Encouraging participation in virtual communities
Another article in the February Communications of the ACM gives us a study of participation in online communities. The results seem obvious, but I haven't seen people talk about them in this way.
Encouraging participation in virtual communities by Joon Koh (Chonnam National University), Young-Gul Kim (Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology), Brian Butler (University of Pittsburgh), and Gee-Woo Bock (Sungkyunkwan University).
Leaders of robust, sustainable virtual communities find ways to strengthen their members' sense of social identity and motivate their participation in the community's activities.
The key thing they discovered in their study is that there are truly two modes of interaction, and these modes are driven by different factors. One is the viewing activity: people are drawn to a community and the information the community creates by their sense of usefulness of the information. The second activity is that of writing: posting activity is higher for those who participate in offline meetings around the community.
The authors suggested that the concept of "offline meetings" has to do with people getting to know one another and developing a sense of identity with the community. While it is easier to make this happen in face-to-face meetings, I have seen it be successful in some strictly online communities. But the leadership role needs to be much stronger, as online relationships tend to be more fragile.
As I read the article, my mind attempted to build a model of how communities grow with these two activities in mind. For readers, participation happens and builds when they find materials in the community to be of use to them. So, there is a reinforcing loop of visits to articles to utility. If the utility is above a threshold, then the loop is reinforced. If it is not, it loses strength. For those who post materials in the community, their posting activity is increased (or encouraged?) by offline meetings.
There has to be another piece of the puzzle that ties the perceived utility to the number and style of offline meetings. Or maybe there is an additional feedback mechanism that wasn't tested in this research: the sense of whether the posters have contributed to the overall utility of the community. Some of that will come back to more offline interaction, I suspect. And is there a point for online communities where much of the participation-utility cycle builds upon itself without the need for outside stimuli?
7 Comment(s)
Josh brings up a good point about classical motivation theories and how they may apply to online communities. I think that Herzberg's theory is a good start but realize that it is based on assumption that people are physically working together. It's a lot easier to ignore a colleague through email then when they are sitting in your office.
I believe the five motivational factors still apply and may even be enhanced by the online community. But the hygiene factors are different because of the virtual nature of online communities. For example, the technology must be stable and work well enough so that it doesn't impede the flow of conversation. Also, the learning curve for using the technology must be low enough to encourage new entrants to the online community to start contributing. And there should be a feeling of openess and inclusiveness (many online communities eventually become dominated by a core group which discourages newcomers).
Bill Brantley
http://eclecticbill.blogspot.com
Excellent points Bill. There are definitely different ways that the motivator and hygiene factors materialize virtually versus physically.
One part I've been struggling with is the concept of paying people to contribute. Rewarding people with money, awards, etc. might actually be a motivator, but ONLY if those rewards are directly correlated to performance in a specific and transparent way. That correlation also needs to be logical and fair to the body of contributors and potential newcomers.
That said, I'm still a little undecided on whether it's better to pay or not, leaning towards not. You may get more people motivated, but the quality and utility of the content may suffer because you've muddied up the waters of what you are encouraging.
Going back to the original post, the offline meetings are a way to still keep the focus on quality and utility. Additionally, I see 3 of Hertzberg's motivators playing themselves out IF the offline is done right:
1. Recognition - by your peers, face-to-face
2. The work itself - this motivator is reinforced by getting to know others who are also motivated by the work
3. Growth - learning from others you meet, and formal presentations on topics relevant to the community
Josh Nankivel
http://www.PMStudent.com
said:
I think it has been pretty well established that pay-for-contribution only works in narrow circumstances (communities or KM in general). It tends to set up the wrong behaviors. I don't have the citations handy.
The general idea is that if the community is "healthy" that people are contributing out of motivations around recognition and altruism and a sense of it being the right thing to do.
There’s an interesting study reported in the February 2007 Communications of the ACM: “Encouraging Participation in Virtual Communities” (Jack Vinson’s written about it as well) The authors, Joon Koh, Young-Gul Kim, Brian Butler... Read More
Sheryl Nussbaum-Beach has an excellent piece on "The Art of Building Virtual Communities." The article was posted about a month ago, and the comments have extended the discussion even further. Read More
This topic is centered around motivation, and it got me thinking about parallels to some of the standard motivational theories out there. After all, we're still dealing with people even when the communication channel is virtual communities.
To pick one, I like Herzberg's hygiene/motivator theory. The hygiene factor of pay for example is analogous to paying for contributions in an online community. It's the stick and carrot approach that doesn't motivate, only causes temporary movement.
In Herzberg's article in the Harvard Business review in 1968, there are 5 core motivators. These are intrinsic and cause the subject to experience psychological growth. These are the primary causes of job satisfaction, and I believe they apply almost universally to other situations like online communities.
• Achievement
• Recognition for achievement
• The work itself
• Responsibility
• Growth or advancement
Looking at the subsequent sections of the article on job loading and steps to job enrichment, again I can see applications here for encouraging contributions in online communities.
Interpersonal relationships, an aspect addressed by offline meetings, is a hygiene factor. Unless those offline meetings serve to address the motivators bulleted above, I submit their real value is minimal. So it seems very important to not just throw people together to say hello, there needs to be some real strategy and value added to those activities.
Josh Nankivel
http://www.PMStudent.com