I Hear Twitter

Friendship, it seems, is more accurately demonstrated than described.  We usually don’t do a good job accurately reporting our friendships when questioned.  So, here’s a look at a slightly higher measurement of friendship: conversations.

How I See TwitterIf you squint (or click to enlarge the image) you can find a little yellow dot.  That’s me.  The connections between dots are conversations that take place within my “hearing” on twitter.  With research suggesting people as far as three degrees away from you hold a statistically significant level of influence across varied subjects; don’t you wonder who is influencing you?

Graphing Wall Street with LittleSis.org

With a goal of transparency, wallstreetLittleSis.Org has started collecting peer-membership information for public figures of many sorts.  Just the stuff made for social graphs!

This is image represents the social networks of the CEOs of the American Wall Street companies, from the info at LittleSis.  Red nodes are the CEOs (Thain is included), and green are organizations.

The data is a work in progress, as it only represents a few organizations these folks are involved with; but a work in progress is progress indeed.

P.S. LittleSis: API pretty please!

8 Simple Steps to Personal Networking

createbridges
Erich's Email Network

Here are some simple steps you can take to start easy, and create a habit of expanding the value of your network by bridging gaps.

  1. Make a list of everyone you have exchanged email with in the past month [gmail search]
  2. Add to your list some personal notes: what they do for a living, their likes, hobbies, etc.
  3. Re-read through your list so it is fresh in your mind
  4. Start at the top of your list, and think of one other person that person could benefit from knowing
  5. If there is no immediate need for the two to know each other, find some bit of information particular to the two of them based on their job, interests, hobbies etc.
  6. Send the info to both of them at the same time, and ask a question you want to know the answer to.  Don’t forget to tell them why you’re asking both of them. Dear Scuba experts, my brother-in-law is looking for a new XYZ, what is your experience with this model… If you can’t think of a question you genuinely want to know, just send the info and the reason why you think they’d both find it useful.
  7. Under each person in your notes, record you have connected the two of them, when it was, and what the topic was.
  8. Done with your list?  Great!  Add another month’s email to your list, and repeat.

Continue reading “8 Simple Steps to Personal Networking”

Demographics Fail

We forget, now that our reach is wide, that all purchasing is done by individuals.  Since we don’t know the individuals, and locating and selling to each and every one of them (us) is too expensive, we developed marketing to help us select the people, the individuals, most likely to purchase whatever we are selling.  We do that by carving up the population into demographic segments.  We do that by creating images and messages our testing tells us will appeal to those demographics.  As you noted, I am using the word “demographics” loosely – as it can just as easily mean single white 18-24 year-old men when selling video games, as it can mean general practitioners in the rural parts of beef exporting states when selling Lipitor.

759460300_63ca1caac9_mBut, why is this important?  Demographics provide us with statistically probable individuals.  Using these expected values are a great way for describing groups, but the value breaks down when talking about individuals.  We all know the story about the man who drowns crossing the river that is, on average, six inches deep.

The second failing in demographics is the pure focus on the individuals.  If the goal of sales and marketing is to convince individuals to take action (purchase, vote, visit, etc.), demographics alone does not provide the context under which we, as social animals, make decisions.

The number one factor that we as consumers use in making purchase decisions in consumer packaged goods, automotive, everything is our peers.  The younger we are, the better demographics reflect our peers, but that starts to break down rapidly once we leave school and enter the work force.

One place where we, as marketers, do a great job taking peer context into account is children’s toys.  Think about how they are advertised.  Is the latest and greatest StarBot 7000 action figure advertised with a static image of the figure with a voiceover talking about the high durability injection molded plastic construction and the die cast elbows capable of withstanding 30,000 hours of continuous play in -40°C conditions?  No, they show bunch of kids running around having a great time with the StarBot.  Children do not have long-standing deep networks of peers, so advertisers create a potential peer group in the advertisements.  Even as children get older, more media savvy, and create deeper relationships with their peers, all parents will recognize the plaintive cry of, “But, Billy has one!” Continue reading “Demographics Fail”

Why is an influence metric hard to decide on?

Why is coming to common metric for measuring influence so hard? Short answer: because measuring influence is not only nuanced, but it’s also really hard.  Maybe we’re asking the wrong question, maybe we should be asking how susceptible to influence are we?

First, a matter of semantics: authority is power bestowed by an outside source. Police, judges, your boss, etc. all have power over you in their own contexts. In most cases, authority is external to Social Media, so what we really want to know is how influential (power regardless of authority) a person is. So, I’ll stop talking about authority and start talking about influence.

Influence in SM is created through exertion of control over content that reaches you by modifying the content, or adding additional context such as your opinion. Modifications can be explicit, or implicit; merely passing along a piece of information indicates you have some interest in it. The social part of this information flow dictates who sees your content. So your influence is relative to your network. That’s bad for good metrics. What worse, from the following diagram, you can start to see that influence is also relative to the individuals within your network. Fortunately, combining influence and reach seems to be promising.

locationlocationlocation

Imagine you are A. You’re going to have a lot easier harder time exerting control over information flowing through your network than B. That’s an example, why reach (or count) alone is a poor measure of influence. But, clearly if you have a larger network, you are likely to influence more people. So how do quantity and influence work together? One strong way is path independence.

Turning influence on its head, it is much easier to measure how likely we are to be influenced depending on where the content comes from. Hearing from two independent sources will have greater impact on our decision forming than two related sources. In marketing, this is called the media multiplier when advertising is spread across multiple channels, e.g. Radio + TV.

So maybe the real question is, how influencable are we? One easy measure is network efficiency.

Andreas Kluth and the Campfire

Great podcast interview with the Economist‘s Andreas Kluth contrasting social media and the communication around the campfire.

“We were all awkward as teenagers … if I had had already Facebook and such media available to me I would have probably been completely impossible to talk to now. Because of course, there is a certain brain exercise involved in communicating face to face: cues and voice and body language and so forth. Knowing not when to interrupt someone.”

From way back at the end of oh-7, and still a great listen.

mp3

/Message: Authority Is A Highly Charged Particle

I’ve discussed my thoughts on authority before and I think follower count is a poor measure; but Stowe Boyd as has a great post (where the name for this post came from) summing up much of the controversy.

Two things I particularly like about the post: his spelling out why follower count is not without merit as a measure, and his unshy conviction that influence is a good thing.

To these I’ll add one short thought and one quote.  Follower count, for all of its failings is the single measure we can all agree on.  That alone is powerful. As for influence:

It is the pressure of our peers, after all, that gives us the support to try things we otherwise wouldn’t have.  — BILL TREASURER, Right Risk

A very happy, healthy, and prosperous New Year to you and your social network. Keep connecting.