Multi-purpose social convenience
Social networking is today’s giant concept – the buzzword in our life’s dictionary these days. Without any extra effort made, it has drawn most of us to its sphere of influence. Without any thought, we’ve let it impact our lives or personalities in some way or the other. Before we could know it, we became an active participant. Has it made us made us better or worse off as a society?
The answer is subjective. You will agree that this is not the first of its kind debate when it comes to the impact of any new technology/concept which entered our world. The empowering and disruptive impact of mobile phones is much discussed. While 70% of the world population believe mobile phone has made lying/cheating more common, still it is so universally diffused that the use is unaffected by any constraint of income, occupation, gender, and age. Same is the case of social networking platforms. There are multitudes of negative influencing factors -yet it is so universally diffused. The reason in all such cases is common. In my view, it is convenience – especially from social networking perspective. You live far from your family and friends – it’s a convenient way to stay connected. You want to show off your luxuries, your new look, your frequent world tours, your new house pictures – it’s convenient. You want to organize political activities or find jobs – it’s convenient. You want to have half an hour’s entertaining break in between your busy work day – it’s convenient. You want to initiate a business discussion with like- minded people who are geographically distributed – it’s convenient. You want to exchange best practices with unknown people – it’s convenient. You want to let the world read your thoughts – it’s convenient. You want it ALL at a time of your convenience – its most convenient.
But convenience is not always welcome or needed – It is disappointing to read through survey results reflecting that youngsters waste so much time to aggregate ‘friends’ they don’t even know – and feel extremely glad to disclose information they shouldn’t, all in an attempt to build their ‘Social Net-Worth’. There have been cases reported of extreme depression because someone’s ‘Social Net-Worth’ was low (that there was no one to write to her). Researchers have also suggested that with every hour a student spends on Facebook, his GPA sinks proportionately. But I believe it’s not the technology which is to blame – it’s the user which defines the purpose to which the technology is used. Hence there are many positive examples too – you now are connected to a world of diverse perspectives and in-depth information. It is also very surprising and inspiring to know how some groups could not just start some positive social campaigns around education, politics, women welfare and child rescue, but could also make a larger impact through it. Companies have used it to make a positive media relations impact. It’s a new marketing channel to build and strengthen your brand. I’ve also heard that younger people are getting involved in causes bigger than the world – that they might otherwise have not experienced. So why not welcome it.
Given the strong privacy policies, safety features, and customizable usage – the impact is surely subjective. You will be positively influenced if you are a positive person. Your personal and professional life is something in your control – it’s up to you what you want to make out of it, it’s up to you how you want to structure or unstructure it.
Syamant Sandhir said:
As I read your post , these are the thoughts that came to mind.
1. If you like reading, social platforms and tools allow you to get in touch with authors and understand or debate their point of view. So maybe you want to get in touch with Paolo Coelho, you can and you can perhaps discuss the Alchemist or any of his new books. Alternatively, you could be interested in a subject and have read a particular author. Maybe you want to explore the writings of other authors who have made substantive contributions in the topic of your interest. Not only can you read more on this subject but perhaps you could also interact with other people and take their point of view. It expands horizons.
2. Let’s say you want to participate or discuss in the major topic of the day. It is simply done. Not only do you get a sense of the sentiment but also gain insight that maybe might come in handy in the course of work.
3. In a world that is witnessing dramatic disruptions, the knowledge that we gain and share perhaps defines our Identity. This may eventually be more important than the static resume of a professional. At a personal level, people could perhaps find like minded groups into music or people who are seeking answers to wellness etc
4. Connecting and contributing positively in any sphere is still the most important thing. I would say meeting someone we know and exchanging ideas is still the definitive experience. But since one cant meet for various reasons, such networks etc would do. For a generation of people, such platforms have been integrated into their lives much earlier and so would be make use of this accordingly.
5. On the point that you made about Social Net Worth, here is a thought by Thomas Friedman. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/01/opinion/01friedman.html?_r=1 . There is potential for doing some real good in each part of the world.
6. I think being actively involved in a greater cause in our areas of interest means that while we can use these social networks and tools to enlist volunteers and participants. Most social causes however could do with more on ground participation than merely adding an application or forwarding an email.
Looking forward to your views…
Krishnan Chatterjee said:
It might be interesting to figure out if people who were unsocial to begin with – have developed better social skills with social networking technologies.
July 8th, 2009 at 3:40 pm
syamant said:
These technologies allow a person to express . In a sense every person is social in a given context.
To build your comment further
1. Interacting online with people one has interacted with in offline situations.
2. Interacting online and collaborating with experts in a topic of one’s interest eg
http://www.mindmeister.com/24038141/future-of-blogging
3. Meeting new people
4. Sharing Information and Answering questions on topics that one is good at eg in forums.
And there are more examples..
With all things , there are positive and negatives attached. So if on one side such tools allow us to connect and communicate, they also tend to create a whole new social issues offline and online .
Looking forward to more views on this theme.
