shared vision that drives goals which define success, or Vision >> Goals >> Execution to success
2. Open communication so that employees can make high judgment decisions (see Two Cents: Organizational Entropy & Information Abuse, Case Study: Amalgamated Suckup Dot Com).

Social media applications can be the tools that:

1. Facilitate communication amongst teams;
2. Gather information that may materially affect decision making.

Yammer, a microblogging application, facilitates private, in-company communication so users can connect and share with others in the organization. Twitter’s initial use case was internal communication at Obvious Corporation.

While these tools allow for rapid sharing of short bursts of information, the 140 character upper limit allows for only so much context, as James Andrews, a VP in Ketchum’s New York office discovered. Practitioners of social media - marketers, consultants, PR, communications, community managers/developers - should practice self-awareness about the information they share via these channels.

If

Facebook is about people you used to know; Twitter is about people you’d like to know better. - Tim O’Reilly

the common thread between to two very different social networking tools is the context they add to information about others in any given user’s network. More information leads to a more robust picture. The question is - do you take many small data slices over time, or do you take a robust picture created in time?

Read Jim Benson’s take on Context is Fluid on Evolvng Web

This post is the eighth in a series of my interpretation of Social Media Principles. More to come in the near distant future.

Jim Benson shares his thoughts on Immediacy in all Things on his blog, Evolving Web.

Immediacy in all things:

Acting on new, validated information when appropriate moves things forward more quickly than before.

Jim published his post before I had a chance to start mine. He raises points about motivation, respect, and delays to missions, writing:

We consider ourselves on a mission when we have clear goals, we have an idea of how to satisfy those goals, and we are somewhat excited about achieving them.  A mission differs from a task by our emotional investment.

“Strike while the iron is hot. Eat while the food is fresh.” doesn’t mean as soon as possible. Taking the time to consider the context and circumstances, prioritize appropriately and keep an eye on the mission is much easier with respect and open communication. This requires knowing the mission and having the correct information, so that we can then judge if our actions are on or off strategy.

We have technological tools that empower us to get information more quickly, easily and cheaply. With the rise in adoption of mobile technologies including cell phones with sms and smart phones with email/internet, we can do more with small timeboxes.

What does this look like in the context of an organization?

DocuSign, Online Signature and Contract Execution Services

One company, DocuSign, clearly understands the value of moving information forward as quickly as possible.

DocuSign provides secure, legally binding electronic signature and online contract execution services. Fortune 500 enterprise organizations as well as individual small business owners rely on DocuSign’s electronic signature and electronic contract execution services daily. By using DocuSign, companies across all industries, with various business processes and needs, have dramatically reduced operating costs and significantly improved efficiency and customer satisfaction.

A possible DocuSign online contract execution process looks like:

1. Open the form on a PC
2. Fill in the fields
3. Sign electronically
4. Instantly and securely, the other party can access the form without using paper and overnight shipping.
5. Move forward as appropriate, now that a legally binding contract has been entered into by both parties.

Compare that with an old-school, analog system:

1. Sending hard copy documents often via overnight shipping
2. Following up if a contract wasn’t returned
3. Generating new contracts if something got lost or wasn’t filled out correctly
4. Repeating the above as necessary.

In a best case scenario, the old-school, analog system for contract execution would take 2-3 business days. This assumes that all authorized signers are available to sign as soon as the documents arrive, sign correctly, and return ship the documents right away.

Just like email reduced the time for written correspondence, DocuSign reduces the time for contract execution. DocuSign’s ability to accelerate this process securely results not only in satisfied customers, but also impresses the clients of DocuSign’s customers. From the real estate industry to global brands, DocuSign helps its customers move their businesses forward by providing them with new, valid information more quickly than overnight shipping, bike messenger and fax.

The immediacy provided by DocuSign’s service enables its customers to move forward with their mission. By empowering its customers and impressing their clients, DocuSign aligns itself very strongly with its customers.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GeCMDV-9tP0]

<disclaimer>  DocuSign is a client </disclaimer>

This post is the seventh in a series of my interpretation of Social Media Principles. More to come in the near distant future.

My previous post, Economies Have Currencies, led to discussion on Twitter and on my blog. Social media principle #7 perhaps explains this best…

Trucks move physical objects - Communication moves ideas from Katmere via Flickr

Communication is blood:

Communication is the transport mechanism for information flow.

