What is an online community?

From Wikipedia

A virtual community ... or online community is a group of people who primarily interact via communication media such as letters, telephone, email or Usenet rather than face to face, for social, professional, educational or other purposes. Virtual and online communities have also become a supplemental form of communication between people who know each other primarily in real life. Many means are used in social software separately or in combination, including text-based chatrooms and forums that use voice, video text or avatars.

Some people think mistakenly that an online community is a set of people where the people in this set do not change. However in an online community, the community is fluid where people with similar interests drift in and out of discussions and contribute and lurk in different ways and unequally.

And, John C. Dvorak wants you to think that the community is not real and is the application.

A good online community, whether it's Second Life, Twitter, or something new, is indeed fun to belong to if you have the time or inclination. But please do not take it seriously, and never believe that you're part of a true community. Get out of your house, and you'll find the community out there in the street. That's real.

He misses the point of online communities. Online communities, like physical communities, are about the people. Applications like Twitter, Facebook, or Second Life are not communities. People and the connections that bring them together make communities. The connections are made through similar interests, goals, opinions, comradery, and respect among the people in the communities. He is partially right in that you cannot take some people seriously, but that is true of physical communities, as well.

Like physical communities, some people within the online communities mean more to you and that you give more weight to some opinions than to others. Like physical communities, credibility and trust,can be built in online communities with time.

Like physical communities, people come and go within the communities. Online communities are fluid where people drift in and out of discussions. In the online world, some people may exist in several communities. For instance, I lurk in the public relations and marketing communities. I also lurk in the professional development community. I am a full participant in an Extension online community that is made up of IT specialists and other Extension professionals.

Online communities are not necessarily separate from physical communities. With the 14 to 17 age group, there seems to be little separation. To paraphrase, Mark Federman who said in a dinner conversation at the NETC08 conference, "Social networking does not mirror their (teens') real life. It is all the same to them."

While solving problems in online environments, individuals identify others who share interests and goals and build relationships with these other members. Contact with members of workgroups through social networking sites helps keep members connected when they are disconnected physically. Online communities help build and strengthen the relationships that I have with people I know, but see seldom. Also, online communities are not about the applications, but about the people.

As with any tool, social networking sites and other social media tools should solve problems easier and better than without them. Joshua Porter says in The Power of Niche Social Network Sites

The power of niche social sites isn’t just in connecting people, it’s in providing tools that allow people to do something better than they could before…

In fact, I use several applications to communicate, discuss, and share. Let me give an example. My participation in the Extension online community (beyond email lists) started January 2007 when I decided to blog. After a few posts and a few comments, I started having more conversations via emails and instant messages. It was when I started using Twitter that the online working relationships begin to grow.

At the ACE/NETC conference in June 2007, as I saw several people who had been conversing with me using Twitter, IM, and blogs, the first physical conversations at the conference were very easy. To quote Kevin Gamble, it was .."like we started the conference in the middle of the conversation". Before, during, and after the conference, I and others invited several of my colleagues to Twitter. During the next several months, our community grew. We sent Twitter messages--some with funny thoughts and some with resource links. I believe the phatic messages had the greatest impact in developing trust and recognition of the people as individuals. These messages gave me a glimpse into lives--where they spend their time and what they find amusing. As we became more comfortable, we found ourselves sending more resource related tweets, including answering questions and helpful links. The phatic messages helped me converse with them at our next conference--NETC08, then allowing easy transition into the work related topics

By the time, NETC08 proposals were requested, John Dorner and I were using instant messaging to discuss the NETC08 proposal requests, when one of us suggested that we needed to provide suggestions and methods for integrating and using these resources and social media into our organization. Although our conference is targeted for technology specialists, we wanted to introduce and begin conversations in how our organizations can use these tools.

John and I knew we could not do it all. In Google Docs, we loosely developed some ideas. We were 2 weeks away from the proposal deadline when I sent an email asking for help from 8 of my online NETC friends who were using tools. We asked them to read and edit the Google document and pick a topic or create their own and submit a proposal for NETC.

I was pleasantly surprised and appreciative of how quickly individuals marked topics they wanted to present, made changes to the document, and added topics. They sent the Google Doc link to others to contribute. 11 sessions were presented. 11 people presented with some people presenting more than 1 session. And, 26 people were eventually given access to the Google document. While this may seem like a small example, it is an example where the online community works.

We covered Flickr, Slideshare, Google Docs, Second Life, social media tools in online communities, Twitter, blogging, social bookmarking, blog analytics, and adoption strategies, Additionally, there were 3 people who contributed to this effort who I have never met personally. I found it amusing that Beth Raney of Penn State thought that Eli Sagor was from Alabama. He lives in Minnesota. Eli and I have never met personally, but through causal conversations and the respect we have for each other's talents, Beth had assumed we knew each other well. Our online communications took place with blogs, Twitter, Flickr, Slideshare, and Google Docs. This professional relationship is very real.

Our request was extremely successful. Sessions were well attended and had great feedback. Did everyone present? No, Did we accomplish our goal? Yes, Did several contribute to lighten the load? Yes, definitely. Did we give ideas to others within the Extension community to use social media in our work? Yes, definitely.

