Section: Ideas
On Community
While doing some research on community websites I came across a (short) thread about people who are trying (and failing) to attract visitors to neighborhood websites. The two sites mentioned were not very appealing, but they inspired me to think about why they and other such sites are failing.
Both posters lamented low interest from users. A visit to both sites confirmed that they revolved around reporting community news (local and neighborhood-specific). To this they add discussion forums, blogs, lists of area activities, etc.
Here is my take on why they are failing:
1. No one is going to turn to a neighborhood association site for local news -- at best the community site will be late and incomplete on the local news front (that's what your local TV station and local newspapers are for) and less than interesting on the neighborhood news front (that's what neighborhood gossip is for).
2. The social networking features -- discussion forums and blogs -- lack intimacy. Everyone is expected to post a topic in one of a handful of predefined topic categories for everyone to see. This creates structural tension between "free" and "acceptable" expression. Community members are therefore likely to (mostly) post information that meets the common denominator of acceptability. This tension is the enemy of intimacy.
3. Apart from the vague (motherhood and apple pie) notion of fostering community, there's *no obvious benefit for the community*. Hell, community members can foster community by *calling* their neighbor and inviting them over for tea. They don't need a community site to do this.
4. There is no obvious benefit for the individual community member. The "i" in community stands for "individual." Where is the acknowledgement of the individual's need and self-interest? I think this is a fundamental reason why these sites are failing to attract users.
5. Community is an emergent state. It is not created by people "deciding to get together" which is what the authors of these websites are implicitly asking (begging?) their members to do. Community happens, it is a result of something primal that these websites are failing to recognize. I think this is another fundamental reason why these sites are failing to attract users.
So, what's the secret sauce that will allow community to emerge? Glad you asked!
1. Recognize and act on the reality of what "Community" really is:
Community emerges when individuals with complimentary interests and personalities connect (sometimes by accident) -- this intersection of complimentary interests and personalities creates an attraction that binds the individuals together. This is ultimately a process of fostering intimacy. A community is created when this process occurs between multiple pairs of individuals within a social group (neighborhood in this case). Picture a Venn diagram composed of multiple (n) individuals with overlapping interests and complimentary personalities. The ones that are directly connected are friends, the ones connected through friends extend friendships into n distinct communities (each centered on an individual).
2. Realize that a community is a *collection* of interrelated sub-communities:
Failure to realize this results in the mistaken appeal to "community interests." Since (like the mythical "average" customer) there really is no such thing as "community interest" the appeal fails -- ergo, the two websites above. When you talk to a person you can expect a response from that person; who do you expect a response from when you address a "community?"
3. Build community-based systems around individuals
First make sure that your community website appeals to individual self-interest. Do that by providing features that help site visitors solve problems that are painful to them as individuals. e.g., find a good/reliable/trusted painter/appliance repair man/gardener/babysitter/...
This is caring for the interest component of the secret formula. If you do this right, people will have a good reason to visit your site and use it. This is the key to giving "community" a chance to emerge.
4. Enable organic social organizing vs overlaying cookie-cutter social structures on everyone
Do this using:
(a) capabilities to automatically highlight common interests/connections between site members
(b) capability to allow site members to transform these connections into an unrestricted number of self-organized/self-selected (sub)communities
(c) capability to measure and report the number of connections (measure of community strength) forged within the neighborhood
Item c above is important as it indirectly appeals to the notion that people believe community strength is important. By measuring and reporting this, we encourage members to build broader circles within the community.
So at this point our system has:
- Tangible benefits for individuals
- Individualized (Personalized), organic social networking around common interests
- Feedback on emergent community strength
What else do we need to do?
Just one more thing ...
5. Get out of the way and allow "Community" to happen
That's all there is to the secret sauce. Take a look at a few successful community sites (e.g., MySpace, Facebook, LiveJournal, and Xanga) and you will see most of these ideas implemented in some form or fashion. Sure, these are large communities, but the principles should hold for communities of all sizes.
I'll close with a summary of my community building postulates:
- Community is an emergent outcome. It is not created by people "deciding to get together"; community happens, it is a result of something primal
- Community begins to emerge when individuals with complimentary interests and personalities connect and bond around those interests
- A community is a collection of these connections (i.e., interrelated sub-communities)
- Community happens, you can't create it; so do what you must to encourage it, then get out of the way!