How will they connect?

Jason-

We are very much in agreement regarding the power of social media…and you raise a wonderful question regarding the future implications of the rapid integration of these tools into our personal and professional lives.

I think that, truth be told, we do no fully understand the current impact of these tools on us , let alone the impact on our children, but here are some thoughts, and I think that these are also relevant to HR and the evolving organization.

Increased significance of weak ties: I can still only manage a relatively small number of close relationships or strong ties, but social media allows me to develop, maintain and manage many more weak ties than before. Twitter and Facebook are great examples of this. Not only are these tools valuable in creating and/or maintaining those weak ties, it also makes it easier for me to benefit from those weak ties…because those weak ties are consistently sharing information. So, the size of my weak ties network has grown drastically and the role that the weak ties play in my life has also grown drastically.

Professional asset: For some folks and some professions this is nothing new, but on a broader scale social capital is increasingly becoming viewed as a significant professional asset. You are a good example of this. It is going become more important to their professional success that our children are able to build and maintain a vibrant network, and that they are able to demonstrate the value of that network to prospective employers or collaborators.

Specialized tools: Our children will be able to be much more intentional about seeking out specific new components to add to their network…when they want to find specific people or specific kinds of people to start relationships with they will easily be able to find them and we already have made progress in this direction.

More self directed personal/professional opportunity outside of organizations: I think that we will continue to see individuals able to do more things, find more things and create more things without the involvement of traditional organizations. Not sure that organizations are going to go away, but their role will continue to change and I think we will see a gradual increase in the number of us that are self-employed and involved in a variety of projects with a variety of other people.

What else do you see changing?

-joe

Why Ignoring Social Media is Stupid

Joe,

You nicely summed up what I feel is at the core of the discussion about how social media is changing how people interact. So, to take it further, how exactly do these social media tools impact relationships and ultimately, the creation of social capital. Here's a few of the most important ways I've experienced:

• Social media is a tool that facilitates the creation and maintenance of relationships, it is not the relationship itself. It's when people mistake their social media connections as relationships that we start getting into trouble.
• Social media facilitates connections. By my definition, a connection is someone who you have come into contact with in some meaningful way. Once we are connected to someone, we know how to reach them and we would have at least enough knowledge about the other person to facilitate the beginning of a more substantial relationship. Connections in other words are loose acquaintances.
• We know from the work of Mark Granovetter and others that acquaintances are our source of social influence and power. Because our acquaintances (or weak ties) represent access to information and resources that we wouldn't know about through our closest relationships, the more acquaintances we have, the more powerful our social capital. Social media makes it easier than ever before to stay connected with these weak ties, thus making it easier to build our social capital and influence.
• Social media makes it easier to maintain relationships with larger numbers of connections. While Dunbar's number suggests that we can only maintain relationships with 150 people at any given time, the tools of social media make that process easier than in the past. While it seems that social media may not make Dunbar's number any larger, I would argue that it does make it possible to seamlessly change which people we have in our 150 over time. Social media gives us the ability to stay connected to people so that we know where to find them when we need them, even if we haven't actively maintained a more substantial relationship with them in the meantime. Social media keeps the connection in tact.

So, while social media can't BE the relationship, I think that it represents incredibly powerful tools for planting, growing and harvesting social capital. By ignoring these tools, you are choosing to be less influential, less powerful and less relevant. I assume we are in agreement on this point.

So, how is social media going to impact our children in terms of how they will connect with and build relationships with others as they come of age?

-Jason

Social Technology: Best/Worst Thing Ever?

Jason, I hope that you are enjoying the shift in weather. Spring is a favorite season of mine, it always feels like a fresh start on things…especially after this winter.

On to the business at hand.

Thanks for your post teeing up social technology…there is so much noise about this issue out there. I guess I have a paradoxical view regarding social technology, I think that social technology is very underrated and very overrated. That works for me, because as you like to remind me, I am a consultant and I do not have to make sense!

Getting on LinkedIn is not going to build social capital for you. But you can use LinkedIn to more effectively build social capital. Getting on Twitter is not going to build social capital for you. But you can use Twitter to more effectively build social capital. Having 17,374,981 “friends” on Facebook does not mean that you actually have any social capital. I guess I view the rapidly evolving world of social technology as similar in nature to steroids. Steroids alone will not make you a great athlete. You still have to be a really talented to play professional sports, but steroids can make you even better (although there is clearly a number of bad aspects to using steroids, so not a perfect analogy).

