In Social Media Communities Size Matters – Inversely

Community

Courtesy of

When I work with groups on their strategic use of social media I assure them, “size doesn’t matter” and they look at me funny. We have been told our whole lives that bigger is better.  As it turns out, when it comes to building a community via social media and specifically when you amass a vague community with no clear definition i.e. followers/friends that isn’t always the case. I blogged about this a while back but a few recent studies I came across  and a short conversation on twitter led me back to the research.

At this point I would like to remind everyone of a very technical term I use quite often when talking about what strategies to use regarding  Social Media engagement, “it depends”.  It depends on your goals and objectives and for as much as we might want to create a cookie cutter process for the strategic and tactical use of social media, what I find to be the case with every organization I work with is, their efforts don’t come close to mirroring any other organization’s use. (note to self, need to blog about the reasons why I think they are so different)

This leads me back to size. Too many folks focus on and talk about the size of their twitter followers. It’s for obvious reasons:

  • It’s an easy metric to measure
  • We start out on Twitter for the sole purpose of finding people to follow in the hopes they will find us
  • Every added follower is… something, not sure what but we get warm fuzzies when we get that update email
  • Even “Twitter graders” give us kudos for the number of followers.  Twitter “elite” strive to hit the one million mark.

But I go back to the question of goals and objectives. Specifically how does the size of your community support them? Are you selling a book, just released a movie – maybe size does matter but I would argue these folks are most likely using twitter as an rss feed for one-way or at best two-way asymmetrical communication. Sure, they might “engage their followers” but what about their community which we all talk about being so valuable in social media.

If we look at our community as a true community, one of engagement and collaboration and created for a purpose (go way back to the days of the Mayberry analogy) then we find smaller might actually be better. But, again, it depends on so many variables. How are you defined in this community? How are others defined in this community? Are you the leader (hint, you might think you are but…) is it a hierarchical community? And so on. All critical questions which need to be asked as you set the stage for your tactical use of any community based social media tactic.

Still shaking your head and thinking to yourself, “strong words Bill but prove it.”  Here ya go -

Research (link provided to original source)
Effects of spatial distribution and information transmission over cooperation dynamics
– “Our results show that spatial structures affect the cooperation dynamics under horizontal information transmission and in some structures, particularly Small World Networks, cooperation is more sensible to information transmission.”

Social Networks and Collective Action – “The analysis finds that some metrics for networks’ influence—size, the prevalence of weak ties, the presence of elites—have a more complex interaction with network structure and individual motivations than has been previously acknowledged. For example, in some contexts additional network ties decrease participation. This presents the potential for selection bias in empirical studies. The model offers a fuller characterization of the role of network structure and predicts expected levels of participation across network types and distributions of motivations as a function of network size, weak and strong ties, and elite influence.”

Learning to Cooperate: Learning Networks and The Problem of Altruism – “Learning networks determine the spread of successful strategies; a larger,more connected population with more overlapping clusters of relationships averages72% mutual cooperation in our simulation, a 12 percentage point gain over the 60% averaged by the smallest, least connected, least clustered population. Larger populations and more contacts both increase the chance of learning from successful retaliatory strategies and hence increase the growth of retaliatory strategies whenever selection favors cooperation. Thus larger populations with more developed learning relationships should on average exhibit higher levels of cooperation. This would suggest that cooperation across longstanding cleavages would develop more rapidly in larger interactive legislatures, larger more established policy arenas, and larger integrated immigrant communities—in the latter case, however, analytic results for finite populations suggest that at some point larger populations may impede the  evolution of cooperation unless interactions are restricted into structured game networks.”

A few points:
To clarify some of the research above, there are cases when the size of the community is beneficial but very specific variables need to be considered and implemented.  I also find it interesting but self explanatory that most studies which involve or can be related to social media are geared toward Biology, Political Science, Anthropology, Mathematics, Psychology, etc.  What I find interesting about this is, in a social media world (PR/Mass Comm/marketing)  where we preach collaboration, seldom do we venture outside our comfort zone regarding research. Finally, there is one other study I am tying again to find. It is recent, within the last two months and from Europe and spoke specifically to mass communication and communities. It was dead and if I can find it I will add it to this post.

So what now?
No reason to start over but do ask yourself a few questions:

  • Why am I tweeting? What larger goal or objective does it support?
  • If I build a community, what kind of responsibility do I have to this community?
  • When you visualize your community what does it look like?
  • Now look at your followers and those you follow – what do you see?
  • Insert a few dozen other questions which should be asked when building a community.

I can tell you what I am doing. For experimental reasons I am starting over from square one. Following no one and no one following me. I am taking into consideration so much more than when I first started tweeting. You won’t likely find me, especially if you are looking for folks who are also focused on a very small niche. I will continue to use Bill Handy for a number of reasons but I am also changing how I use this tool. If I want a community then I need to truly build it so, based on the research above, it can be successful.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]
14 Responses to In Social Media Communities Size Matters – Inversely
  1. [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Bill Handy, Bill Handy. Bill Handy said: @ChicagoLeah Truth be known, smaller is better ;) http://bit.ly/9muUM9 (Glad I found your site, good stuff!) [...]

  2. [...] the best use it. A lot has changed since then, two years later Chris has 125,514 followers (Chris, size will be the demise of your community… oh wait, never mind) and I don’t. And I’m happy about that – both stats. [...]

