Social Networking Models.
Another wave of online communities is underway. The first wave, beginning with the Well, took advantage of the social adoption of email to build community upon Usenet, bulletin boards and forums. A basis of trust in email-style interfaces and conventions enabled pooled discussion. This wave takes advantage of the social adoption of the web to build community upon web-native tools. Because the web is more diverse environment so too are the tools. The physical and logical infrastructure of the web has reached a maturity while usage has surpassed a tipping point where it is ingrained in most people's lives. As people have become participants on the web, they are building a new social infrastructure, connection by connection.
|
Social Networking Models |
|
Network Type |
Connection |
Example |
| Explicit |
Declarative |
Ryze |
| Physical |
In-person |
Meetup |
| Conversational |
Communication |
LiveJournal; Weblogs |
| Private |
Referral |
Friendster |
| |
|
© 2003 Ross Mayfield |
The above table provides a framework for understanding how Social Networking Models differ by how personal connections are made. When a community is served by Social Software, its design places limits on how relationships are formed, especially in how strangers make initial connections.
This is in contrast to how connections are made in physical environments, where inter-personal communication and interaction has no boundaries except social convention and the rule of law. If you want to get on a soap box to attract connections you can in many places. And in the physical world there are social norms that make different methods for making connections more appropriate. If you want a job at Google you could bring your soap box to their parking lot, but a personal referral to Eric Schmidt might be more effective.
Social Software design fosters specific social norms by regulating possible behavior. Regulation is a good thing. A stem cell can grow into any cell in the human body not by hard coded instructions of what to become, but regulators telling it what not to become. Simple rules in complex adaptive systems, like social networks, yield complex results. And as Clay Shirky said, Social Software encodes political bargains that are required because of natural social tension.
An Explicit Network fosters connections by declared identities, interests and ties -- such as with Ryze. An initial connection is made by introducing yourself to someone on the basis of who they say they are and who they say they know. The entire network is explicit, all identities and ties are open for browsing and even serve as methods for navigation.
A Physical Network fosters connections by in-person meetings -- such as with Meetup. An initial connection is made by people introducing themselves the old-fashioned way, the Social Software facilitates coordination and drives people with similar interests to be in the same time and place.
A Conversational Network fosters connections by communication -- such as with LiveJournal and Weblogs. An initial connection is made by introducing yourself on the basis of communication. Its a fascinating dance. Initially you read someone else's weblog, gaining a gradual understanding of the person behind the weblog. Perhaps you participate on their weblog through comments or post and link from your own. They may choose (and choice is what make it a Spam-free medium) to read yours and eventually will cross-post building a circle of trust. It may be some time until a more personal connection is made through email, in-person, or otherwise, but when it occurs a strange sense of familiarity engenders relationship forming.
A Private Network fosters connections by referrals -- such as with Friendster. An initial connection is made through a referral backed by existing social ties. You want to meet Jane who knows your friend Ellen, so you ask Jane to introduce you. On Friendster you can't see or navigate through the entire network, only four degrees of separation from you, and with each person you can see how they connect to you in a web of trust.
One model I didn't include here is Virtual Networks, which fosters connections through avatars, such as with EverQuest. Largely because they are not web-native (yet) and the patterns of connection are still being defined and another wave of worlds like Sims Online are being created.
Trust ascends through these different models. You are more likely to trust someone introduced through a referral than someone you know through conversation than someone you meet in person for the first time than someone who declares their background and interests. However, speed descends through these models. You can quickly navigate and introduce yourself through an Explicit Network, especially compared to working your way through a Private Network.
The differences of these Social Network Models will trend to blur, but each example possesses a unique and dominant connection method. Ryze facilitates physical meetings (in fact that's how the community began). Weblogs and LiveJournal do not emphasize identity like Ryze, but share their own differences. Weblogs are decentralized while LiveJournal is centralized and does emphasize ties, which explains the denser clustering of relationships. Friendster increasingly provides mechanisms for making identity explicit. But each model has a unique and dominant property for social networking. Pointing out these distinctions isn't a call for Social Software builders to emulate each other. People don't just join one community, they join many, and they appreciate diversity and choice.
One of the criticism of new Social Networking startups that their success is based upon the large base of unemployed people with time on their hands. It is ironic that during the bubble companies subsidized our networking by flying us to events and the like at a time when we didn't value connections. During the downturn connections mattered to companies and the unemployed more than ever. This did bring some people online to connect with one another that otherwise wouldn't have. But the outcome of this cycle is more people socially engaged on the web as participants. The major threat to each of these models is bad regulation that produces negative externalities (read: Spam). Provided this issue is addressed these communities will be a part of our lives for a long time.
[Ross Mayfield's Weblog]
Picking up where Ross leaves off:
- I TOTALLY agree that people will join and participate in multiple on-line social networks - some called communities, others called extranets - still others referred to as maillists, groups, clubs or spontaneously formed 'mobs'. Some of them go by cute names like Gnomesters or Phosters, while others are so secretive - we don't even know about them.
- I would extend this excellent treatise with the concept of activities. No where is there a recognition and analysis of what people do after they've formed these networks.
- One way to think about that - is to add eGroups (like Yahoo's Groups) into the private - invited to referral kind of group. But that doesn't quite work either - as some eGroups can be joined - without limitation. So where do extranets, message boards, group based web sites and contributory Wiki's fit in? Some are private, some open - some hybrid combinations of both approaches.
- Well let's not get hung up with trying to fit everything into neat slots, but try to establish some new ways to think about how all these networks and activities interact and matrix between each other.
- The way we look at it - new kinds of tools will enable ALL SORTS of new interaction and social phenomena - defining new kinds of on-line communities. Hopefully in the future - when someone says: "on-line community" - they'll think of something beyond message boards.
This was my complaint with Joel Spolsky's excellent treatise Building Communities with Software. It's not that I don't agree with everything he says, but he's defining on-line communities as JUST message boards or forums.
As we continue to evolve and define social software, let's keep in mind that we ALSO have to evolve the user experiences and tools that enable people to create and maintain these social networks. It should be as easy as hitting a button called "Create Community".
And once these communties have formed - these community members need to DO something together! The combination of social networks and relevant, simple activities that bring together meatspace and cyberspace - is what it's all about!
If the Buzzcocks' new CD sounds instantly familiar that's because legions of loud, fast, snotty bands have co-opted the band's signature punk rock style since the late 1970s. But now, 24 years after the band's best-known U.S. release, "Singles Going Steady," the Buzzcocks remain ahead of the competition.
This is why I think of Joi as the Henry Kissinger of our world. He reaches out and brings the word to folks like Sony, while also hanging out of airplanes and throwing cool parties. This - by definition - defines Leadership. He's not hung up on his own dogma, but can represent ALL of our interests.
