Modeling the Hockey Stick

Social media nirvana usually includes some kind of expectation around getting to a 'hockey stick' adoption curve.  For online services in general it is immensely hard to predict if and when that curve will happen.  But communities are slightly different - especially enterprise communities. Here's why:

- There is a known addressable audience
- It is easier to gauge where there are passionate, engaged individuals
- There is strong existing affinities - even if unevenly distributed
- The topic and scope of discussion is more obvious

Which leads to the question - are there standard models for growth (i.e. slow, moderate, aggressive) given how much content and marketing is injected into the community over time?  I think that there are....I'm just not sure exactly how to build them yet.

Some factors that I believe affect community velocity:

• Size of the total potential user audience
• Jump starting connections by analyzing email and IM transactions and, based on that, recommending 'friends' to new users
• Jump starting profile pages by pulling directory, location, and reporting/team structures from existing enterprise information
• Allowing individuals to customize their profile with their pictures, links to external accounts (Facebook, LinkedIn, Flickr, Upcoming, etc.), and other media
• Profiling users for contributing content - Social Media Today does this very well. Replicate this offline or in other venues as well
• Providing online recognition for volume or quality of entries (who doesn't want to be a grand puba?)
• Providing a few compelling ways to  'converse' initially rather than overwhelming users with too much functionality
• Seeding plenty of content so people always get something new
• Provide some structured ways to participate with specific fields/questions so to make people comfortable with expectations - i.e. an idea form with specific questions.
• Email alerts
• Marketing and awareness campaigns
• Make it fun - be tongue and cheek, include some games, ask odd profile questions...

What do you think affects the velocity of community ramp? 

Comments

[Jim Storer]

Hi Rachel - Great topic and one that certainly deserves an "it depends" answer, but I'll try to provide something a bit more concrete. ;-)

Your list of "factors that impact velocity" is solid - there weren't any that had me shaking my head. I do have some to add:

1. Active moderation/facilitation. I think it's really important to have a community manager that has a good understanding of the individual members and the community biorhythms as a whole. While technology can help make connections, it's important for the community manager to help move the process along. For this reason I like community managers to actively welcome/onboard new members. While this isn't practical for very large communities, it's a good approach for focused communities. In one community I managed we conducted a "welcome interview" with every new member, capturing interesting information in their profile that they might not have otherwise shared. In the process, we developed a deeper understanding of what they were good at and what they needed help on, so we could facilitate connections that might not have occurred otherwise.

2. Start with a passionate core group. "Start the party" with a cross-function group of passionate people that understand what your goals are. Give them ownership of specific forums, blogs, whatever... just give them the keys. A passionate core group will fuel the fire and build vibrancy that builds on itself until you get to the hockey stick.

3. Think about "what's in it for them." Why is your membership coming and why should them come back? You mention content, which is part of the answer, but I like to think "programs" are more important early on. Develop ways to bring members together (conference call, web round table, planned forum threads, etc.). Early on it's important to create as many interactions as possible to speed along the process of members trusting one another. The best way is to get them together face to face, but this isn't always an option.

4. Be prepared to lean on your core group and "experts" a lot early on. Getting to the point where the "members take over" takes a lot of care and feeding. It's not likely they'll start contributing right out of the gate, so creating early programs that lean on industry experts and your core group is essential. This also dovetails nicely with #1, where the community manager actively connects people that have questions with the people that have answers. It may all be there in the profiles, but introducing them to one another in a safe environment might just get them talking.

5. You mentioned not making it too complex early on, limit the technology in place. I couldn't agree more. Plan to phase in new applications over time vs. going with a "big bang" approach.

No back to "it depends" for a minute. I like to stress the importance of knowing your target members early on. How do they use the internet today and what can you build to help them be successful? Because it's really not about technology... it's about people. Help them meet other interesting people and become part of something exciting and they'll reward you with a vibrant community regardless of the technology in place.

{Stepping down off my soapbox) ;-)

Thanks for asking!

Jim | @jstorerj

[Tom O'Brien]

Hi Rachel:

Great questions - BTW I saw this because of @jstorerj on Twitter (I AM @tomob).

One really useful exercise is to think through your community's MOTIVATIONS for participation.

Then use this understanding as a lens to inform what you do with the community.

Also here's a tip. Put something there that they really want but can't get anywhere else. When GM launched their global EE portal (years ago) you had to go there to get your email. Everyone went every day. The two most used applications were:

Org Chart with Pictures and

EE Birthdays

Give the people what they want!

TO'B

[Rachel Happe]

Awesome additions Jim & Tom - the personal elmiments of faciliatation are so important.

When I speak to audience about this I tell them the #1 requirement is an audience that cares.

Thanks for the additional comments!

[Dave Witzel]

I love the idea of measuring velocity. One of the things we've been running into is groups/sectors (e.g., global health, clean technology) that don't have well connected networks yet -- members haven't adopted many tools that allow one-to-one interactions. I think you need a "thick" network to enable social media campaigns to take off. So I've been debating whether it is worth trying actively to strengthen the network or if this is hopeless and you just have to wait for nature to take its course and hope they get on board eventually. Have we got a measure of "network thickness"? (@dwitzel)

[Rachel Happe]

Hi Dave -

Interesting question as to whether you need 'thickness' - certainly seems like that helps with velocity and time to robustness (TTR - just made up another metric!) but I'm not sure it is a absolute requirement. It would certainly create a different community development model I think so in that respect, a great factor to include for modeling.

I think as most communications get faster and faster, community development is still a discipline that takes time and patience so we need to find ways to give communities and ourselves the time and space to develop sometimes.

Thanks for stopping by and adding the great comment!