I think that new social technologies are absolutely changing the way that we interact, and some of those changes are good and some of them are bad. You and I as friends, as collaborators and as business partners communicate with each other in a variety of ways. But the vast majority of our really important and serious conversations still happen face to face. We use texting, e-mail, Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn and this blog to complement an already very real relationship. That is a wonderful thing. But when social technology is used to replace, avoid or simply create the perception of a real relationship it is bad news…whether we are talking about a 1:1 relationship or the relationship between an organization and its workforce or its customers.

So, I think that the most important question that is not being asked is what kind of relationships do we want to have? As employees, as employers, as HR leaders, as business leaders, as citizens, parents, friends, neighbors, consumers…what do we want those relationships to be like?

I look forward to digging into this further.

-joe

Is technology killing social capital?

Joe,

I have found myself recently chatting with several people who seem to be making the argument that social networks, text/instant messaging, and the internet in general are diminishing the relationships between people. To be fair, the people making the argument are generally Gen X or older and are people who pride themselves in networking the old-fashioned way, face to face and eyeball to eyeball. So, they could just be resisting change or maybe they are on to something.

While I think it's very short-sighted to suggest that technology is ruining relationships, I do think it's an interesting topic to consider how it is changing the relationships and connectedness between people. So, I'd like to propose that we discuss this issue in our next several posts. Here are some of the questions that I'm interested in discussing:

• How has the advent of social networks, email, and texting changed the way we connect and interact with others?
• What are the differences between being connected and having a relationship?
• How is technology impacting the way children and young adults are connecting to one another and what is the long term impact of that?
• How does the difference between connection and relationship play into the creation of social capital?

Clearly, a major shift is underway in how we interact with one another. I look forward to hearing your thoughts on exactly what's going on and how we can both make sense of it and embrace it.

-Jason

Getting HR Connected

Joe,

We've been talking about a lot of important issues around Social Capital in HR over our last severals posts. One of the questions you asked as we began this discussion was: How do you get your HR team connected?" Since this is a topic I work with daily, I'll share some thoughts I have on it.

The most important thing that needs to happen to get your HR team connected and investing in social capital is to make it a part of the job. For far too long, too many HR folks have spent their days sitting in their offices, waiting for the phone to ring with the next issue to handle. HR leaders need to very specifically set expectations for their teams about getting out and being around people both within and outside the company.

Here are some ways that HR leaders can get their teams connected:

• Be the example. As the leader, you have to visibly demonstrate that you are committed to building your own social capital. Your team will key off of what you do. If you aren't walking the talk, the rest of these ideas are meaningless.
• Train the team on relationship skills. Have the team read and discuss "How to Win Friends and Influence People." Pair up new HR members with those who do this well so that they have a role model to learn from. Teach them how to use outlook to capture information about contacts and schedule follow ups.
• Establish requirements in their performance objectives related to internal and external networking. Goals can range from taking an internal contact to lunch once per month to attending other department meetings weekly. Relationships can't happen unless people are out interacting with one another.
• Require each team member to find a project or effort to get involved in internally. There are always projects, committees, task forces, etc. taking place. These groups are powerful ways to gain connections to others in the company who you might not otherwise meet. Note: team members may need help finding and getting invited to join these depending on your organization.
• Expect your team members to be involved in local HR networking groups like SHRM, CEBS, etc. People get busy and unless you establish an expectation that they are attending these meetings, they won't go. When they go, establish a goal that they come back to the office with at least 3 business cards from new people they met at the meeting.
• Require people to have an active LinkedIn profile and to grow it. Not only is LinkedIn a great networking tool for people, it's a nice way for individuals to feel the progress of building their network of connections because they can see the numbers.
• Train your team on social media. By teaching your team what it is and how to use it, it makes jumping in a lot easier. If you, as the HR leader, facilitate the training and use examples of how you are using it, the team will follow.
• Give performance feedback on how connected each individual is and the efforts they are making towards getting connected. By involving this in formal performance feedback like performance appraisals, you will ensure that it's viewed as important.

There are a lot more ways to do this, but these area few important places to start.

-Jason

Do You Know Who You Know?

