Passion vs position


From my own experience this comment on Peter Winick’s blog ‘Thought Leadership Leverage’ about the value of committed people (‘Do you have the right strategy and the right people?‘) – over suitably qualified but less committed professionals – makes good sense:

It’s interesting that you have identified the wrong people as those who are committed to the job at hand even over having the right skill-set and experience. This too has been what I have seen. People who are in positions that can make things happen and who pay lip-service to getting the job done don’t only hinder/stop implementation, they harm the organization by creating cynicism and making the next strategy that comes along even harder to implement.

Often organisations don’t even realise this is going on. All too often people are more adept at retaining their position, first and foremost, than delivering the goods. So if you find yourself out in the cold remember to stay positive – success is the best antidote.

Latest feedback thoughts on LinkedIn


Check out the current discussion with Principal Scientist at Lithium Technologies, Dr Michael Wu, on the subject of the 90-9-1 rule, feedback loops, and the rest, in the LinkedIn Online Community Manager Group.

Viral loops as a subset of feedback loops in social media


I like Jeremiah Owyang’s matrix with the embedded point about the viral loop value, to drive engagement in advanced integration of one’s corporate site with your social media strategy.

Accords with my views on how to grow online communities (where I’ve seen viral loops are a subset of feedback loops) – so using such a strategy both in the viral sense as above with with users, and in terms of establishing feedback loops with top contributors.

Any circuit-design type simulators out there which could plug into your web analytics data to allow you to test out viral campaigns?

I sketched this out a bit more on a recent slideshare: http://www.slideshare.net/stuartgh/feedback-loo…

It’s also worth reading the comment from Bert DuMars on the value of using consumer generated product reviews published on one’s site as a powerful feedback loops for driving performance:

When you integrate CGP reviews into your branded website you are inviting additional conversation about your products and services. You are opening up to your consumers and allowing them to begin a conversation with you about what they like and do not like about your products.

If you are open and honest (showing both positive and negative reviews) you not only learn how to improve your products and services, you are given the opportunity to show that you care about your consumers. We have seen culture change at our Rubbermaid and Dymo brands based on CGP reviews.

We can respond faster to feedback, especially negative, and reach out to consumers to learn what went wrong. We can then adjust the product or service based on that feedback. Think of it as an ongoing, near real-time, feedback loop and a gift from your consumers.

Who believes in the 90-9-1 rule?


A second question on LinkedIn from Dr Michael Wu, Principal Scientist at Lithium Technologies:

Is there something more accurate and precise than the 90-9-1 rule out there? IMHO, Lorenz Curve and Gini Coefficient. Do you know anything else? The Economics of 90-9-1

My answer as part of yesterday’s Online Community Manager group discussion kind of sums up where I’ve got to after reading Dr Wu’s blog previous post and this latest one:

I like the approach you have using economics-based models. I’ve come at it from a more particpant-observer type sociological point of view, so what I’d like to see is for your analysis to return a new ‘rule of thumb’ based on your in-depth data analysis.

The 90-9-1 rule is useful to community managers because it helps provides a starting point for understanding, as Arantza says above. For example it would be useful to know from a practical point of view whether for more open communities (as opposed to niche market research or project based communities) the 90-9-1 is a useful tool for helping launch a new community.

It’s partly about creating a social dashboard that can explain to a member of senior management why a certain kind of community activity may help or hinder greater participation.

I did this kind of work previously in the National Health Service, creating simple reports on the success of a national public health initiative, which worked well for senior managers (government ministers in that case).

So I come back to the challenge, the age old relationship between lab & fieldwork if you like, what would be the new rule of thumb/thumbs?

I’ve chosen to highlight multiple feedback loops as a useful tool, to help drive top contributors for example (taken from the HP Labs research), but I take your point that for commercial ROI purposes more precision is required. To put it another way in such a dynamic social context how does precision allow you to create heuristics for day to day community management?

Do you believe in the 90-9-1 rule?


A question on LinkedIn from Dr Michael Wu, Principal Scientist at Lithium Technologies:

Do you believe in the 90-9-1 rule? Do you think it is a hard and fast rule, or do you believe that it is just a rule of thumb?

What do 10+ years of data across 200+ communities say about the 90-9-1 rule? http://is.gd/aNWvx

My answer as part of the Online Community Manager group discussion kind of sums up where I’ve got to, hence why I thought it worth reproducing here:

Hi Michael,

It’s getting a little late on Friday evening here in the UK but I wanted to share my experience in case it’s of use to you.

