Just thinking out loud here…
- What’s it really take for a community to start and evolve?
- Who must participate?
- Who shouldn’t participate?
- Who should facilitate?
- How does the “What’s in it for me” get addressed?
- Is this really what a community serves? Free support, free tools, utilities, open access to information?
- If this is true, can “real” relationships ever be realized?
- How transparent should the community be?
- Does transparency/openness help/hinder participation?
- Should everyone be able to see who’s participating, where they work, their background and motives?
- Should companies incent/encourage/mandate participation by their SMEs and practitioners?
- How should they?
- Who has the best community and what makes it so good?
- What’s an example of a bad community?
Thoughts?
Comments on this entry are closed.
Hi Doug,
Great questions! The answers are hard to come by. There seems to be some voodoo involved in building a community. Here is what I see:
– a number of active participants is needed to bootstrap the community. It gets easier once the community gets going, hence the initial starters are very important
– community needs a “purpose” or uniting theme broad enough to include enough members to jel the community but not too broad that would dilute the community feeling.
– participants should be convinced that there is some level of indirect benefit. People are willing to participate if the existence of the community is a benefit to them or can be benefit to them in the future.
– I think who should participate highly depends on the community.
– we’re social beings. the communities we belong to define who we are. Communities help to connect members, enable collaboration, and build identity. I certainly think “real” relationships can be realized, but what’s “real”. Does this imply, the relationships are not real, if they don’t have a physical aspect? Don’t think that’s correct.
– I’ve seen communities succeed both by being open and transparent and closed and exclusive. The purpose/nature of the community plays a large role here. I tend to think they should be open and completely transparent, but have seen and participated in communities that are not. Some people feel more comfortable with closed communities and anonymity, and this can encourage them to participate more openly within the community, where they may not in an open manner for whatever the reason.
– companies should certainly encourage community building. they can start with not preventing it š Many people I know hesitate in participating in communities due to concern that what they say/write/share may cause them trouble. Either not towing the company line, our sharing company “secrets”, sensitive material etc. having clearly stated policies and ensuring people that they are not in danger by participating would be a start. The company has to build credibility with its employees in time that they won’t get in trouble by speaking their mind freely.
– in our industry (it management) communities around specific products/vendors seem to be more successful.
– a bad community? one that is inactive..