Hey Jason-

I think you have done a good job of identifying some of the key roles when it comes to influencing change within an organization. One of the things to keep in mind is that not only do you need to be aware of who these people are but also of the nature of the relationship that you have with them.

True social capital goes deeper than simply knowing somebody (or being connected to them on LinkedIn or their friend on Facebook).

I know that I have personally been in situations where I have focused a great deal of my energy on having a quality relationship with the Don and many of the Influencers, but have taken my relationship with the Inner Circle folks and Loose Cannons for granted.

Those people sink ships. Frequently.

If you truly want to drive change you have got to be relentless in building and maintaining social capital and those efforts need to include all four groups to some extent. Social media / social networking tools are great for this, but within the organizational setting, nothing beats face time.

Are you in the habit of requesting face time on a regular basis with the Don(s), the Inner Circle, the Influencers and the Loose Cannons? Are you inviting them in to observe your department meetings from time to time? Are you sheduling departmental open house events, where folks from other parts of the organization can network with your team and get updated on what you are working on?

I think that HR leaders that are really going to be able to drive change are those that are constantly finding ways to weave themselves and their team together with other parts of the organization. It has to be a constant effort, so that the social capital you need is there when you need it.

-joe

related posts:
Social Capital: HRs Secret Weapon, Part 1
Social Capital: HRs Secret Weapon, Part 2
Social Capital: HRs Secret Weapon, Part 3
Social Capital and Corporate Politics

New Age Networking, part 2

Jason-

I surely do not qualify as a social networking expert, guru or thought-leader as the world clearly has plenty of those, but I will respond to the best of my ability. I think that despite all the chatter, and noise and expertise, there is still substantial confusion and misunderstanding about networking...what it really is, how it really works, why it is really valuable. And whether you are networking in real life or on Facebook, this confusion and misunderstanding is what negatively impacts peoples ability to build and use real social capital.

I do not think that there is any such thing as "new age networking", networking is networking. We do however have a growing array of new tools to use in our networking efforts and I think that many of them are quite powerful...if used appropriately.

Twitter, LinkedIn, and Facebook (a few of my favorites) do not replace phone calls or face to face meetings, but they do allow me to really tap into some of the characteristics of networks that phone calls, hand shakes and lunch meetings do not.

Twitter allows me to find a lot of new people and very easily develop a basic connection to them that may or may not evolve. I can bring a great deal of diversity into my network (professional diversity, geographic diversity and other types of diversity) that I would have a really hard time connecting to in other ways. As you know, diversity is one of the things that can make a network really powerful. And it is easy for me to experiment with Twitter...I can easily follow and un-follow people.

LinkedIn allows me to really tap into the exponential nature of my network, as I can not only tap into the ideas, experiences and perspectives of the people that I am directly connected to, but I can also tap into the people that they are connected to...and the people that they are connected to. The numbers get pretty big, pretty fast. The exponential nature of a network often remains hidden and under-utilized in the world of phone calls and handshakes.

So, the more things change, the more they stay the same. I think that there is nothing really new about social capital, going back to How To Win Friends and Influence People...maybe going back further than that. We do however have a lot more research on how networks form and function, and we certainly have new tools to apply to our efforts to build social capital. Regardless of what we are using it is the quality of the those interactions that makes them matter...and yes, I agree there are people that think they are doing more networking than ever before, but they are only collecting numbers.

-joe

It is "social" networking....

Jason-

I do agree, with one exception. I do think it is important to post a picture, but I do not think that it needs to be a picture of yourself. There are a handful of people that I follow on Twitter that use other images and they happen to be images that "fit" with that persons persona. I do use pictures of myself, but I believe you can go the other route and still have a credible presence. In a society that places far too much emphasis on appearance, I think that there is actually something to be said for not using your picture.

Having said that, I think your fifth suggestion is maybe the most important. If you are going to get any real value of social networking, you have to be all about the social aspect of it. LinkedIn is a really good example. I have been on LI longer than I have been on any other community and there have been times when I have not felt like it was a very valuable place to be. That was primarily because I was not proactive in engaging others there. I do that a lot more now, and LI has made it a lot easier to be interactive with updates, groups, questions, applications, etc.

One of the biggest differences between the 1.0 world and the 2.0 world is the transition from monological communication to dialogical communication. There is a lot of value to be found on LinkedIn, the Ning networks, Facebook, Twitter and other places but you have got to take a dialogical approach...you have to be reaching out to engage people and you have got to listening to them. The people (and companies) that do a good job of this are getting a return on their investment.

