Archive for April, 2009

20 Ways to Evaluate Contributions to a Corporate Social Network

From what I’ve seen, the main objectives of online social networks in companies are: to facilitate idea-sharing around a theme or topic (e.g. “Our Brand”); help users find out more about their peers; form useful insights to solve particular challenges; and for the network itself to become a useful repository of resources (ideas, inspiration, files, people) for participants.

However, the technology itself won’t guarantee these results – it needs to be managed or curated effectively. Here are 20 subjective criteria I’ve used to help evaluate contributions to these networks:

1. Relevance to the stated objectives of the network
2. Poses questions to the group
3. Sparks discussion and comments
4. Enhances a lecture, discussion, debate or theme related to the purpose of the network
5. Makes a relevant statement
6. Responds to criticisms as well as compliments.
7. Builds on the ideas and contributions of others on the network.
8. Acknowledges the contributions of others.
9. Shares unexpected insights
10. Stories – especially from personal experience.
11. Recommendations to peers
12. Empathy – readability; humour; use of formatting; respect for other perspectives
13. Lists e.g. “Top 10…”, “Best ways to…”, “Our favourite”
14. Thought is given to topic before posting
15. Creativity or originality of ideas or the way they’re expressed
16. Clarity of expression.
17. Well structured arguments.
18. Mixes opinion and data.
19. Uses graphics to illustrate ideas
20. Contributes to the learning experience of others on the network

What you want to ultimately see is that the group is co-creating a knowledge ecosystem – so that if you want to explore any idea that catches your fancy further, you could find out who the contributors to it are.

In his book, “The Wisdom of Crowds”, James Surowieki reveals that the smartest groups are those that allow space for people to individually form and express ideas, independent of the group, which can then be “aggregated” into more cohesive solutions. This is one of  the key advantages of using the online network as opposed to discussing everything in person: it allows space for more ideas around a particular topic to be expressed simultaneously.

Decision-Making Biases

Flip a Coin by The Bartender 007 on Flickr

While there are many rational reasons for people to choose to buy a particular product or service, it’s often our emotions and personal biases that drive us.

Below is a list of some of the more commonly debated cognitive biases that can affect people’s decisions (From “Decision-Making” on Wikipedia):

  • Selective search for evidence (a.k.a. Confirmation bias in psychology) (Scott Plous, 1993) – We tend to be willing to gather facts that support certain conclusions but disregard other facts that support different conclusions.
  • Premature termination of search for evidence – We tend to accept the first alternative that looks like it might work.
  • Inertia – Unwillingness to change thought patterns that we have used in the past in the face of new circumstances.
  • Selective perception – We actively screen-out information that we do not think is important.
  •  Wishful thinking or optimism bias – We tend to want to see things in a positive light and this can distort our perception and thinking.
  • Choice-supportive bias - occurs when we distort our memories of chosen and rejected options to make the chosen options seem relatively more attractive.
  • Recency - We tend to place more attention on more recent information and either ignore or forget more distant information. (See semantic priming.) The opposite effect in the first set of data or other information is termed Primacy effect (Plous, 1993).
  • Repetition bias – A willingness to believe what we have been told most often and by the greatest number of different of sources.
  • Anchoring and adjustment – Decisions are unduly influenced by initial information that shapes our view of subsequent information.
  • Group think – Peer pressure to conform to the opinions held by the group.
  • Source credibility bias - We reject something if we have a bias against the person, organization, or group to which the person belongs: We are inclined to accept a statement by someone we like. (See prejudice.)
  •  Incremental decision making and escalating commitment – We look at a decision as a small step in a process and this tends to perpetuate a series of similar decisions. This can be contrasted with zero-based decision making. (See slippery slope.)
  • Role fulfillment (Self Fulfilling Prophecy) - We conform to the decision making expectations that others have of someone in our position.
  • Underestimating uncertainty and the illusion of control – We tend to underestimate future uncertainty because we tend to believe we have more control over events than we really do. We believe we have control to minimize potential problems in our decisions.

Reading these, I realise the truth in what Bertrand Russel said: “The fact that an opinion has been widely held is no evidence whatever that it is not utterly absurd” – decisions and beliefs are hackable.

The Business Value of Social Gestures Online

Social Gestures

So much of what drives social media platforms such as Twitter and Facebook basically comes down to social gestures by people who want to connect with others, or add value to something bigger than themselves. From product reviews to wiki edits, millions of people are benefitting from this mass of small social gestures online.

It’s interesting for businesses to note that massively complex systems and information empires can be driven by something other than money. Very few social media sites pay people to participate. People use online platforms to build relationships and contribute to communities. Essentially this is a new form of economic production beyond the two classic pillars of economics, the firm and the market. Yochai Benkler calls it “Peer Production”.

I’ve noticed that my social gestures over the years – blogging, chatting, uploading, editing – have accumulated into a kind of Social Equity. The result is more exposure, higher trust, more business, and ultimately financial reward.
Thus each social gesture becomes an investment.

Many businesses are already benefitting from the social equity of their employees. I think it’s important for businesses to recognize these people within their ranks and enable them to continue rather than shutting them down.

2009 South African Blog Awards: Best Business Blog

Blog TagsI won the “Best Business Blog” category at the 2009 South African Blog Awards!

Over 4000 blogs were nominated in this year’s awards, and over 25 000 people voted.

I also scored some free goodies with the award, including:

  • A subscription to the Sunday Times  (I still love reading the newspaper in print as a special treat, so this is a super prize for me);
  •  A subscription to Encyclomedia (a PR match-making tool that helps local businesses get press releases out to the right journalists);
  • 12 SA Blog Awards branded Kika-sacks (I’ll use one of them next time I hit the beach and give the rest away with reckless abandon); and
  •  ”Black Bottle” whisky (I don’t drink alcohol, but will keep it for cooking).

As much as I enjoying getting free stuff, by far the most enjoyable part of the experience has been all the congratulatory messages I’ve received on Twitter, Facebook, Email and SMS. Thanks everyone :-D

This award and the whole experience of winning it is very encouraging for me as a blogger.




Close
E-mail It