Posts Tagged ‘Online Communities’

When we hear the phrase “net worth,” it is almost always in reference to someone’s financial position.  That is, what is the value of someone’s assets minus liabilities?  While that is a good thing to know for oneself, I believe the phrase can be used in a new way now that personal networks are such a vital part of our lives.

The idea for this post came from seeing a tweet by Dan Pontefract (@DPontefract) on January 25 that said, “my network *is* my net worth.”  The tweet linked to the press release “Most Expect to Get New Job by Networking” from Right Management, the workforce consulting experts within ManpowerGroup.  The release discusses survey results which showed that 50% of respondents expect to find their next job via networking, while 22% expect to do so through a job board, 10% through an agency/recruiter, 8% by directly approaching businesses and 1% through a newspaper or periodical (how are newspapers still in existence?).

As someone who puts great value in his personal network of personal and professional contacts, I resonate with the survey results and am surprised, frankly, that the 50% figure wasn’t higher.  Give it a year or two and I’m confident it will be much higher.

As I think about the value of a personal network, the primary benefit for me is not for job searching.  It is for learning.  For the past few years, the primary way I have learned is by following key people on Twitter who are leaders in fields I care about.  The blogs, reports, white papers, surveys, infographics, books and articles these people link to, their insights shared, and the incredible opportunity to have direct online conversations with them make the world of knowledge available to everyone who chooses to take advantage of the social technologies at their fingertips.

Learning professionals talk about personal learning networks as sources for individuals to learn via informal connections with others.  If you’re interested, grab your favorite beverage, do a Google search on the topic and spend some time perusing the 147 million search results on the term.

Personal networks consist of connections you have with people you see in person as well as others online you may never have met face to face.  Personal networks are not the same thing as online social networks, although the people you connect with online are part of (and perhaps the largest part of) your personal network.

I encourage everyone to continually work on expanding their personal network – their “net worth” – both for the value you can bring to them and for the opportunities such connections bring your way.  Don’t expand your networks just to take without giving, though.  That’s against the spirit of a true network where each person plays an important part.  Expand because you have a thirst for knowledge, a desire to help as many others as possible, a yearning to expand your horizons through rich communication with others around the world, and you will find that you end up gaining as much or more than you give in the process.

You may have additional reasons for and uses of a personal network beyond the professional and learning focus that most interests me.  Regardless of your motivation, I encourage you to pause and ask yourself “What is my ‘net worth’?  What can you do today to increase it?”

Buzzing CommunitiesI have long been a fan of Rich Millington and the excellent advice he dispenses daily from his blog at FeverBee.com.  For those involved with leading online communities, you need to go to FeverBee and subscribe to his updates.  You’ll benefit from the brief, insightful posts he publishes nearly every weekday.  I was extremely glad, therefore, when his book Buzzing Communities: How to Build Bigger, Better, and More Active Online Communities was published a few months ago.  I readily digested it upon arrival and am eager to share these thoughts with you about the contents of the book, why it’s important, and what specific actions it has already prompted me to take in order to be a more professional and effective community manager.

The book’s two parts and twelve chapters span nearly 300 pages and are devoted to the categories of “How to Manage Your Community” and “Everything You Need to Know About Your Members,” with the vast majority of space given to the former.  The part on managing your community includes nine chapters: Strategy; Growth; Content; Moderation; Influence and Relationships; Events and Activities; Business Integration; Return on Investment; and User Experience.  The second part includes: The Community Ecosystem; Competition – Existing Online Communities; The Audience – Demographics, Habits, and Psychographics; and a wrap-up on Community Management Success.

Online community management is a relatively new profession that still lacks much in the way of formal training, education, certification, standards, and proven, documented, and accepted best practices.  In such an environment, Millington’s book raises the bar and sets the standard for what community management is about and where it must go in the best interests of the communities served and the professionals who have responsibility for them.  Anyone whose role includes in whole or in part leading an online community will benefit from taking a slow, diligent walk through the book.

Usually, when I read a book, I underline some things as I go and absorb at an intellectual level the contents of what I read.  For this book, however, so many helpful ideas jumped off the page or sprung to mind while reading that the margins are filled with notes to myself with actions I need to take in my online communities in order to implement the concepts discussed.  Such ideas make this one of the most practical and helpful books I have read with immediate impact on how I do what I do every day.

One of the core ideas of the book is that “data is the single best asset you have to develop a thriving community.”  Millington is wonderfully relentless about the need to gather, analyze and make decisions based on data in order to grow and strengthen communities.  He is spot on correct when he states that too many community managers are “too reactive, too ad hoc, and too lacking in long-term strategy.”  They fail to use their data probably because they don’t gather the data needed to make the best decisions.  Some platforms are woefully limited in the data easily mined to help with this need, but even in those instances you’ll at least know what you’re missing by reading the book.  Be forewarned: If you read it, you will no longer be able to speak the lie that “It’s hard to measure the ROI of social.”