I tried to use the 90-9-1 rule as a heuristic to help guide community development here: http://www.siftgroups.com/blog/heuristic-tools-help-community-managers – and used that rule of thumb in designing a drupal-based community metric package to help monitor the balanced between readers and contributors in various facets of measurable development.

In addition I believe it’s worth considering the value of designing feedback loops, so that your top contributors for example are rewarded for their efforts. I did a slideshare sketching out that concept here: http://www.slideshare.net/stuartgh/feedback-loops-3363641 – in fact that got me thinking about the broader topic of ‘viral loops’ but that’s another story with I was sharing with some great people at the Social Media World Forum in London this week.

Otherwise thinking about the 90-9-1 rule also has underlined to me recently the value of measuring offline use of online communities, especially to the majority of ‘readers’. I’ve blogged on that aspect here: http://www.stuart-hall.com/2010/02/08/measuring-e2-0-evolution-of-hello-bah-com/

Hope that’s of use.

Cheers,

Stuart G. Hall
@stuartgh

PS: I’m off on a skiing today but hopefully I’ll get chance to read Dr Wu’s in-depth piece on the subject when I get back from Rauris in Austria!

Pic from Ava Maria Seven’s photostream.

Loops – Daily, Viral


Great to see UK-based Nudge Social Media leading the way at the Social Media World Forum on the creation of application around viral loops in Facebook:

Viral Loop notes


I just stumbled across a great site, Books Noted, which in it’s words provides “quotations, notes and takeaways on interesting books. These books further our knowledge in a variety of topics from psychology, entrepreneurship, philosophy, business and more. Since they tend to be hundreds of pages in length, these short notes and takeaways will get to the essence of the book for time strapped readers.” Below are the notes from Viral Loop, with my particular interest on the growth curve behind Hotmail and the story of how one mother got out of Chernobyl just in time – intuition is powerful:

* Products that require a customer education are best suited to direct selling… if you are unloading blue jeans, direct selling probably isn’t for you, since everyone knows what jeans are and what they are used for [what about cosmetics? Avon?]
* Jim Clark contacted Marc Andreesen after using the Mosaic browser for the first time
* Warren Buffett says “Get greedy when others are fearful and fearful when others are greedy.”
* Network effect: the more connections you have, the more nodes, the more people, the more valuable it will be
* “double viral loop” – every network creator is a user and every user is a potential network creator
* Successful viral expansion loop companies share these characteristics:
o Web-based: suited to the frictionless world of the Internet
o Free: users consume product at not charge
o Organizational technology: no content is created, users create it. Companies just organize the content
o Simple concept: easy and intuitive to use
o Built-in virality: users spread the product out of their own self-interest
o Extremely fast adoption, exponential growth, virality index, predictable growth rates, network effects, stackability, point of nondisplacement and ultimate saturation
* Fanout: Jurvetson noted a “mathematical elegance” to Hotmail’s “smooth exponential growth curves” in the company’s early days: Cumulative users = (1 + fanout) cycles Where “cumulative users” related to the number of Hotmail registered subscribers, “fanout” was the rate by which the product spread and “cycles” was the number of times the product was used in the time period since launch (or frequency multiplied by time). At the beginning, each Hotmail user, on average, brought in two new users each month. (In other words, the fanout equaled 2.)
* Controlled growth at Gmail: Paul Buchheit, the brains behind Gmail, purposely controlled the rate of adoption by instituting an invitation-only sign-up procedure. Because Gmail offered 1,000 megabytes of storage while others gave users only 4 megabytes, Buchheit chose to drag down Gmail’s growth rate so Google could keep the application operational without risking sluggish download times, outages, data loss, or any other performance problem that often emerges with rapid scaling.
* How Max Levchin survived Chernobyl: Fleeing the crumbling Soviet empire most likely saved their lives. When Levchin was eleven, his mother, a physicist who worked as a government research assistant, overheard news of a leak at the Chernobyl nuclear reactor, which was on the verge of a meltdown. Acid rain misted down as the family quietly vacated their home and rushed to the train station in Kiev. After they were onboard, news of the disaster became public, and hours later, as they chugged into Crimea, Soviet guards ordered them to turn back, fearful of contamination. Following an animated discussion, Levchin’s mother convinced them to check for radiation. All were clean, except Max, whose right foot sent the Geiger counter into spasms. The guard said the boy’s bone marrow was contaminated; his leg might have to be amputated. His mother told Max to take off his shoe and he was tested again. This time he passed and they were let through, sans shoe. The culprit was a radioactive rose thorn that had lodged in his sole as they escaped Kiev.
* What early PayPal was looking for: Because Thiel’s ultimate plan was to create a Web-based currency to undermine government tax structures, which would require taking on powerful interests like commercial banking, the cofounders sought people a lot like them: hypercompetitive, well-read, multilingual workaholics who had, above all, a proficiency in math and an aversion to authority.
o Thiel subscribed to a theory of human behavior known as “mimetic desire,” propounded by French historian and philosopher René Girard, who believed that people were essentially sheep who, without much reflection, borrowed their desires from others. This theory has been applied to describe financial bubbles and panics, when investors blindly act as a flock and follow what others are doing even if it flies in the face of economic logic, and to war and violence, which arise when two individuals vie for the same possession, leading to antagonism and strife. Pretty soon the object of desire is forgotten and all you’re left with is the antipathy.
o PayPal Mafia: The day that eBay took over, Thiel, Levchin, and Hoffman, who collectively took in more than $100 million, walked away from the viral company they had started just a few years earlier. But PayPal was simply the beginning for these former employees, and the lessons they learned at PayPal would spread virally to other viral concerns. Thiel founded his own hedge fund, Clarium Capital Management LLC, invested $750,000 in Facebook, and joined the board. Levchin created Slide, a widget maker that counts hundreds of millions of installs of its photo slideshow and other applications across social networks. Hoffman is the CEO of LinkedIn, a networking tool for business that counts almost 40 million members and, since it has multiple revenue streams, boasts that it is profitable. Roelof Botha, PayPal’s CFO, moved over to the venture capital side and became a partner at Sequoia Capital. One of his first investments was in YouTube, which was started by former PayPal alums Chad Hurley and Steve Chen.
* Michael Birch, founder of Bebo’s daily life: While Bebo grew at a fantastic rate overseas, Birch’s family life in San Francisco remained downright normal. He woke up at 6:30 a.m. to help his children get ready for school; then, after dropping them off, he and his wife would arrive at the office at 8:00 a.m., and Birch would spend half the day programming. The few meetings he held were with suppliers and prospective partners or advertisers. With Bebo adding ten thousand new members a week, either he or his head programmer was always on call, since they were the only ones who knew the site’s architecture. Since his co-coder got his kicks from skydiving, Birch would stress whenever he took to the sky. Then he would leave around 7:00 p.m. to see his kids for an hour before they went to bed. A few times a week he attended networking events, for instance, a website launch, and he traveled to England, where he and his wife would combine business with pleasure.
* Summary of online viral loop companies:
o Web-based: Better suited to the Internet
o Free: Users consume the product at no charge
o Organizational technology: They don’t create content, their users do
o Simple concept: Easy and intuitive to use
o Built-in virality: Users spread the product out of own self-interest
o Exponential growth: That is, the virality index is above 1.0, which creates predictable growth rates
o Network effects: The more who join, the more who have an incentive to join
o Stackability: A viral network can be laid over the top of another, helping both grow
o Point of nondisplacement: Becomes virtually impregnable
o Ultimate saturation: A point of maturity when growth slow

Leicester’s history revealed by Google Street View


According to the Daily Mail today Google is extending its Street View service to peer at 95 per cent of homes in the UK.

Greyfriars

In honour of this I’ve uploaded (above) a pic taken from a screen-grab of Street View of the spot in Leicester where a memorial plaque to Richard III, who some say is buried beneath the streets of the ancient city, is mounted. Except it’s covered up (Google Street View pic taken in 2009). By a lettings advert. For a building which is still vacant. And which is surrounded by barbed wire.

Fortunately the advert has gone now, and the memorial is now visible.


There’s a nice article from the Leicester Chronicle, donated by the Richard III Society, on clues to where exactly Richard III might be buried. Personally my favourite plaque is round near the old castle, which says something like ‘back at the time of the Battle of Bosworth in 1485 the people of Leicester met two kings in three days’. Or words to that effect.

The exact location of the battle between the two kings of England is now on show to the public:

The precise location of one of Britain’s most famous lost battlefields has been revealed today (19th February 2010).

The latest discoveries, announced by Leicestershire County Council pinpoint the exact location of Bosworth Battlefield, where Henry Tudor and King Richard III clashed on 22nd August 1485, and shed new light on the way the battle was fought and where King Richard III died.

The exact location, which has been the topic of much debate amongst historians for years, was discovered as part of a groundbreaking archaeological survey to locate the Battle of Bosworth, funded by a grant from the Heritage Lottery Fund.