As a concrete example of communication facilitating how the information flows, the path looks like this:

An’s blog post –> An’s Tweet –> Nick Ward’s Comment –> An’s thanks of Nick’s comment w/a brief encapsulation –> Josh Maher’s comment integrating information from An’s blog post and Nick’s comment.

Retweets from Mack Collier, Jim Benson and others help spread the ideas and participate in the on-going discussion.

If we sit on, or hoard information, ideas stagnate.

In organizations, what ends up happening is 1) sub-optimal innovation. Jim Benson touched on this briefly, discussing the benefits of dynamic teams and workplaces; 2) bored employees that become cost sinks. This happens not because they want to cost the organization $$, but because keeping bored employees around requires management overhead.

By lowering costs of communication or building processes that incentivize people to share information, the odds of the above occurences decreases. Social media tools have already led to new and innovative ways to express creativity (Salesforce + Facebook –> Faceforce), build and market personal brands (MySpace –> Tila Tequila) and help consumers find information they want (Yelp –> Setting expectations around restaurants, salons, etc.).

This data may be expressed visually, textually, auditorially or some combination of the above, but without open pathways of communication, information remains siloed and decisions are then made which may or may not reflect reality.

This post is the sixth in a series of my interpretation of Social Media Principles. More to come in the near distant future.

Previously, I discussed rules in social media, framing the discussion in terms of etiquette and social norms. Once predictability of outcome for actions exist, bargaining and trade is possible, thus…

Currency, from Department of Chemistry, Washington University

Economies have currencies:

Trade is possible with Karmic infrastructure and rules of engagement.

Karmic infrastructure and rules of engagement provide people with boundaries within which to operate. Those who do not follow the norms are marginalized or on the edge/outside of the system.

One of the main ways we interact with others is through exchange of value, which can take many forms. For example, this can look like the exchange of approval, affection or information. Jim Benson has blogged about the currencies of Social Media, discussing artifacts and recognition.

My Company Cares Because…?

By making the artifacts and recognition distinct, measurable, and concrete strategic decisions about knowing with whom to trade becomes possible.
For brands, this means knowing who is interested in 1) your industry; 2) your business; and 3) why they care.

For consumers, this means knowing 1) if you have any brand affinities; 2) why you think about brands, products and services the way you do; and 3) providing actionable feedback to the appropriate people.

For example, I have spent quite a bit of time discussing whrrl, a social networking/location aware/social experience discovery application. Whrrl’s community manager and I have spent quite a bit of time discussing Web 2.0, social media and restaurants. As a top whrrler, I trade her my insights, links and content to help create a better experience for me. I’ve touched 262 places, rated/reviewed 85 places and bookmarked 42 places/events as “want to go.”

On her end, she informs me of whrrl-related events, new feature releases and other relevant information based on our relationship created with the exchange of value. She actively solicits my feedback and integrates those insights as appropriate.

Predictability and ability to set and adjust expectations around actions enable trade between members of the community. Social media participation reflects this, via the exchange of ideas and information through comments, reviews, blog posts and linking.

This post is the fifth in a series of my interpretation of Social Media Principles. More to come in the near distant future.

Previously, I discussed karma in social media, and touched on a case study of the use of blogging to drive sales. Because social media interactions are repeatable, they can give rise to patterns of behavior and over time which lead to shared, common understanding, such that:

Rules beget rules:

At some point, organization happens so that common understanding of interactions are possible.

In concrete terms, much has been written about social media etiquette. Tamar Weinberg wrote The Ultimate Social Media Handbook, covering Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Social News sites, FriendFeed, YouTube, StumbleUpon and blogs. Chris Brogan also covered social media etiquette with respect to email, blogs, Facebook and Twitter.

How did these guidelines come about?

Twitter: From Broadcasting to Sharing

Twitter asks: “What are you doing?” Users respond to that question in 140 characters or less. Over time, they realized “Eating lunch” is not as interesting as “Talking about crisis mapping over lunch with @patrickmeier“

Smoked Trout Salad from Crow anbui.tumblr.com

Which has turned into “Talking about crisis mapping over lunch with @patrickmeier http://zi.ma/b9d8de”

Twitter has rapdly evolved from broadcast mechnism to an informtion sharing application which can provide someone with many quick slices of information about someone’s life. As a dynamic, digital interaction paradigm Twitter provides rapid iterations of concise idea sharing that can inspire those involved in, or watching, the interactions.

You end up with patterns for interaction because you learn what resonates with individuals and the broader community.