Krishnan Chatterjee said:
Actually the thought was slightly different. Many exceptional professionals may have in the past been prevented from succeeding as leaders and managers because of poor real world social skills. It is possible that technology is coming to the rescue and ensuring they are able to perform to potential.
July 8th, 2009 at 3:51 pm
syamant said:
Agreed, social tools may increase visibility of a person’s ability. They will however have to invest time in knowing about social tools that are most relevant. That is the one big challenge of social tools as of now. ..
Arvind Ramaiya said:
“It might be interesting to figure out if people who were unsocial to begin with – have developed better social skills with social networking technologies.”
That is the problem. I find that the teenage and population in their mid-20s, may be early 30s are the maximum subscribers to the concept of establishing contacts via social networking – Linkedin, Facebook, Twitter, Orkut, whatever.
Now, if someone can explain where twitter is going that would make for an interesting debate. Many newspapers had articles that confirmed 10% of twitter users are responsible for 90% of the activity and 50% of the users login only once or twice per year.
Surely creating an account and all the hype around being connected is not actually adding any value to our lives. I have Scientific American as one of my tweets and love all the magazine sites that are informational. But I am still not among the 10% who use twitter.
Shelfari was an interesting concept – where you could share the books you read with family, friends and subscribers. But that never took off – had they had some way of buying the book or previewing it, that would have been a lot more useful.
Do not believe that any social networking tools have yet made an impact on my life. Information flow however has now reached maximum capacity as is clearly depicted by the usage of twitter.
July 8th, 2009 at 6:46 pm
Meenakshi A. Benjwal said:
Its good to have your views…
I know certain people who are really uncomfortable putting themselves out there in front of people, not sure how to network. They go to meetings late to avoid talking to people before the meeting and leave the place as soon as the speaker is done..again, no need to talk to people. Some of them are actually highly active in online networking. May be, that gives them a secured platform to choose their own friends, and a safe environment to interact without having to show any face to face expression. Therefore, they may be comfortable in such virtual world. So now the one who could not exchange ideas over business meetings can do so over virtual networking platforms. This definitely helps ‘not-very-social’ leaders in widening their business and social network across the world. It helps the world connect to the ‘unsocial’ in as social a way as it likes. But the new question which arises is, ‘How many of such ‘not-very-social’ people actually turn ‘social’?
The behavior is different in an online and offline environment – and not many are able to leverage the online networking skills in offline meetings, unless it’s the same social set. To add to this, we start relying on such online channels alone to stay in touch which eventually converts a ‘social person’ also into a ‘not very social’ one. I came across an article that says that the growing use of internet has made people of all ages and the gen Y in particular unsocial in real life. A leading neuroscientist has claimed that ‘Social network sites risk infantilising the mid-21st century mind, leaving it characterized by short attention spans, sensationalism, inability to empathize and a shaky sense of identity. I will again go back to the point I made in my original post that it all depends on the purpose that you are crafting for yourself. Some sites are dominated by youngsters and teens, some sites are driven by business leaders. The usage and hence the impact differs. It’s how you want to bring about a difference.
July 9th, 2009 at 9:37 am
Arvind Ramaiya said:
@ Meenakshi – your response were really worth reading, thanks.
“How many of such ‘not-very-social’ people actually turn ‘social’? ”
How do you quantify the person’s social status by usage, by activity or by amount of
time. My previous example, of twitter usage means 90% of users are unsocial,
which certainly is not true. Your point that it provides for a new way of connecting
people, making them more social and therefore leading to a new avenue of sharing
knowledge is well taken.
“Social network sites risk infantilising the mid-21st century mind”
Indeed true, I can see this within my family itself, let alone the business world.
If more sites would be driven by business leaders, the world would become
a better place. As of now, a majority of the social sites are driven by techies providing a free services to connect people and then working towards turning that into a profitable business.
July 10th, 2009 at 8:14 pm
Samraat Kakkar said:
@ Arvind You should look at these demographics that got recently published for Facebook. Social Media has crossed the tipping point. Prior to the tipping point Social Media did attract the teenagers & audience in 20’s primarily due to their ability to experiment & understand with new technology platforms.
The changing demographics of facebook is not an isolated case. Similar demographic changes can be seen for other social media platforms & tools.
However the biggest challenge continues how organizations & brands understand & embrace it.
Here is the link to the facebook demographics.
http://bit.ly/Qv1Qi
July 8th, 2009 at 9:50 pm
syamant said:
@Arvind
Interesting you mentioned the example of Shelfari, consider this, when one looks up a book on Amazon, do they read comments or reviews by other people. If they do then would that be considered as a benefit ?
The benefit could be in the form of insight gained or shared or perhaps business opportunities. You do make an interesting and strong point and I would like to know more of your experiences …
@Meenakshi
It would be interesting to develop this thought further. The way we interact with Digital Tools per se is evolving. There is a view in recent times of not allowing mobile phones etc in meetings because well they create a distraction. So in a sense new etiquette is developing .