Unfortunately, I can relate all too well to the above shortcomings.  How much of my days have been spent reacting to the vocal minority instead of planning and improving things for the majority?  How many weeks pass with no progress on big-picture strategic paths because I have taken too many member complaint detours or spent too much time in the weeds to even notice how far off path we traveled?

The book provides ample specifics to guide community managers through the early planning of new communities through the day-to-day building of existing communities.  Millington’s insights apply both to internal and external communities of all types, sizes, ages and platforms.  I challenge any community manager to read it and not come away with a to-do list of things you can immediately do to help build your community.

Speaking of a to-do list, let me share with you some of the things from my to-do list having read the book.  Keep in mind that I am the community manager for a 23,000+ member internal community for a Fortune 100 company and also have responsibility for some of our external social platforms as well.

  • I changed the welcome email that I send to all new members by adding one specific thing they could go out to the community right then and do to get them involved immediately.
  • Since I lead a bi-weekly call of nearly 30 others in our company who have some level of responsibility related to community management, I’m taking one of the book’s chapters each call over 14 meetings to discuss the key ideas and insights from that chapter.
  • We have purchased a quantity of the books to put copies in the hands of community managers in-house.
  • I routinely do not open my email at work until I’ve been there 2-3 hours so that I can concentrate on getting important tasks done related to big-picture, long-term growth instead of allowing email to force me into a reactive mode.
  • I limit the amount of time I give to member complaints or the vocal minority daily.
  • My manager and I have been in conversation about adding a new analyst role to the team (in addition to the analyst role already planned) to assist with all the data-related needs.  Writing up the proposed job description and role justification is my next task on this matter.
  • I’ve made notes to do a number of additional things in the coming weeks, such as:
    • Schedule town halls with group admins to provide a forum for sharing success stories, best practices and advice about being a successful group admin;
    • Survey the community to gauge their sense of belonging;
    • Create a group for new members and populate it initially with helpful links and info, and then modify the welcome email again to invite members to join the group;
    • Schedule a monthly town hall for new members;
    • Solicit current members regarding their favorite platform or community tips to include in the weekly broadcast I send to all members;
    • Post a list of community volunteer opportunities since it isn’t possible or wise for me to try to do it all in the community.

You can see that I had many takeaways from the book.  I am certain that you will as well.  In fact, let me help you get started with this list:

If you’ve read the book already, or if you read it soon, please leave a comment below with your thoughts.  I’d love to hear your takeaways from it as well.

Blind JusticeVery few days go by without someone complaining to me about something happening in our company’s internal social network.  Usually it’s about a specific discussion that someone takes offense at or because they think a rule or two have been broken that requires my intervention as community manager.  That goes with the territory of managing a community of 23,000 people that posts over 1,000 messages a day.  Given the activity level, the number of complaints is remarkably low.

An interesting phenomenon of late, however, is the complaint that suggests I don’t moderate political discussions fairly – that I allow people on the left (or on the right) to get away with more than the other side.  The funny part of that complaint is that I hear it from both sides.  The fact that both sides complain tells me I’m being as fair as I know how to be.

While there is some subjectivity to moderating online communities, there are also specific rules in place that I have communicated and that I follow.  The clear-cut rules when broken are the easy ones to enforce.  It’s the more subjective guideline such as showing respect to fellow employees that is up to interpretation and more challenging to enforce.  These are also the ones where people are more likely to disagree with my decisions.

I have no fantasy and no goal of trying to please everyone.  My goal is to do what I think is in the best interests of the community and the business.  As was mentioned by my manager earlier today at a team get-together, you have to develop a pretty thick skin as a community manager given all that comes at you.

If you are in a role that occasionally requires you to make a judgment between sides, then you know the situation I’m in.  Heck, even a parent of two kids knows that situation, much less anyone in a work-related role that calls for mediation between two parties.  As challenging as the role may be at times, there is some comfort in leap year lesson #355: You’re likely being fair if both sides accuse you of favoritism.

One of the facts of life in a small or new business is doing a lot of things yourself.  You usually don’t have the resources to hire expensive consultants, marketing agencies, graphic artists or others to do work.  You may begrudge not being able to hire out such work, but you shouldn’t be too quick  to pass it on to others outside the business.

One of the traits many large companies lose as they grow is an appreciation for and willingness to use the workers’ talents that are outside the employees’ official responsibilities.  Our social media team at work is trying to change that as far as our needs are concerned.

For example, today is the annual Great American Smokeout encouraging people to try to quit smoking.  As the manager of our internal social network, I was asked to come up with a logo to display for the day on our social network.  I’m no graphic artist.  I had a few ideas and files from which to work and I created one I was willing to use.

