I was following a thread of interesting thoughts and stumbled upon this article from Bokardo that comments on a list of Best Practices that Google put up as part of the OpenSocial release.
Indeed, just last Friday, two colleagues and I were discussing how some folks misunderstand what ‘community‘ is. It seems that some folks think ‘community’ is a thing you build, much like a consumer electronic device: assemble the elements, package it, and, voilá, you have a community. And, also, it seems that these same folks view their target market as a _single_ community that can be serviced in a single way.
But, we all know that’s not the case, in all sorts of dimensions.
Eh, preaching to the choir here.
But, the one question that has been puzzling me is not ‘how does a social networking service capture that first pioneer who brings all her friends into the service?’, nor is it ‘what are the elements of a social networking service that lead to a healthy thriving collection of networks?’. The question that puzzles me is ‘when someone shows up at the door with a friend’s invitation, what is the catalyst* for that person to come in?’
The answer lies in the first point of this Best Practices list ‘engage quickly’. But, that’s a huge effort involved in a single line. For a service to engage quickly, it must be able to show the value of joining YASN immediately. The user is asking herself ‘if I connect to my friend through here, what do I get out of it? what investment will be needed on my part?’.
These answers need to be visible at the outset. And that’s the challenge.
Do you have any good examples of how a social networking service makes its value immediately apparent to a potential new user?
Link: Google’s Social Design Best Practices – Bokardo:
One is that we’re clearly seeing a set of practices emerge across all social software that centers around getting people started quickly, allowing for self-expression, engaged in real-life tasks, yet also allowing for flexible discovery and play. On both this site and others concerned with social design, these are the major themes that arise again and again.
*A ‘catalyst‘, in the way I grew up using it, means something that makes a reaction more likely (without being consumed by it). The reaction still can happen (it is chemically and energetically feasible, though might take forever), but the catalyst lowers the ‘activation energy‘ needed and increases the rate significantly. In this case, the catalyst shortens the decision time for the person join a social network service. 🙂