Carlo Scannella also believes that online communities are about people developing relationships for common interests and goals.

Positive, working communities can certainly develop both online and off, and to question an online community’s “realness” misses the point completely. The trick, it seems, when considering the question of community, is to figure out why they work, and how we can replicate these successes more often.

del.icio.us Tags: Twitter,Facebook,Social Networking,Instant Messages,Slideshare,Google Docs,Social Media,Cooperative Extension,Relationships,Social Bookmarking

Trust in Web 2.0 and Social Networks

Mitch Owen makes some good points about trust in online learning environments. Using a blended approach--one that consists of online and face-to-face interaction--for self-improvement or behavior change may prove to be successful.

The leadership implication is that effective use of Web 2.0 will best be done in a blended manner, where it is coupled with other methods of working together. It also suggests that if you formed a virtual group using one of these tools, you need to find a way to have a trust building experiences.

Like Mitch, I am a true believer in individual influence. We often underestimate the power of individual influence in our conversations and in our behavior. Unlike Mitch, I think that individual influence through many Web 2.0 technologies can be powerful as well. The blended approach is probably the most effective, though.

The relationships developed through online technologies may not be the deep-seeded relationships that Mitch describes, but they can be built around professional trust and respect, nevertheless. This kind of trust and respect is like the trust and respect that you developed for your favorite professor.

Before I explain my thoughts, first let me direct you to what others are saying about specifically about social networking.

Social networking: What are others saying
Some, like Steve Rubel, Micro Persuasion, believe that social networking tools are increasing the quantity of relationships, not necessarily the quality.

On the other hand, Anne Truitt Zelenka says that her "relationships with friends and acquaintances are stronger." Without these social networking and presence technologies, we could not keep up with this many friends and professional contacts.

The nature of friendship itself, is shifting. It is no longer the byproduct of physical proximity, it is no longer strongly bounded by geography, and it is strongly mediated by our social tools. Texting, blogging, and trafficking (what we are doing in flow apps) have become essential to our continued connections with our friends, and we could no more keep up our relationships without these tools than we could put aside language itself.

Andrew McAfee suggests that social networking creates and maintains more weak ties. Weak ties offer access to information, knowledge and loose relationships of individuals across groups. These weak ties are not the ones that we look toward for personal development, but rather weak ties may be valuable for organizations to minimize groupthink, and under certain situations, increase innovation.

The implication for SNS (social network software) is obvious: Facebook and its peers should be highly valuable for businesses because they’re tools for increasing the density of weak ties within a company, as well as outside it. My Facebook friends are a large group of people from diverse backgrounds who have very little in common with each other. Furthermore, their profiles give me a decent way to evaluate their expertise. These online friends, in other words, are a large group of bridges to other networks.

Then there are others, like Scott Karp, who thinks that using Facebook for business is nonsense.

Facebook is a fantastic platform for PERSONAL social connections, keeping up and communicating with close friends and family.

But business and professional needs are NOT the same as personal needs. I have no need to “poke” my professional colleagues or specify that our working relationship began when we “hooked up.” I don’t need to know about my professional colleagues what gender they are interested in mating with, or what they are looking for in a relationship, or what their favorite TV shows are — these things may be of voyeuristic quasi-social interest, but they don’t help me connect or collaborate professionally other than maybe topics for idle — or embarrassing — chit-chat).

Using social networking for invoking change
Social networking--not just social network sites, like Facebook, but also presence technologies and forums--has its very important place in online learning and behavior change. Knowledge workers who transfer their knowledge to invoke behavior change can use social networking, collaborative tools, and presence technologies:

• among colleagues, peers, and others--individuals for which you have strong and weak ties--to keep up and share information, knowledge, and products and to build diversity in within the knowledge bank.


• with local clients in conjunction with their local programs to maintain and strengthen their relationships and to continue transferring knowledge, even when there is little or no physical presence.

As we transfer knowledge, we hope that behavior changes as a result of the new knowledge. What better way to assist in invoking change than to be constantly available and relying on others in a virtual world to support the change?

Trust in creative, knowledge, and learning networks
Of the 3 organizational networks that Mitch describes, Creative, Knowledge, and Learning, Web 2.0 offers plenty of opportunities for developing innovations and knowledge--not in the way that Mitch describes--trust in a physical board room--but professional trust and respect for others at a distance.

Sure there are individuals who I have met using Web 2.0 tools, but the level richness and trust in these relationships is low. Only through time together and experiences where trust is built will I develop a true social network.. that takes time.. not something I can do using IM.

Social networking and mentoring
The Learning Environment which Mitch describes as coaching individuals is more difficult to do in social networks, but not impossible. Recently, within our organization, a state leader told a group of new employees that one of the most helpful things they could do is to identify someone who can mentor them, show them connections in the organization and with industry, and to understand how to conduct programs. He relied on his two mentors during the early part of his career in the early 1980s.

This kind of individual influence is so very important! But, in our organization, most of the professionals serve regions. While they have a "home" office, there is usually no one co-located who could serve as a mentor within the same area of work expertise. Creating a physical local "Learning Network" is very unlikely.