It seemed best, though, to throw the task out to the employees on our social network and to invite anyone interested to submit a logo.  After all, that’s how we came up with our primary logo two years ago.  It worked today beautifully.

This morning when I checked, someone had created a wonderful graphic that was a modification of our usual logo, that was cute and captured perfectly without words the “no smoking” message we wanted.  I gladly used the logo for the day.

Farming out that task to an agency would have cost at least hundreds of dollars and probably more.  Going through official channels internally would have taken months of red tape, concern for branding standards, meetings, emails and phone calls galore.  That’s dumb.

One of the great values of social media is the ability to ask a large community for something and frequently get what you ask for if it taps into the passions and talents of others.  Businesses need to do more of that.  How much internal talent is untapped simply because we don’t follow leap year lesson #318 – Sometimes you just need to ask.

One of the online conversations today at work dealt with the differences between face-to-face and online communication.  It should be obvious to most that there are major differences between the two, but our actions don’t always indicate an awareness of those differences.

For example, when we are physically present with others, we have the benefit of not only hearing the words they say, but we can hear their tone of voice, we can see their facial expressions and their other body language.  All together, we make a more informed decision on what the person is communicating, taking visible and nonverbal clues into consideration.

Contrast that with how we communicate online.  We are mostly limited online to typed text on a screen, void of any tone or physical clues that help with understanding.  Yes, we have the option of emoticons – smiley faces, frowns, etc. – but even with those we don’t know for sure the intent of the person who typed them.

The trigger for this thought and discussion today was when someone commented on a thread in a manner that I thought was unnecessarily argumentative.  When pointed out, the person went back and added “#kidding” to the post.  I’ve had enough people complain to me about similar situations over time that I posted that I still consider many such statements as intentional jabs that people try to then pretend are not jabs by adding some cutesy icon or hashtag.  By then, however, the criticism is inflicted.  You may as well take a knife and stab it in someone’s back and then try to cover the puncture wound with a yellow smiley face sticker, pretending all is well and that you’re best buds.

Communication face-to-face is hard.  Communication online is infinitely harder and requires more skill and forethought and care so as to communicate clearly, making up for the lack of visual and nonverbal clues the medium necessarily omits.  You may know exactly how you intend a comment to come across, but that is no guarantee that the characters on the screen adequately communicate that intent.  Go the extra mile to communicate clearly online.

Leap year lesson #313 is Understand the difficulty of online communication.

I received a call at work yesterday about a post that was on our company’s internal social media platform.  The initial post was negative, but the situation prompting the post resulted from a mistake that was easily corrected.  The lady calling me had been asked to call and inquire about the possibility of deleting the discussion thread now that the matter was resolved.   She rightly assumed that we don’t delete threads just because they are negative in nature, and she was actually confirming that practice with me so that she could go back to the ones who requested the deletion and let them know.

As we talked, I told her that we only delete posts if they violate any of the community guidelines or company policies, and this discussion did not cross those lines.  In this case, therefore, it was best to add a comment to the discussion that the matter had been resolved.

Taking this approach is preferred for several reasons:

  • It does no good to pretend to embrace social media, but then only allow positive comments.  That isn’t honest or transparent.
  • Censorship stifles good communication, effective collaboration, and the benefits that come from occasionally uncomfortable exchanges.
  • Others not directly involved in the situation are encouraged by knowing that issues can be addressed and resolved openly.

While the original person posting her complaint may not have addressed the situation in the best manner possible, the end result was positive and resulted in more people being exposed to the community guidelines I follow in moderating nearly 7,000 posts per week.  Given education and periodic reminders, the community rarely needs posts deleted.  It is mostly self-policing in that regard.  Experienced members give guidance to newbies as needed.

In our brave new world of social media, it still takes some getting used to for many who have not yet immersed themselves in proper online etiquette.  Communication is still a challenge online or offline for those lacking social skills.  So be patient with those who may not be as savvy or experienced as you in social media.  Educate them, share your wisdom, provide gentle correction when necessary.  But always remember leap year lesson #278: Don’t try to censor social media.

I wrote here a couple of months ago about the difficulty of walking tightropes.  I’ve faced another similar challenging situation in recent weeks.  It’s finding the right balance of doing my best in a professional, unbiased way as the community manager of a 20,000 member social network vs. knowing when to take part in discussions that can be very controversial in nature.

My first duty at work is to do what they hired me to do, so over the past more than two years I have avoided being involved in religious or political discussions that happen on that social network.  I don’t want to do anything that might alienate half of the community I am charged with leading.

The difficulty for me, though, is when I have strong convictions about something from a religious standpoint.  On the one hand, I want to take the impartial side of moderator and limit my involvement to making sure everyone follows the guidelines and respects the views of others.  On the other hand, there are times when I feel like I can and perhaps should make substantive contributions to conversations out of my personal convictions, and that failure to do so is somehow hypocritical or cowardly.