Digital inclusion takes centre stage


A free software widget to allow people to search the web for information on public services in their area is to be launched today by the Directgov website. The Directgov team is taking the opportunity to use what may be the last big public showing for the highest profile IT-related programme of Gordon Brown’s government, the digital inclusion drive, according to local government portal UKauthorITy.com:

The National Digital Inclusion Conference, which opens in London today, will open with a message from the prime minister. Digital Britain minister, Stephen Timms, will talk about the National Plan for Digital Participation launched this week. Martha Lane Fox, the champion for Digital Inclusion, is expected to reveal further details of the plan to collect “digital promises” from more than 10,000 private, public and charitable organisations.

One highlight will be a cross-party Question Time featuring long-time digital enthusiast Derek Wyatt MP (Labour), Conservative heavy-hitter Baroness Warsi and the LibDems’ Lembit Opik (Lib Dem).

Helen Milner, managing director of UK online centres, said: “It’s wonderful to see support for digital inclusion coming from the top – and just before a general election is testament to the fact this is now central to the wider agendas of economic growth, social justice and the improvement of government services.”

Downloadable presentations here.



Who are the influencers?


Moving back to valuing social networks, and who are influencers following listening to a Telligent webinar which included discussion on tracking ‘influencers’, I found the following quote from a recent GoViral report ‘The social metropolis’ (pdf) pretty interesting – it’s that passion, not position is what distinguishes an influencer.

Duncan J. Watts, a network-theory scientist from
Columbia University, has recently challenged the
theory of the influencer and the idea of viral marketing
as concept. Originally inspired by epidemiology,
the idea of viral marketing is that a few agents
can ignite and eventually drive a massive spread.
After analyzing e-mail patterns and setting up
computer simulated tests, Watts and his colleagues
found that even highly connected people are not really
the social hubs we expected them to be.

Watts created computer simulated societies to test this
theory, and they actually managed to create trends.
“The problem, I think, is that we have been defining
influentials incorrectly. They are not a particular class
of people like college grads or news junkies. Instead, the
title of influential migrates from one person to the next
depending on the topic of interest. One person is an
influential for computers, another is an influential for
wine. It’s a function of passion, not position.”

The main conclusion is that for the vast majority
of cases that spread, it was just as much a result
of average people – the ones that didn’t seem particularly
influential – as of those who were. In fact,
even when influentials had forty times the reach of
a normal person, you couldn’t be sure they could
kick-start a trend.

Indeed Dr Watts, interviewed over two years ago in FastCopmany, argued that just targetting ‘influencers’ was a big waste of marketing spend. But he also suggested a way that did work, which while not viral exactly ‘doubled’ the effect and used a bit of basic viral looping (if I may inelegantly call it that). It also rings true for anyone experienced in grassroots political campaiging for example, and no doubt is supported by Obama’s campaigning strategy:

In their hunt for a practical way to create maximum exposure for any given ad, Watts and Peretti developed a way to marry the benefits of old-school mass marketing with clever six-degrees effects. Their first test case came when the Brady Campaign, the gun-control group, asked for help with an online petition.

Watts and Peretti set up a regular mass-market ad buy, running banner ads on several prominent blogs and news sites. Like many ads these days, they added a button on the ad that allows people to forward the ad to a friend–a way of collecting eyeballs for free. Typically, people ignore this “share with your friends” pitch. But Watts and Peretti included technology called ForwardTrack, which displays the route the ad travels once you’ve forwarded it. This turned ad forwarding into a piece of social cartography. People would pass the ad specifically to those friends most likely to keep it moving. It became a Facebook-like contest to sign up the most friends.

The technique marries Watts’s two main epiphanies: Cascades require word-of-mouth effects, so you need to build a six-degrees effect into an ad campaign; but since you can never know which person is going to spark the fire, you should aim the ad at as broad a market as possible–and not waste money chasing “important” people. And it worked. The pass-around effect doubled the number of people who saw the Brady Campaign’s ad. They paid for 22,582 hits and received an additional 31,590 for free. Another campaign they ran for the Oxygen network quadrupled the audience size, adding 23,544 hits to the initial 7,064.

Neither was, technically, a viral hit. Neither passed the disease threshold, where the meme spreads exponentially and engulfs the mainstream. “But you can double your impact, which is still pretty good,” Watts says.

The ultimate irony of Watts’s research is that, if you really buy it, the most effective way to pitch your idea is … mass marketing. And that is precisely what the wizards of Madison Avenue, presiding over our zillion-channel microniche market, have rejected as obsolete. “But that’s the thing about magic,” says Watts. “If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.”