How much network can you digest?

MikeDubrall said:

HaraldHorgen said:

In a business environment the issue is not so much the quality of the relationship in terms of a personal touch.  It is the perceived quality of the product, service or message that is critical, and social media are simply tools that give us a multiplier effect in distributing the message.  Our "brand" can be distributed more quickly and effectively, and once it is launched out to our expanded networks, and the networks of our contacts, we can quickly lose control of that branding. 

This makes it imperative that we understand the implications of social media, that we develop and manage the distribution of the message that is "multiplied" beyond our control.  Do you become a trusted brand or a crappy brand?  Either you decide or you let the market decide for you.

Ty_Downing said:

Sorry i f I did not expand. We are on the same page, I left out using the proper  tools part!  There is an evolution before our very eyes in SM, and in feedback, and discussions I hear, it's apparent that as fast as the tools are being developed, they are being used.  It's my position (Yours too) to avail these ones of how to process this information by letting them know what is out there, and how to use them, otherwise you will suffer SM anxiety.  Your posts, this blog, your social media academy (based on student feedback) have been pioneers in this regard, so thank you for making my job as a consultant much easier.

AxelSchultze said:

@Mike - yes, growth spurt is a great description. So we need to train a whole set of new muscles (our social muscles) to get to top condition.

@Susan - I guess the reason for the social media consultants to not touch the limitations is because too many ne-sayer are around so they develop a set of "advantages" and loose sight of limitations. I have to admit we just put an additional session together to talk about it in the Social Media Academy.

@Ty - not sure I understand you correctly. Running between many networks is exhausting - and exactly the reason to use tools to help us expand on our natural limits. Like I mentioned in my post: Our body can only list so much, run so fast and connect to so many. But with the mechanical tools we reach very different results - and with social media we do the same on the social side. Tim can talk a lot about it :-)

Ty_Downing said:

 Ty Downing - Twitter: TyDowning

SusanrLincoln said:

For corporations, the key to solving this problem is to have a  vision.  Without a highly defined vision outlining what they want to achieve with social media, it is impossible to engage in a clear conversation.  Conversations that are started all over the place just because they CAN be started is certainly  not the ideal model--no matter how seductive the long list of social media tools can be...

For their part, the consumers of social media will also need to self-select. We must remember that social media -while undoubtedly transforming the world of communications-is not the ONLY form of communications. We are only human beings after all. With very real limits.  Without self-selection, we just end up darting from this tool to that and risk end up in a big, disorganized-and dissatisfied-jumble.

 For some reason the topic of when is enough enough never seems to come up very much.  Everyone is too busy singing the praises of social media to stop and evaluate the real issues.  You only have to talk to a few corporate executives and a few people on the street to realize that people are already highly confused.

To close, I believe that the social media consultants out there do a disservice to their clientele by not talking about the limitations of social media.  Just because the technology exists, doesn't mean that people are necessarily equipped to digest it all--and today. 

Mike Johansson said:

              Axel, this is a good analysis and offers valid comparisons between human use of physical tools and now our use of mental/social tools.

                I think “The Economist” story has a point: It is very hard, in the brick-and-mortar world, to sustain meaningful relationships with vast numbers of people. However, when Social Media applications are used correctly I believe the human capacity to maintain relationships will be greatly expanded.

                What do I mean by using Social Media “correctly”? It is treating each connection as a human being and not a number. It is following basic courtesies such as thanking people for connecting and offering to help them (and add value) if wanted or needed. It is NOT pursuing Social Media ties to others simply for personal gain.

                Like all emerging human movements Social Media is now going through a growth spurt and there are indeed large numbers of people who do not follow these basic courtesies. However, I believe that in time human nature will help weed out or marginalize the insincere users of Social Media.

                In just a few years I believe Social Media will become an accepted part of the human experience and will be looked at as adding great value to our lives – including adding to our ability to maintain a larger number of relationships.

-          Mike Johansson, Fixitology LLC (Twitter: mikefixs)

DavidCooper said:

Tools that assist with the quality side will also help with the second question and that is the next generation of tools NEEDS to have the ability to sort and filter relationships. Dunbar and company suggests a limit to relationships based on our physical limits to maintain them based on our own brains and how much time we have and much time is required for maintaining relationships. So in order to be able to surpass the Dunbar number in a meaningful way the tools must address what are the bottlenecks to maintaining more than 150 relationships.