Social Media and The Speed of Trust

Last month, on separate occasions, I met two friends that I had previously only communicated with via blogs and social networking sites (and maybe the occasional e-mail). Although I knew each of them for some time, it was our first "in-person" meeting.

When we finally met, there was an immediate sense of familiarity. We skipped the usual pleasantries and small talk and jumped right into an open and honest conversation. Thanks to social media I already knew what they looked like, their personality, their interests, their dislikes, their hobbies, their sense of humour, their perspectives, etc.... In fact, I know more about them than some of the people I actually work with on a regular basis.

Why do I find that interesting? Why might an organization want to pay attention?

Trust!

Trust, much like the term "collaboration" is often seen as a fuzzy-wuzzy airy-fairy nice-to-say high-level taken-for-granted leadership concept...

"But of course I trust my people and they trust me".

Do they? Do You? Does it matter?

Yes it matters! It matters if you care about the long-term and about maintaining sustainable collaborative benefit. It matters at individual levels as it does at organizational levels. As Stephen M. R. Covey explains in his book, "The Speed of Trust", those without trust can say and do the right things and people will analyze every word, read into each sentence, and spin your message no matter how much effort you put into perfecting your communication. Those with trust however, can make mistakes and even say the wrong thing and people will overlook it and still support the individual or organization.

Personally, when my team designs collaborative events whether face-to-face or on-line, we spend a good deal of time thinking through the engagement factors. Trust is one of the key elements in the 'motivation/desire' factor .

A lack of trust will cause people to withhold information, to waste effort validating each message instead of integrating, to be less receptive to compromise, and to just be overall less committed, often choosing the least amount of commitment possible. Ultimately this means organizations are, less agile, less innovative, of average performance, and peppered with incomplete analysis.

My first visitor, Betrand Duperrin, author of, Bloc Note de Bertrand DUPERRIN, was able to fly in from Paris to visit me here in Toronto. He was actually on his way to Montreal, where he was presenting at the Webcom conference on the topic of... you guessed it, social computing.

I was able to show Bertrand a couple of our collaboration labs used for face-to-face facilitated sessions. It was a good setting, since, my area of social media focus is on collaboration and borrows greatly from the years of learning & experience our team has gathered from designing and facilitating 1000's of sessions.

We discussed several concepts and shared several stories. I learned even more from Bertrand. There was no, "what is the guy trying to sell me", or "what is this guys hidden agenda". It was as natural as if a close work colleague called me up wanting to talk about collaboration.

Mike Dover who works with nGenera, and avid Wikinomics blogger, was the other person I've finally met after years of digital correspondence. I have to say, there really is no excuse for not meeting earlier considering Mike is actually based out of Toronto.

We finally met at a conference in which Mike was one an MC and organizer. We talked, joked and shared a table at the conference. He even put me on the spot by unexpectedly (at least for me anyways) introducing me, and my blog to the conference attendees. Again, no "posturing" or "small talk". Just open and honest conversation.

How does social media enable trust? Well, Covey talks about 13 behaviours, several of which tie into social media benefits. Here are 3 additional concepts that I'd like to add specifically for those of you in the social media space.

1) Self-Organization - Bertrand, Mike and myself have similar perspectives, and ideas on the power of social computing, and also the limitations of social computing. It's not too surprising that we would eventually meet. The difference though is that commonality and passion around social media, provides a grounds for us to establish a stronger relationship by choice. We choose to engage in these discussions instead of being 'forced' into these discussions because it's our "job".

2) The In-Formal - Mike and I are both Guitar Hero III addicts. In fact, it was a blog post of Mike's that got me started. Without social media, I wouldn't have known that about him. Sure, our paths would likely cross professionally, but he wouldn't have sent a solely professional contact an e-mail dedicated to how he mastered another song on GH3. But he might provide that info on a Facebook status. The in-formal knowledge we have of people makes people seem more like... yep, real people! It shows more of their personality and aids in developing trust.

3) Interaction - Social media provides a two-way opportunity to communicate across time and space. An organization that embraces this is demonstrating that they value the thoughts, and ideas of anyone who wants to share them. This "respect" for other's opinions encourages trust because trust is a two-way thing. It's hard to trust someone that chooses not to listen or respond.