Within our mobile and regional workforce, there are few opportunities for employees to encounter each other face-to-face. I don't know of any other way to help employees stay connected, communicate and learn from each, and to build trust than to use these technologies.

Social networking and building and maintaining professional relationships
Additionally, Web 2.0 can be used to maintain and build upon existing professional relationships. Let me give a personal example.

I see some of my colleagues from other states only 1 or 2 times a year. Social networking, blogging, commenting, Twittering, and instant messaging (and Facebook, to a much lesser degree) helped build upon the acquaintance of our relationships into a higher level of professional respect.

Now, when we see each other at conferences "we start in the middle of conversations." The respect and understanding of philosophies were not created through the face-to-face time, but rather through (online) casual and informal conversations and through blogging.

Without social networking--particularly, blogging and presence technologies--this would not have happened. On a few occasions, confidential remarks have been made in IM or email--mirroring how we communicate with our local trusted professional friends. Are any of these online friends my "Top 8" closest professional friends? Not yet, but I will not discount that from every happening.

Likewise, I believe that others have developed a trust and respect for others in my department.

Higher level of trust
Mitch asked:

Think of a stranger you have met online... in what way would you develop a high level of trust using WEB 2.0?

I can think of at least two individuals that I have not met personally, but through online relationships and communications who have influenced my practices. I have communicated with them through blogs, comments, and Twitter. Even social bookmarking (specifically, del.icio.us) has been influential in my understanding of their philosophies.

I have communicated with only one of them in Facebook. I see one of them modeling online behavior that would be helpful for me to follow.

Do I trust either of these with questions about my career and my leadership? I don't know. I have not thought of their role in this way. They have, however, influenced me positively, giving me confidence to continue blogging and creating helpful resources.

If I were to think of one of them as a mentor and discuss my career and personal development, I would probably start with one-to-one dialog online. Possibly, using Facebook and instant messaging. Eventually a phone call or two may be in order--even then--using Skype maybe the easiest tool, rather than the phone.

I will continue to have my closest professional confidants. Some of these are, of course, local--some are not. These are my sounding boards. I call them when trying to make a decision. I ask for their opinions or advice. I have known these people for years. I cannot expect that my social networking activities in the last 9 months could produce friends like them in just 9 months. Maybe after years of getting to know someone--I will develop a "at a distance" confidant.

For my current friends who are not local, it is a shame that I don't have more constant contact with them so we can engage in conversations more often. Online tools are helping; some are adopting these tools, and we are beginning to find that geography is not preventing us from staying in contact.

One final note: Web 2.0 is about a change in attitude toward open content, sharing, and collaboration. Social networking is part of Web 2.0. The social networking sites (Facebook, Linkedin, Ning) and presence technologies smooths the zigzag route of collaboration. From Wikipedia, Web 2.0 is referred to as:

a perceived second generation of web-based communities and hosted services — such as social-networking sites, wikis and folksonomies — which aim to facilitate collaboration and sharing between users.

To expect great deep-seeded trust to be built through Web 2.0 is overstretching its immediate expectations. However, Web 2.0 can help all of us create diverse knowledge and share and improve knowledge. Web 2.0 tools provide mechanisms for developing professional trust and respect that results in influencing behavior.

From my observations, professional trust can and is being built online. It mirrors the way trust is built in physical environments. I learn to trust individuals by observing their behavior, attitude, language, and tone, and by listening to their philosophies. We can observe the same kinds of things online, but in different ways than they way we observe physically.

Web 2.0 does not mean that we forget about Web 1.0. Do you no longer search on the Web? Of course not. Does online social networking mean that we no longer meet face-to-face and make phone calls? Of course not. What social networking and Web 2.0 may mean is that in our face-to-face encounters, we start in the middle of conversations.

I do like Mitch's question:

"Think of a stranger you have met online... in what way would you develop a high
level of trust using WEB 2.0?"

Describe how you began to trust that person. Describe what you might have learned or how your attitude or practice may have changed.

SMS and instant messaging advantages

In writing my last post that described activities that virtual teams can use to help communicate and develop their online communities, I omitted two very important tools, instant messaging and Short Message Service (SMS) or text messaging.

I overlooked these important tools because I use these tools all the time and I simply don't think about not using them. I use them like some people use a phone.

Instant messaging and text messaging are not just for kids.

Instant messaging is a way to:

• know if your colleagues are in the office.
• communicate what you are doing (examples, "I'm in a meeting" or "I'm at lunch").
• start (and end) impromptu discussions.
• find out answers to quick questions without interrupting ongoing office questions.

We often use instant messaging in our office when we are on support calls with clients and we need supporting information from our colleagues.

• keep up with your kids.

When they arrive home from school, you can know when they are online and they could IM you.

Text messaging is a way to:

• communicate in a pinch.
• communicate when phone use is disruptive.
• communicate when you don't know how disruptive your communication maybe to the recipient.
• communicate when asynchronous messages are preferred.
• communicate when cellphones don't work well (i.e., in emergency situations).

Because the way data messages are sent, text messages have better success in getting through when circuits are overloaded.