However, social media tools may establish different interaction patterns because they serve different purposes and the features determine what types of interactions are possible.

Whrrl: From Information Source to Social Discovery

Whrrl enables you to:

1. See where your friends are/have been;
2. Share where you are/have been;
3. Provide a persistent opinion of experiences, tied to public places.
   

When I first started using Whrrl, I used it for local search and real world location bookmarking of restaurants, stores and museums I liked. With time, I added people to my Whrrl network and its utility as a social discovery tool increased so I could find out which restaurants, stores and museums my friends enjoyed.

Whrrl’s real world location broadcasting feature can cause privacy concerns, which the developers and product managers have tried to address via privacy and security settings.

Which means…

The social rules and norms that develop in online communities are influenced by the features and functionality of the social media tools used. Understanding the tools and their users help you understand how your actions may be perceived in the digital realm.

Businesses that understand the importance of online communities can participate thoughtfully, using the appropriate online etiquette, and incorporate social media data when making business decisions.

Update: Read Jim Benson’s perspective on Social Media Principle #5: Rules Beget Rules

This post is the fourth in a series of my interpretation of Social Media Principles. More to come in the near distant future.

Previously, I discussed findability and searchability in Findability is Power, touching briefly on connections, crowdsourcing and community as pathways for surfacing good information. Because using social media means the information comes from people, I find it timely to expand on the next principle:

Karma is real:

The more you give, the more you get. You just don’t know what at the point at which you’re giving.

One of the main values social media provides is the means to connect people to people as well as people to information.

Thanks to OneRedPaperclip.blogspot.com

Tara Hunt of Citizen Agency has written some interesting thoughts about karma in her blog, Horse Pig Cow. Her idea of karma centers on “gifting,” or the idea that an object gains value as it is passed from person to person, as in the example of One Red Paperclip. From one red paperclip to a house in Saskatchewan, Kyle didn’t know (and couldn’t know) when he would get the house. He did know that he had a red paper clip, and that paper clip had value.

Mack Collier, a social media consultant who started the Z-list, also has interesting thoughts about the give/get dichotomy:

As with anything else involving social media, I think when you start thinking about Ok…what do *I* get out of this?, then it all starts going to hell in a handbasket.

When Mack started the Z-list, he wanted to help spread link-love to marketing blogs with great content. Mack started a meme to help the community by surfacing lesser known bloggers with great content. In doing so, he created a lot of value as others added blogs they liked to the list. Did he have expectations of personal gain? Knowing Mack, no. Did he personally gain from it? Yes, by discovering blogs he didn’t know about previously, as well as any incidental links back to his own blog as the meme spread.

What “Karma is Real” Means for Business:

Giving and Getting requires at the very least, interaction with your customers. If you have a budget for feedback cards, do email marketing or run pay per click campaigns, you are already budgeting for customer interaction. Why not take it one step further and reciprocate with your customer base? Why not offer them information about who you are and what you’re up to?

Because people have a tendency to anthropomorphize or ascribe human tendencies to brands or products, providing customers with information about who you are and what you do enables them to start building a relationship with you. Tim Jackson, Masi’s brand manager, used social media to connect with customers and double sales. Tim posts about cycling, what Masi has in development and a bit about his personal life to help consumers connect with him and Masi.

Social media interaction patterns tend to mirror real life interaction patterns. People will know you by what you say online - on blogs, forums, and other communication tools. Karma tends to be the great leveller, by rewarding good behavior and condemning bad. Social media shows us that the community is a great karmic instrument.

The difference between online and real life is that Google remembers. And if Google doesn’t remember, archive.org does.

This post is the third in a series of my interpretation of Social Media Principles. More to come in the near distant future.

Having discussed information evaluation in Information Wants to be Free, this discussion of findability expands via discussion of content creation.  

Findability is Power:

Without findability, the information’s ability to provide and create value is greatly diminished.

Search (and searchability) gets us only partially there. Searchability, in this context, is an attribute of a piece of content (text, video, sound and so forth) that means it can be indexed such that when a user uses a search engine to ask for information, content with relevant information is returned.

For example, I needed my mother’s address and asked my younger brother to email it to me. He sent:

Searchable Email?

The information sought came without a subject, without a city, without a state, without context. Even with Gmail’s search, this particular content is not highly searchable because I’d have to remember my mother’s street, house number, or apartment number.