So, please leave me a comment and perhaps we'll find a way to collaborate. And for those of you who were at Talent 2.0 conference in Toronto... Yes it's true... I am a FAR better Guitar Hero 3 player than Mike. :)

5 Social Computing Benefits that Adoption Rates Don't Show

Are you are promoting social computing in your organization and being questioned about the low "participation levels" or "adoption rates"? Well, here are 5 points that should help you explain that it's not just about the percentage of people that actively participate.


1. Thanks for Asking

Sometimes it's just being asked that matters! Even if people choose not to participate, it's still a choice. Have you noticed the term "employee engagement" showing up everywhere these days? The term happens to be the most common search phrase leading people to my blog.

To engage employees means that you actually need to start by asking for their input. Even if they don't have specific input right now, that's fine. What you don't want to do is incent the wrong behaviours such as "gaming" a system to meet an objective. Providing opportunity is an implicit benefit of social computing. It demonstrates respect for the employees input and leads to a more engaged and committed organization.


2. La crème de la crème

A favourite book of mine is, "Good to Great" by Jim Collins. In the book, Jim explains that the role of leadership is NOT to motivate. If you have to motivate and convince people to do something, you're already starting in a bad position. Instead, if you have the right people and the right opportunity they will be "self-motivated". The role of leadership then becomes making sure you don't let people become "de-motivated". Jim goes on to explain the importance of making sure you find the right people. But how do you do this?

One way is to leverage the power of self-organization. For example, we run on-line "jam" sessions and invite 1000's of people to participate. Not everyone will, but those that do tend to be "passionate" and willing to take on accountability. And those concepts that rise to the top tend to be well thought through. The point... Even if you only have 10% participation. It's likely that the 10% you want!


3. Needle in a Haystack

Mass collaboration isn't about simple consensus. It also provides greater opportunity to find a few gems by casting a much bigger net. 60 Minutes had a great story on John Kanzius , a retired Radio and TV engineer who's invention may ultimately cure cancer. He has zero medical training and his unorthodox method involves the use of radio waves and nano-particles! He likely would never have been invited to any discussions on the topic. And it is only that his own very unfortunate situation has inspired him to look for an answer. Is there a way to purposefully stimulate more creative ideas?

I often hear people ask for "out of the box thinking" and if they truly want that, we apply different techniques. One of the techniques is simply to bring in experts in different fields than the topic we're actually working on. Why? To drive a completely different perspective on a given situation. Hopefully leading to a breakthrough. Social computing allows us to invite many many people each with different views and perspectives. Even if you don't have high participation, if you get that one breakthrough idea, it's all worth it!


4. One for All

A well designed social computing environment encourages interactive participation of the right people. For all of you "executives" that believe this is something you let "employees" do but aren't actually engaged in yourself, you are missing a huge opportunity. The opportunity to drive "trust" and "confidence" throughout the organization.

When I see an executive who "gets it", the effect can be amazing. You can read a conversation that is authentic, public an non-hierarchical. The participants in the conversation see a "real" side of an executive whom they otherwise may never have even met. But what if it's only a handful of people engaged in the discussion? That's fine. Because even if the participation level is low, the folks that read and view the conversation also benefit. The readers will also see an genuine conversation which aids in building trust and confidence in your organization.


5. Back to The Future

By the time I write this blog, I hope many people will read it and benefit from it. I also hope many people will discuss it. But realistically, I know that it's value may really be in the future. Unless you need this information now, it may be just an interesting (which I also hope) article. In the future, when someone really needs help in this area, it will be available to them, and perhaps will help them articulate the additional benefits in leveraging social computing.

This pertains to your organization as well. Even if you don't have immediate participation, the conversation is not time bound, and employees can still join the conversation even into the future. They can understand the context (how we came to decisions we did) in addition to the ultimate decisions. This depth of understanding helps ensure smarter, better, more complete decisions can be made moving forward.

So the next time someone challenges you, that your social computing endeavours just aren't "engaging enough people", you can explain that the full value of social computing and enterprise 2.0 is more than the number of people fully interacting. These 5 real benefits just can't be determined by some magic "participation rate".