Arvind Ramaiya said:
@ syamant
I agree that the internet and more specifically Web 2.0 as such is having a positive impact on people’s lives. Blogging has opened the door to sharing views and opinions openly even at the corporate level (intranet). In my organization, we have thought leadership publish their own blogs which gets heavily commented on, and thereby reaching the the intended audience.
Abhishek Vanamali said:
Great posts Meenakshi. Rather than elaborate if Social Networking has changed my life (it hasn’t), let me mention a case of how an organization is using this to, well, increase the “Social Net Worth” of their employees…
Ideo – one of the world’s premier design firms – runs it’s corporate intranet, named “The Tube”, like a Social Networking site. Of course the object here is not to share photographs or comment on world affairs – but to create a “human network of knowledge”. With this, Ideo attempts to solve a very basic problem faced by companies which thrive on employee knowledge and experience. On the tube, employees and projects have pages, much like a linked in profile, which is constantly maintained and updated by the respective owners with new things that they have learned, or on-the-job experiences. The back end works to point the seeker to other people who might have answers or solutions to problems that a seeker might have. This is an informal way of managing “human” knowledge and experience – much more effective than typing an email or uploading a report.
This, I believe, will have the following effects on the users of the platform:
1) They will build a profile, a body of work and experience, which will grow along with their tenure in Ideo. Something to show off… very similar to what Meenakshi was mentioning.
2) This will improve and increase employee interaction… once the Tube points seeker x to giver y… then x will just pick up the phone and speak with y. Sometimes knowledge can only be imparted first hand and not through texts. People will seek help and opinion more often and will contribute with their experience more often – and hence increase collaboration in the company.
I am sure there are many other uses of the Tube which I am not aware of… but this is just an example of how Social Networking tools can be used to change employee behavior.
July 11th, 2009 at 12:21 am
syamant said:
Very informal , informative and yet simple. . So the key element is highlighting what a person has done and as a consequence now knows. In the process one ends up sharing with others at one’s own pace… Am i correct ?
Does it also have a reputation ranking system .. in the sense that if somone one liked what Y have shared then they rank that bit of information and consequently Y ?
Meenakshi A. Benjwal said:
Now that we have diverse views emerging, let me try and put it all together in line with Soumitra’s opening discussion.
With the various examples posted here, it is quite evident that all of us who are hooked to internet in some way are experiencing the influence of social networking. For some, it might not have brought home any noticeable impact yet but it’s definitely a trend to watch for everyone and for specific use to some. Soumitra described its influence through Identity, Status and Power – let’s see how some examples fit into this set now:-
Identity
Earlier CV used to carry your professional details, your growth path – now your online identity (your linkedIn URL, your blog URL etc) serves the purpose, in much wider a way. SAP database locks the employees’ identities – with no opportunity for employees to widen their circle of influence – as Abhishek mentioned, look at how Ideo is giving new identity to its people. The kind of sites you associate with, the topics you browse and the activities you undertake on these platforms – help define other aspects of your identity. But if it’s easy to create an identity, isn’t it also easy to destroy and recreate it when needed? Now how about multiple identities of the same person? Also what you may not realize is how much information you’re unknowingly providing to identity thieves? You may also not realize when people start using your photo and name to create fake identities?
Status
This is what I call popularity play. The more active you are, the more refreshed your status is. Stop publishing posts on your blog, people will stop visiting you. Google will declare you inactive soon. Search results will no longer throw your name on the keyword you used to own sometime back. Continue socializing, and get ‘top of the mind’ status of your online identity. Some film stars, when not busy with movie premiers or shooting, become active online and get their share of fame even in the downturn. Remember the Shahrukh/Aamir/Amitabh blog controversies? Your status reinforces (it’s proof of identity)whether you’re a travel freak, a foodie or hardcore techie. Your thoughts and actions get reflected in your status – and the meaning is hence proportional between input and output. But then social status for the sake of it isn’t very sticky. When the core individual activity takes precedence over social building aspects – Isn’t your status quite unsocial?
Power
When you demand the desired position in the social space, people generally do what you wanted them to. This explains why my boss visits the becker-posner blog every week. Action of one individual can influence the action of other individuals. Social standing is based on the accumulation and distribution of reputation – how well have you used your identity and status to create power for yourself. Through this power, it becomes easy to attract expressions from others. I know a person who was able to organize a blood donation camp for a government hospital – with 176 people joining her with a short notice of 4 days – purely from her facebook power. Barack Obama signed up with linkedin sometime back to communicate with the site’s 13 million members, who responded in bulk to the debate he initiated there, ‘How can the next president help small business and entrepreneurs survive?’. Obama is approaching 200,000 friends on myspace, which puts him in a league with some of the bands and comedians on the site. Applied in an organizational set up, it allows a junior to supersede his senior simply by adding more to its social power.
More and more is added to these identities, interests, reputations, relationships, and lives here every day. The enablement is not really through tools/platforms or email addresses/videos/songs anymore – it is through people across the globe. And if the context is people, the call is of identity, status and power.