psychology - Cultivating Community2024-03-28T10:35:29Zhttps://cultivate.ning.com/ning-blog/feed/tag/psychologyThe Psychological Impact Of Interactionshttps://cultivate.ning.com/ning-blog/the-psychological-impact-of-interactions2013-05-07T16:59:31.000Z2013-05-07T16:59:31.000ZRichard Millingtonhttps://cultivate.ning.com/community/RichardMillington<div><img src="https://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/2208194?profile=RESIZE_400x&width=400"></div><div><p>When you reply to a fun, <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.feverbee.com/2011/02/open-and-closed-questions.html">closed</a>, question on Facebook it doesn't affect you on a deep level. </p>
<p>It doesn't increase your connection to the organization or fellow likers. It has little influence on your future actions (and certainly not your buying habits). The only thing that changes are the engagement stats. They skyrocket.</p>
<p>If you were to look at <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.facebook.com/visitsweden">VisitSweden's Facebook page</a>, clearly they have high engagement rates. They have hundreds of people liking posts, commenting on posts, and even sharing posts. It looks terrific. </p>
<p>Therein lies the problem. It looks so much better and more active than their community did. <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.communityofsweden.com/footer/editorial/community-of-sweden/close-down/">They decided</a> to close the community and focus on social media platforms. </p>
<p>If look at engagement metrics, this makes sense. Closing struggling communities is a good idea anyway. But it's mistaken to believe that the types of interaction are interchangable between platforms.</p>
<p>In dedicated community platforms people talk to each other, not just the page admin. They build relationships with each other. They visit daily to satisfy their social needs. This has significant, long-term, impacts on future actions and, yes, buying habits. </p>
<p>The FB page has few discussions. No-one is getting to know other people on the page. This is an audience, not a community. Despite all the engagement, it will be tough to demonstrate any measurable impact. </p>
<p>Interactions aren't equal. Interactions <i>between</i> members are very different from interactions <i>with</i> members. Responding to a Facebook post has a far weaker psychological commitment than participating in a discussion with other people. Likes have no beneficial impact. </p>
<p><img src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1281905?profile=RESIZE_1024x1024" width="750"> </p>
<p>You can look at the interactions themselves above. They don't bring the same value as discussions which take place in community platforms. They don't bring new value, new information, encourage high levels of self-disclosure, build relationships between members, nor build bonds between members. </p>
<p>This presents a problem for a community professional. You're going to get pressure to move to social media platforms. You're going to find it easier to develop a page that looks really active and pleases the boss. Yet you also know this page doesn't have the same impact as community platforms do. This is a really, really, tough argument to make. But if we don't make this argument, we'll find it impossible to build communities.</p>
<p>(<i>Image: <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/nostri-imago/2866399803/">Last Conversation Piece</a>, a Creative Commons <a rel="nofollow" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/deed.en">Attribution (2.0)</a> image from nostri-imago's photostream</i>)</p></div>How to Deal With Antagonistic Membershttps://cultivate.ning.com/ning-blog/how-to-deal-with-antagonistic-members-12013-04-02T17:56:52.000Z2013-04-02T17:56:52.000ZRichard Millingtonhttps://cultivate.ning.com/community/RichardMillington<div><img src="https://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/2208115?profile=RESIZE_400x&width=300"></div><div><p>Many community managers are either too slow or too fast to remove antagonistic members. They either remove the antagonistic member without fully realizing the role this individual plays within the community, or they spend copious amounts of time trying to convert the antagonist into a happy member.</p>
<p>One community manager I spoke with a few weeks ago had recently spent <i>half a day</i> resolving a problem with antagonistic members. That’s insane, what happens when you have 20 antagonistic members a week? Are you going to spend ALL your time on your community’s unhappy participants?</p>
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1281722?profile=original" target="_self"><img src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1281722?profile=original" class="align-center" width="550"></a></p>
<p> </p>
<p>Antagonistic members aren’t always bad. They can provoke discussions, highlight topics that other members were hesitant to address, put forward opposing (if unpopular) view- points, and prevent groupthink in communities. Communities where everyone agrees and gets along are dull.</p>
<p>Even the most antagonistic members can unite the community against them. This sounds crazy (and I’ve received plenty of criticism for it), but a community united against a few individuals can actually derive benefits.</p>
<p>The question you need to ask is: Does this antagonistic member kill or boost discussions?</p>
<p>Antagonistic members might not be breaking any rules, but may still have to go simply by virtue of squelching every discussion they participate in. Otherwise, antagonistic members should be allowed to stay because they have a beneficial impact upon the community.</p>
<p>Don’t fall into the reactivity trap. Don’t get sucked in to spending hours of your time trying to deal with antagonistic members. Make quick decisions and take quick actions.</p>
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1281764?profile=original" target="_self"><img src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1281764?profile=original" class="align-right" width="300"></a></p>
<p>I often offer clients a six-step escalation process:</p>
<ol>
<li><b>Do nothing</b>. This is my favorite step. It doesn’t require much work. If neither the number of participating members nor the quantity of contributions is declining, let it slide.</li>
<li><b>Reason/befriend/distract</b>. If the antagonistic member is clearly a problem, you react in one of three ways. First, if it’s likely they don’t realize they’re antagonizing members (this is surprisingly common, usually a personality issue), explain they need to tone their language down because members have been complaining. If they have a genuine grievance or concern, try to ask them what the real problem is and how you can help solve it. Finally, if they are focused upon one particular issue, distract them by giving them a column, or responsibility for a certain topic to express their viewpoint.</li>
<li><b>Suspend</b>. If none of the above works, suspend the member and explain why. Suspension can range from three days (one day isn’t enough) to one week. You can do this manually or use any system you like.</li>
<li><b>Ban</b>. If after a suspension they still cause problems, remove them from the community. Lock the account or ban the IP address from registering an account.</li>
<li><b>Edit/Repel</b>. Some members continue to register new accounts (or mask their IP address). They’re intent on causing trouble. Some community managers get caught in a cat-and-mouse game. They ban the new accounts and others continue to spring up. An endurance game, it continues until one side gets tired. It’s best left to volunteers. I’ve had some success by editing comments posted by the member to something softer (usually complimenting other members).</li>
<li><b>Contact ISP/Police</b>. If the member continues to return or is engaged in threatening/illegal activity, either contact their ISP or the police. You can jump straight to this stage if necessary.</li>
</ol>
<p><br> The goal of this process is to move from one stage to the next whilst spending as little time on antagonistic members as possible. The danger is rarely antagonistic members themselves; it’s the amount of time you spend on them. Over time, you neglect your happy members and can lose many members as a result. Make sure that doesn’t happen to you.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><em>Images courtesy of <a rel="nofollow" href="http://th02.deviantart.net/">th02</a> and <a rel="nofollow" href="http://raidho36.deviantart.com/">raidho36</a> </em></p></div>