Brian Solis this past Monday commented extensively about a piece of research on Twitter networks done by Huberman, Romero and Wu from HP's Social Computing Laboratory (click here for original report PDF).
The team found that even though people may have a massive following on an online social media platform - in this case Twitter (but basically it also applies to all other forms of social media) - the numbers actually do not mean much in terms of the actual volume or quality of actual interactions among them. Huberman, Romero and Wu say that scarcity of close attention to nurture the networks, and the routines of life and work will naturally constrain people to interactions with just a close few who really matter socially or professionally.
OK, just to make things clear, even though the trio had specifically identified Twitter in this study, I would tend on the side that this phenomena applies to any form of social networking platform because making connections is at the heart of the application. Just think of all those people we've connected with on Facebook or LinkedIn consider how many of them do we actually keep in close contact with, and how many more are people we know, but still find it perfectly comfortable to have them on the periphery?
What matters, according to Solis, is exactly THAT network of close contacts (the extent of the connections that are really 'hidden' from view until one takes the effort to map it out on a network diagram) who will enrich the connections made by driving a piece of content from the originator along the network, with or without the participation of the originator. Solis calls that an indicator of the originator's IF, or Influence Factor. I believe that also echoes what David Meerman Scott calls the new 'third party ink,' or PR of Web 2.0 in his book "The New Rules of Marketing and PR" where the content leadership demonstrated by someone has such authority and influence for information pushed through this source to take a life on its own.
I have actually written to Solis to clarify the nature and extent of some of the terminologies used in his blog, such as Outbound Network and Inbound Network, and whether such terms are indigenous or sensitized concepts. I should be able to tag an addendum to to bring further clarity to this piece of work - especially for many of us who may have some difficulty in following the sometimes technical-sounding narratives in the blog. Do wait out for that!!!
Useful Takeaways:
But I guess for now, newbies to the social media scene like us still have some useful lessons to take away from the article:
(1) As the HP report finds, social networking sites are making it extremely for our network of contacts to grow, but not all of them fall within our close circle of friends or acquaintances whom we keep in touch regularly. Only by doing a network analysis would we uncover what would usually be a network that is hidden from view. This easy befriending is a natural phenomenon of social media.
(2) Closely related to the earlier point, Solis explains that the social networking platforms enable individuals to not only connect with those they know (and thus have a higher chance of developing a strong tie), but also with those who are merely interested to follow the online activities of the former without any expectation of reciprocation (this group tend to make up those with whom weak or fragile ties are formed).
(3) According to Hazleton, Harrison-Rexrode and Kennan (2007, p.96), it is important to cultivate both strong and weak ties. Strong ties are essential to survival, and require a lot of time to cultivate, which is why one's circle of strong ties is often small and restricted to family, close friends and selected colleagues. Weak or fragile ties, however, are important for the general socialization purposes, as well as the transmission and exchange of information, which is why it requires very little time for maintenance work. While in theory, or on paper at least, strong ties seem to trump everything else, in all practicality, one only has so much energy to sustain a small group of strong ties but maintain a much larger, but more distant, group of weaker ties.
(4) In this Web 2.0 world, individuals or organizations have a better chance of building credibility for themselves by developing leadership in the content or knowledge that they are pushing out to the Internet that may be of benefit to the public at large (or a specific niche audience). What ensues is a buzz and presence that is created because the content gets people talking, and it also stands a better chance of going 'viral' and getting circulated across the network, first within one's friends, then with friends of friends, and then the friends of other's friends. This becomes the 'third party ink' that basically promotes credibility for the source much like how organizations in PR campaigns would seek traditional media to ascribe some degree of legitimacy to them through third-party stories, not advertisement.
(5) The bottom-line is this: whatever networks that are built online, especially from an organizational standpoint, are useful only if the online following can be translated into actual help or activists in the real world. Dorie Clark, of Clark Strategic Communications, says that in her work in new media during the 2004 Howard Dean Campaign, is that a key is to not only build on online following, but be able to translate all that online network capital into actual and tangible 'helping hands' on the ground, without forgetting to nurture the people so that they continue to stay connected online as well.
Ultimately, we must remember that in building our networks, we are dealing with people, not digits or statistics - even though new media can sometimes reduce a human being into a 140 character Twitter microblog or a photo on a Facebook page, and others. If we look at this from a public affairs or public relations perspective, we cannot lose sight that success is all about relationship management, especially now that new media is tearing down the intermediated channels of traditional presses and media, and putting organizations and individual in close touch with other organizations, individuals, buyers, customers, clients and what have you.
My next article will feature an interview that I did with Dorie, where we discussed issues about public affairs, public relations, as well as trends and challenges of this industry in the face of the new media and Internet assault. Watch this space for more of that coming soon!
9 Comments
|
Daniel SeetDaniel is a student with Emerson College's Communication Management program. He is a recent convert to the world of PR2.0 and hopes to start a dialogue to broaden his, and other's, understanding of this subject. Archives
April 2009
Categories
All
|