The ENTiPping Point

Previous Posts:
- Introduction

In my previous post, I introduced the idea of "metafolksonomy".  Let's see if we can get to a quick definition of the concept before we dive too far into it...

Metafolksonomy: the classification of an individual by one or more other individuals based on inbound relationship affinity traits.

Now, that's just a heady way of saying:

If I want to have some kind of relationship with you, then obviously there is some kind of appeal in your personality or your social capital that makes me want to connect with you.

Others might find these same things about you interesting too, or they very well might have other traits on which they base their relationship with you.

Now, take all of those reasons that people wanted to connect with you and list and weight them, you have a profile of yourself in the social space.

Relationship Affinity Traits

What exactly is a "relationship affinity trait"?  The concept is core to the idea of metafolksonomy.  As seen in the diagram, there are two different elements of affinity at work in our relationships -- inbound and outbound.  There is a reason that you want a relationship with me, and I with you.  These reasons are the "relationship affinity traits".

But just like yin yang, the reasons that we may have a relationship with one another may be completely different and this is why it's important to classify the relationship not as a single pipe connecting two people, but rather as a pair of connections that each satisfy a unique need for each individual involved.  I, for instance, may find the fact that you juggle intriguing and yet you find the fact that I live in the same city with you as a reason that you want to have contact with me.  They're very different reasons, but still cause a connection.

We Define You

As you become "stickier" in the social space and communicate with more people, the sum of your relationships contain valuable information about who you are and how people see you.  Take a quick glance at your LinkedIn profile, your Twitter bio, or your 'About' section on your blog.

Guess what?

That probably doesn't include everything about the way that we all see you.  Sure, there are probably a few things in common, but there are probably hundreds of small pieces that you'd find trivial to leave out.  Some of these trivial nuggets, though, might be the complete basis for someone having a social relationship with you.

...And You're Defining Others

Remember that relationships are two-way and while you're being defined by inbound affinity relationship traits, you're involved in the "outbound" aspect of the relationship as well.  Why do you interact and have relationships with those around you?

In my next post, I'll go through some practical applications of this concept in the social space.

In the mean time...

Do you consider a relationship as a singluar piece of social conduit or do you see it as something else?

Next post in series --> "Making It Happen"

When you start to have more than a couple dozen folks that you follow on Twitter, the prospect of managing the relationships you're creating starts to get a little overwhelming.  We've all met great people on social media sites.  And there is usually some singular trait that drew you to interact with these great people.  However, as you get to know them, watch their Twitter stream and see who else they interact with, you probably get to know more interesting things about them.  So what may have started out as a business relationship interest, over time, the total picture of that person starts to become clearer.

You may notice an industry pro talking about his grandmother who just used to live next to Abraham Zapruder.

Maybe you find out someone went to pastry school while they "searched for identity" before becoming a CPA.

You might discover that someone who has been so hard to get a response from on Twitter actually shares your love for collecting frog figurines.

This is the joy of building your social network -- you find out all of these great nuggets that help shape a picture of each person in your network.  You begin develop perceptions of personalities based on interesting traits about your new relationships.  Hopefully, you're sharing bits and pieces with your followers along the way as well.

But what's intriguing is that while you value one set of traits in a new friend, another person could value that exact same friend for a completely different set of traits.  While I may value our shared love for collecting frog figurines, another person might be following you because you just live in the same city that they do.  So neither I nor your local friend have a complete picture of the value of your online presence.  Therefore, each person has created their own taxonomy of you -- a classification based on certain characteristics that are derived from your relationship with them.

A "folksonomy" is a loose term used to describe the process of people collaborating to tag and organize items, much like you see on sites like Flickr, for example.  The theory is that by putting our heads together as a social media community, we're more likely to accurately describe photos using tagging with keywords and that the totality of these tags yields a more legitimate description of that item to the rest of the world.

In this blog series, we'll take the notion of folksonomy one step further to "metafolksonomy" -- the process of classifying the classifiers;in short -- people tagging.  We all have our own taxonomies that individuals have created based on our relationship with them.  We create "folksonomies" of objects on sites like Flickr and Delicious based on a join effort of humans classifying objects.  And at the deepest of collaboration is humans classifying humans jointly.

How does metafolksonomy fit into the social media environment?   How could we benefit from solutions that implement this concept?

And to you, the reader -- what questions do you have about this concept that we should explore?

Next in the series -- > "Relationship Traits"

Am I about to come across as a social media cynic?  Just maybe to some of you.  But after watching my Twitter stream over the weekend, I realize that some of you just need to stop.  And I mean literally 'stop'.

You see, I followed you on Twitter in the hopes that I would meet a new and interesting person.  You may or may not have relevance to my career specialty.  You may be right here in Birmingham, Alabama or hundreds or thousands of miles away.  We may have met or may not have (yet).  But I've followed you because I think that you have something to say.  And I want you to say it.

And then I want you to stop saying it and say something different.

I see way too many people who tweet about social media, marketing, and PR strategies around the clock.  Early in the morning, late at night and on the weekend.  It's non-stop social media.

I have a suggestion: social media doesn't have to be awesome all of the time.  Nor does the Internet.  Nor does your work day everyday.

I'll be honest.  I really want to hear your thoughts about social media strategy.  But I also really want to hear about that thing you did on the weekend with your kids or that thing you cooked that didn't quite turn out the way you expected.  These are the events and elements that make you human and not a robot that searches the internet 24/7 for the latest social media information.  The recent Olympics have been a blessing as I watch people actually stop for a few hours and tweet about what is interesting to them about figure skating, hockey and yes, even curling.

So feel free to let a few of the social media logs pass you by in the river.  There will be more chances to grab the logs on Monday.  In the mean time, show me that you know how to have fun in the water.

Photo: http://www.flickr.com/photos/hisgett/ / CC BY 2.0

I posed a question a while back on Twitter about whether or not business-applicable social media networks like Twitter and LinkedIn rely on some of us not being on the network for it to have value. This brought me to a few bigger questions about what the true meaning of "value" is and how it might apply to the business world and interconnections on social media networks.

If you look up the word "value", most dictionaries include a definition that describes "relative worth" of an item. This implies that value of something is dependent on its relationship to something else not having value. The value of money lies in the availability of one portion of it relative to the entire amount possible. As people get more wealthy, the value that $1 holds is nowhere near the value that that a person at the poverty level might have for that same $1.

So I pose my question to you in blog form this time:

If we all become connected and are able to leverage each other in an equally accessible manner, do we all lose the overall value of being connected?

If my company can get things done just as quickly as yours because we all know the same people and we are all leveraging the same network, is it really possible to claim that the network has provided either one of us "value"?

Now, this doesn't necessarily apply to social networks used in the personal space. I can find great value in being connected with my friends and family and the "relative" part of "relative value" is compared to that of missing out on family photos, friendships, etc. The value here is not dependent on me being more connected than some other entity (i.e. a business), but rather the opportunity cost of not being connected.

What do you think? If we get to a saturation point and everyone is leveraging connections equally on social networks, would they still have business value?