-joe

Network Your @ss Off

Joe,

As we railed against companies who block access to social networking sites, it reminded me of the people on the other side of the equation--those who have access to these tools and don't bother to use them. What a wasted opportunity. I have even gotten to the point where I have a bias against those who aren't on LinkedIn because the value seems to obvious to me that I can't comprehend why you wouldn't be out there.

Lately, with all the layoffs, I think there are a lot of people who are suddenly finding out how important it is to have a strong network of personal and professinoal connections. I'm not sure why this is so difficult for some many people to see, but it has always seemed obvious to me that the more people you know, the more resources you have available to you. The hard truth that some people are learning right now is that it's much easier to network when you don't need something from someone (like a job).

And, it's easier to build a network now than ever in history thanks to tools like LinkedIn and Ning. Every person knows people and these online tools allow you to connect to them and to keep in touch with them. If there was one lesson that I could share with people that I think would have the greatest impact in their life, it would be that "who you know makes all the difference."

While I empathize with the people out there looking for a job right now who just realized the importance of networking, they are already behind the eight ball. It's the people sitting around watching this happen that need to get in gear and start networking like their life depended on it. Those connections that they make now might just be the source to their next job and livelihood if their job were to go away tomorrow.

Jason

...on The Twitter Dilemma

Jason-

I am going to push a little harder on this issue as it has become a growing source of frustration for me. I continue to encounter companies, schools and non-profits that block access to social networking sites, content-sharing sites, etc. I agree with you that this is largely an issue of leadership and I think that it is issue that allows us to see which organizations have a proactive leadership stance and which ones have a reactive leadership stance. And I would say that in the world in which we live, if you are being reactive your days are numbered.

Not only does blocking Twitter, LinkedIn, Facebook, etc. show a desire to manage activity rather than productivity, it shows a complete lack of understanding about how information travels, how employees become engaged, how innovation happens and how value is created today. It also helps ensure that your organization remains largely clueless about something that is changing nearly all aspects of how we do things. There are companies that are actively using Twitter to promote their brand, to recruit talent to provide customer serive and there are those that block it, deny it and shake their fist at it.

To put it another way; some of use tools, some of us are tools.

With the rate of change today, organizations can ill afford to block, deny and shake their fist at the changes that are taking place in the world. I think there are 200 million people on Facebook right now. Some of them are your customers. Some of them are potential customers. Some of them are your employees. Some of them are your potential employees. It really makes a lot of sense for you to be there. If you are not there, I probably will be there taking them away from you.

The same is true regarding Twitter and "social media" in general. A friend of mine put it like this; "If you are doing anything of any significance in the world, people are going to talk about you. You should be there."

Closing your eyes and covering your ears does not mean the conversation stops...it just means you don't get to benefit from it.

tweet tweet

-joe

The Twitter Dilemma

Joe,

It seems that Twitter has heightened the debate in the workplace over "to block, or not to block" employee access to social media and social networking sites. The argument is typically rooted in concerns about data security and productivity. The question is really whether or not allowing these sites into the workplace will ruin the company.

In my experience, the data security concern is a smoke screen used by technical folks to get you to give up the fight easily. Anyone who encounters this resistance should push harder. The real issue is productivity loss--which I think is a legitimate concern.

I, for one, have wasted a lot of time on Twitter, for example. I've done most of this on my own time because I wanted to understand how it works. I also have a belief that it can be a useful tool to me once I finally figure it out. Unfortunately, despite being a relatively savvy technology user, Twitter proved harder to figure out than I expected and has take up a lot of my time.

So, if it can happen to me, why wouldn't the same thing happen to everyone else. Despite best intentions or noble plans, having access to a site like this could destract the undisciplined in our workforce from accomplishing their more important tasks. At least that's how the thinking goes.

If a company is working hard on performance management and engagement, their employees will know how to appropriately use these sites. Each employee will be clear on what's expected of them and will feel compelled to contribute to the organization's success. If these two conditions exist, providing your employees access to Twitter, Facebook and the rest is simply an act of giving them access to tools they will use to help the company succeed.

So, if a company is blocking access to these sites, it's probalby less about productivity and more about leadership--and it's a shame.

Jason