Great. Even if there were more information such that I could search “mom’s address” or “address MN” and have it return my mother’s address, the information isn’t necessarily findable.  In the above email, I can very quickly find the information I’m seeking. The nformation sought, while not highly searchable, is highly findable.

What if the needed information was buried in a 1,000 word email? Maybe there’s important information there, maybe there isn’t. The email is easy to search, but the information may be hard to find.

Social media tools such as Twitter, Slideshare, and Facebook enable users to find information by helping users connect with each other. While Google, Yahoo and Live Search still serve valuable content, social media tools facilitate connecting, crowdsourcing and community and provide another avenue to augment available information and add more value by introducing other ideas and perspectives.

This post is the second in a series of my interpretation of Social Media Principles. More to come in the near distant future.

Building upon my previous post, with freedom facilitated by decentralization as a necessary precondition for information exchange, my second principle follows:

Information Wants to be Free:

The cost of obtaining information is rapidly declining, but still capable of providing and creating value. Freedom is necessary for free information.

City Lights Bookstore in San Francisco, from anbui.tumblr.com

Search enables us to find information incredibly rapidly. Thus the question has shifted from how can I get the information to how good is the information?

Social media enables us one avenue to begin to answer the information quality problem. Before we had virtually 24/7 access to others, regardless of geography, we were constrained to those in our geographic locations. With telephones (and answering machines) and cell phones (with email) we’ve increased our ability to communicate with others. Others who know different things, have different ideas and bring different perspectives to the metaphorical table.

With social media tools, the barriers to access to individuals (points of knowledge) have decreased and costs of information sharing have decreased as well. However, information still provides value (and thus remains an exchangeable commodity) because of the value we can create with good information. Data drives decisions, on strategic and tactical levels. Good (accurate) information enables one to make better decisions. The real value is in one’s ability to sort information into signal and noise before executing based on information of value.

Before, we relied on people we trusted to help us validate information, people such as teachers and experts.

Now, social media has flattened the world by providing us with tools to find or discover others and build mutually beneficial connections and thus surface good information for decision making. Increasing access to information can create an environment for pushing boundaries on creative thinking, problem solving and accomplishing goals.

Restricting or siloing information is appropriate in context. Communicating that to information holders and those from whom the information is withheld preserves relationships built on trust, respect and reputation.

Read Jim Benson’s thoughts on Information Wants to be Free

This post is the first in a series of my interpretation of Social Media Principles. More to come in the near distant future.

From my 10 Principles of Social Media. The Remix:

Freedom enables us to pursue our thoughts and interests in a social space. Thus decentralization is of primary value.

This formulation of freedom recognizes that freedom is necessary for individuals to pursue their values. Constraints limit one’s ability to pursue values. Some constraints are part of reality, such as Newton’s Laws of Physics. Other constraints can be attributed to circumstances or context. In the context of this post, centralization and the degree of is one such circumstantial constraint.

High Authority Network Map from Snurb.info

Thinking about centralization in terms of network, connection, and nodes, the fewer number of nodes in a network, the more centralized the network. These few nodes serve as the conduit of information and power. Should something happen to one of the nodes, the power dynamic and balance of the system would shift, if not outright splinter. The other nodes would bear more responsibility and there would be fewer pathways to information. With more barriers to information, the greater the challenge of obtaining information and the greater the possibility of an ill-informed decision.

In a decentralized system, more connections means less reliance on any one node for information. Redundancies protect against information loss should any node be removed from the system as well as provide options for information sources. Thus, one is free to choose which node, connection, pathway will serve as the information source and validate that information against other resources in the system.

Decentralization Leads to Social Freedom

This lack of dependence also provides social freedom. The less one depends on any given node, the more freedom one has to exercise any one of the greater number of options.

For example, take a group of three friends. If this group had no other friends, the personal relationships between them all are of high importance and each individual would need to provide the social resources and interactions the other two need. Should one go away, that impact will be felt - mathematically, there is a 50% decrease in friend choices for those remaining. Considering others’ reactions may have greater importance in decision making, given social consequences of public action.

Take a group of 30 friends. Any given individual now has 29 friendships. If one-third of of this group leaves this system, each of those remaining now have 19 friendships. I solved the first example, I’ll leave this one as an exercise for the readers.

What does this all mean?

Decentralization = Freedom due to lower barriers to information access and risk spreading in social relationships, thus creating a virtuous cycle that more freedom –> more decentralized network –> more freedom… and I look forward to your thoughts/questions/remixes.