  3. [...] advertising software that will get me 10 thousand followers per day. Just because you failed to properly utilize social media does not mean I’m going to make the same [...]

  4. Joe Dunn
    February 6, 2010 | 4:18 pm

    I have to agree. It’s social media, not mass media. To be honest, I’m sure that I don’t read read every person’s tweets that I follow. Some people I follow out of courtesy rather than genuine interest. I think that a small, dedicated base of followers is much more beneficial than a crowd of them who never really bother to read your tweets. The point of social media is to spark that conversation. Even in PR, the ultimate goal is action, not trying to see exactly how many outlets you can send them to or how many eyes you can direct to something. I could easily send out a press release/blast for an event, but the results we’re really looking for are people to show up. I don’t think a lot of people really think through the concept of using social media in conjunction with a business.

  5. [...] After reading his letter it is my opinion his community simply got too big which reinforces that in social media communities size matters – inversely. (thank you @mattgalloway or Matt Galloway in the real world for forwarding his [...]

  6. mike mancino
    November 5, 2009 | 10:15 pm

    so true about goals and objectives. I think the reason people’s communities are so different are because their lives are so different. even people within a community that share many interests and idealogies will conversely contrast one another in their personal lives and interests. Most people will mix their work with their pleasure on social media sites. Their network will include not only their like-minded professional contacts, but also their like-minded casual contacts, along with every other possible connection to a person.

  7. [...] between the size of a community and the value of that community. Bill delivered: an in-depth, academic post about community, and what makes it work or not work online. It’s worth reading and digesting, but [...]

  8. [...] a conversation with @billhandy and @freshpeel on Twitter, and by Bill’s (lengthy, but good) post about the science behind [...]

  9. [...] “I’ve always said that numbers alone are beside the point in SOCIAL vs. mass media RT @billhandy: …my size argument [In Social Media Communities Size-Matters Inversely].” [...]

  10. edvarcl
    October 16, 2009 | 6:30 am

    great posts as usual, Bill!

    I think a power-law distribution model is relevant here as well in terms of the communications patterns that can be supported ;p

    Where too many followers would create a “broadcast” relationship while when you level down the followers, the conversation between the antagonist and his audience will improve from loose conversation to tight.

  11. Ellie Becker
    October 15, 2009 | 6:46 am

    Thanks for the terrific post and for sharing the research. When I first jumped onto Twitter, I hadn’t a clue to who or what I was looking for or why. Somehow I have gravitated into the lively social media interest community — and glad of it. The fact that I found the link to this very informative post in a tweet from someone I follow -@cjbowker – underscores the value of having developed a community as a source of teachers. With aspirations to also teach as I learn, I am gaining appreciation for the value of having found a community with shared interest. I can also understand how, knowing more now, it would be fun to build one with specific intent depending on identified objectives.

  12. Bill Handy
    October 14, 2009 | 3:38 pm

    Mandy, thanks for your comments and I can’t disagree with anything you say. If someone is tweeting for tweets sake then they can approach it in any fashion they like (As I tweeted not to long ago, “if you like to hammer in nails with a wrench and it works for you then go for it. Same applies to twitter.”) However, if there is a purpose to their being on twitter then they must consider all stated above and more.

    Thanks for the great conversation! That is why I love twitter and other social media tools.

  13. Mandy Vavrinak
    October 14, 2009 | 3:01 pm

    Bill,

    First, (as one of the participants in the brief convo that prompted this post) thank you for gathering the research and sharing it.

    Second… I am still digesting the research you linked to, and will have more to say later on, but I’m intrigued and basically agree… communities based solely on proximity or weak affinity can be impeded by size. Communities based around a celebrity or personality of some sort may not be impeded by size but are really more of a collection of parallel actions than true interaction among the loosely-defined members. Lose the hub and the spokes all scatter.

    Finally (at least, until I’m finished with the thinking)… I would say in my case that the size of my community has little to do with my value to that community. Value is in the perception of the subscriber (follower). I started off in Twitter the way you are re-starting… not following people, not seeking to be followed. I shared content and ideas that I hoped would appeal to a specific set of folks, and if they did find the content valuable, I assumed they’d follow. I do sometimes follow people first now, when I find them, whom I deem valuable (I learn from them, I have interacted with them or met them, etc.). Sometimes they follow back, sometimes they don’t. It doesn’t particularly matter to me, either way.
    I don’t have any guilt over not following back someone who follows me, either. We all have the ability to choose what we hear, and I think that is one of the most attractive features of social networks.

    I am not seeking to “build a network” so I can sell it, tweet ads to it or otherwise exploit it. They’ve found me and I try to be valuable. Yes, I do hope that if they find me valuable on Twitter and they decide they need something I offer as a service in the “real world” that they’ll think of me. But that will only happen if I remain valuable, in the perception of those who follow me.

    Thanks for sharing the info, and your thoughts… looking forward to someday talking in person about communication theories and hearing more of what you think and why. :)


    @Mandy_Vavrinak

  14. [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Bill Handy and Bill Handy, Matt Galloway. Matt Galloway said: Hey folks @BillHandy says smaller is better for community building http://bit.ly/19oLa7 I think he's compensating. What do you think? [...]

Leave a Reply

Wanting to leave an <em>phasis on your comment?

Trackback URL http://www.billhandy.com/social-media-communities-size-matters-inversely/trackback/