It doesn’t help that my conservative Christian beliefs are not politically correct on all matters discussed and would be easy grounds for some to attack and to even use against me in jeopardizing my job if they wished.  So my failure to speak up then makes me wonder if I’m being unfaithful in my beliefs out of fear for my job.  That isn’t a good place to be.

I suspect that I will continue to take the corporate high road and do my best as moderator to manage the community peaceably since that is what I’m paid to do.  But it is unfortunate that there is a present reality where those on the conservative right feel like they can’t speak their heart on some matters without fear of reprisal in what appears to be an increasingly hostile environment against such views.

Leap year lesson #226 is one I struggle with daily – Know when to speak and when to be silent.

If you watched Nik Wallenda walk his tightrope across Niagara Falls earlier this week, you were probably amazed like me that anyone would be brave or dumb enough to try it, and that anyone would succeed at it.  It was an amazing feat.  The man is skilled at what he does because he’s been doing it all his life.

Many of us walk other kinds of tightropes daily.  Perhaps it’s at work collaborating with a wide variety of personalities.  Perhaps it’s at home when all is not rosy.  Perhaps it is in your career as you try to balance a forward progression against winds that attempt to move you in a different direction.

I don’t know what your tightrope is, but I’ll share with you one that I’m battling right now.  As the community manager for our company’s 20,000 member internal social network, my job is to help the community continually grow, mature and bring business value.  We openly allow non-business discussion there because it helps increase employee engagement and, frankly, everyone needs to get away from thinking about work all the time.

The tightrope relates to the tension present when some discuss (i.e., bicker) about politics.  We have a group set up just for that – one of over 1000 groups in the community.  But over the last 2-3 months there has been a noticeable change in tone and quantity of comments, especially by a few.  Technically, they aren’t violating a company policy, so there is no action to take of an HR enforcement nature.

Still, my job includes doing what is in the best interest of the community.  I’m considering deactivating the group for a month to allow everyone time to cool off.  There is no way a handful of these folks are giving their best to the company with all the time they spend bickering.  At the same time, my heart as a transparent, open community manager is to allow discussion – not to stifle it.  So the question I need to answer is which approach in this case is best for the overall health and future of the community.

Whatever I decide soon, leap year lesson #169 is Walking tightropes is tricky.

With the growth of Facebook to over 800 million users and showing no sign of going away anytime soon, we have a new element in our relationships that simply didn’t exist too many years ago.  We have the ability to easily stay in touch – even to the finest level of detail – with whomever we wish.  We can choose to maintain relationships from years past where geography and circumstances would previously have ended regular contact.  We can, in a sense, live with many others every day to stay in touch and to at least be up to date on those aspects of their lives they choose to make public.

I think that’s a good thing.  Case in point – this week spending time with some family members and friends who I do not get to see in person very often.  Because of our connections on Facebook, when we got together we could pick up the conversation from a broader knowledge base than if we did not have that connection.  We didn’t have to say “Where are you working?” or “What have you been up to lately?” or “How is the family?” or a host of other catch-up types of questions.  We already knew the answers to those things because of staying in touch via Facebook.  We could move more quickly to other matters.

I’ve had several friends and acquaintances over the past year who chose to take breaks from Facebook because they felt like it was in some way harmful to them or their relationships.  Some gave it up for Lent.  Some have closed their accounts completely.  That is their prerogative and they have to do what they think is best in their situation for their relationships.

But I am grateful to be connected regularly with friends from high school, with family and with people I see in person every week.  Should I be online so much that I ignore my wife or anyone I may be physically present with?  No.  To do so is as rude as always spending time on your cell phone when you’re with others.  Used responsibly, it expands and deepens relationships.

Leap year lesson #130 is Facebook can deepen relationships.

Like much of the rest of the world on January 1, I can’t help but reflect on the past and look forward to the future. When I think of this blog and where I’d like for it to go, there are two major things I can do to improve.

  1. Be more consistent. 16 posts in 2011 was a poor start. I can do better.
  2. Be brief. Just because I like writing a lot doesn’t mean readers always want to read long posts.

When I think about the blog I read more than any other – Rich Millington’s “The Online Community Guide” – consistency and brevity are major factors in my growing admiration of what he does there, in addition, of course, to the excellent content.

Since part of my plan for organizing my life this year involves more intentional time daily to reflect, and since it’s a leap year, I thought I would embark on 366 days of capturing brief lessons learned and documenting them here. They will most often relate to some aspect of my professional life as an online community moderator/manager and social media/social learning enthusiast. But I reserve the right to interject a few personal lessons along the way as well. So consistency this year means 366 daily posts, and just to put a number on brevity, each of the lessons will be stated in no more than 366 words (hopefully far fewer).

Join me for the adventure. Maybe we’ll learn from each other.

Happy new year!