Quick Upload

Loading...
Flash Player 9 (or above) is needed to view slideshows. We have detected that you do not have it on your computer.To install it, go here
Post to Twitter Post to Twitter
Share on Facebook Share on Facebook
Post to Blogger Post to Blogger
Myspace Hi5 Friendster Xanga LiveJournal Facebook Blogger Tagged Typepad Freewebs BlackPlanet gigya icons
« Prev Comments 1 - 7 of 7 Next »
  • sparkbouy
    sparkbouy said 2 weeks Edit Delete

    @sbg00sbg Social Networking in the enterprise is about delivering measurable value to the organisation. The object isn't to get the highest number its to get a ratio that demonstrates that the system is providing some value to those who are using the tools, including contributors and consumers. It also has to make sense.

    If I were deploying IBM SN tools to an organisation of 10,000 users and only one person was contributing but 10,000 were getting benefit then that might be enough to justify the SN investment. Although in reality further investigation would be carried as to why this was the case.

    The RoC is the most basic 'idea' in regards to measuring value - there are others. I think it is a good starting point but it is a long way away from a unified theory of SN value creation!

    Please keep commenting and thinking about this subject area with a view to refine and extend the subject of measuring the value of SN. Note that if we want enterprises to use/buy SN tools then we have to give them more than 'you just have to get it' as the reason.

  • peterreiser
    peterreiser said 3 weeks Edit Delete

    Hi Sparkbouy,
    Thanks for your feedback Re: Community Equity
    Quote
    'm a bit concerned about the model you are using to calculate return on contribution as it seems to me as though it is supportive of a 'banking' model of knowledge (or shall I say information transition), which is not what social networking is about. If the objective is to get a higher number, then that would mean that less contributors and more readers would be an ideal model, which goes against the principles of social networking. I'm most probably missing something and would be glad for you to point it out to me.'
    Our goal is to build a social VALUE system (not a frequent flyer program model) were the system automatically evaluates Contribution (input) Participation (feedback/reuse) Value of people,content and communities
    So we honor not just contribution but also participation. As example - usually 10-15% of a community regularly contribute but the others are usually 'just consuming' content. That's fine as long a consumer provides feedback trough rating/comments etc. Also our Community Equity services have some pattern matching logic e.g. a user can contribute 100s of documents but its only counts when some else has viewed/downloaded it.
    Summary our goal is to build a qualitative value driven system versus quantitative ..
    or as one of our CTO's recently sad :
    'I rather prefer to have on artifact been downloaded 100 times then 100 artifacts once '
    :-)

  • sbg00sbg
    sbg00sbg said 3 weeks Edit Delete

    I'm a bit concerned about the model you are using to calculate return on contribution as it seems to me as though it is supportive of a 'banking' model of knowledge (or shall I say information tranmission), which is not what social networking is about. If the objective is to get a higher number, then that would mean that less contributors and more readers would be an ideal model, which goes against the principles of social networking. I'm most probably missing something and would be glad for you to point it out to me.

  • peterreiser
    peterreiser said 1 month Edit Delete

    Interesting thoughts ... have a look at http://blogs.sun.com/peterreiser/entry/community_equity_s...

  • khuffman
    khuffman said 1 month Edit Delete

    Return on contributions/value of social networking. Great ideas! Thank you for sharing.

  • sparkbouy
    sparkbouy said 1 month Edit Delete

    great to get your comments. I like your idea of connectors and you are right that there are a number of variables associated with 'value'. While we will have generic measures I think we will be producing unique calculations based upon the customers challenges.

  • mtkdante
    mtkdante said 1 month Edit Delete

    Hi Sparkbouy,
    first: thanks for exposing your idea! really, it's good to know people is working out what the real value o possible revenues for social networking are.

    Now, some suggestions:
    What if you consider also how many connections have the people that benefits from a resource? I say that you can bring into this calculation the number of connections. It's not the same a 'connector' person or a 'referent with authority on a topic' or a 'leader' in a social network. Have in mind that, for example, connectors, have more influence. Influence should be taken into account. And if you have one influencer getting benefit, most probably thing is that this person would spread the word, making some other users 'get benefits'.
    Well, i'm getting even more into this social-networking-thing each day. I'm a system analyst. Hope this help.
    And good job!

Add a comment If you have a SlideShare account, login to comment; otherwise comment as a guest.

    Measuring Social Software

    from sparkbouy, 1 month ago Add as contact

    1762 views | 7 comments | 11 favorites | 8 embeds (Stats)

    Desc: A short presentation looking at ratios to evaluate the success of social networking projects.

    Embed customize close
     

    Categories

    Business & Mgmt

    Tags

    Groups/Events

    More Info

    This slideshow is Public

    Views: 1762 Comments: 7 Favorites: 11 Downloads: 84

    View Details: 1674 on Slideshare 88 from embeds
    Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate

    Flag as inappropriate

    Select your reason for flagging this slideshow as inappropriate.

    If needed, use the feedback form to let us know more details.

    Slideshow Transcript

    1. Slide 1: Evaluating the Success of an IBM Collaboration and Social Networking project Chris Sparshott BEng (Hons) MBCS CITP
    2. Slide 2: What is the business value of collaboration and social networking?
    3. Slide 3: That is a difficult question.
    4. Slide 4: …or is it?
    5. Slide 5: Before Production
    6. Slide 6: What is the business value of a telephone? Should we How does the monitor the telephone help number of the process that calls? the employee is executing? Reduction in other media forms e.g. less physical mail
    7. Slide 7: Business process approach I Go to workshop attendees with a Identify critical business processes survey that asks them to make that impact SLA’s and target the teams estimates about the critical tasks they which support those processes. perform. (Base line) (heavy knowledge workers are best) Implement Collaboration and Social Use surveying and analysis to design Networking Tools new work practise for those teams / individuals. (Knowledge Management) Go back to workshop attendees in 6 month intervals with a survey that asks Monitor and report results monthly them to make estimates about the critical tasks they perform and see how the results compare May need additional reporting tools / facilities
    8. Slide 8: Business process approach II Can not assume viral growth will occur from the outset. Usage may stabilise amongst early adopters and those desperate for change (Gen Y). Universal adoption may need a “push” reference company “Culture” team. May need to prescribe some behaviours to ensure uptake and benefit to the business
    9. Slide 9: After Production
    10. Slide 10: Did the project succeed over time?
    11. Slide 11: Introducing Return On Contribution
    12. Slide 12: Return On Contribution is a ratio of benefit divided by cost Benefit Return on Contribution (ROC) = Cost *No direct monetary costs the metric is therefore based on people *Assume employees make appropriate and strategic use of available collaborative resources Number of people who benefit from a resource Return on Contribution (ROC) = Number of people who create or contribute to that resource
    13. Slide 13: An example: Dogear (Social Bookmarking within Lotus Connections) Measure Social-Bookmarking Consumers 10896 Bookmark -Originators 4213 Return on Contribution 2.59 (Consumers) Consumers 10896 Return on Contribution (ROC) = = = 2.59 Originators 4213 * Some consumers may also be originators
    14. Slide 14: What does the number 2.59 mean? Bookmark- 2.59 consumers benefit originator from the work of each bookmarks a bookmark-originator resource
    15. Slide 15: Hang on! Some people are both originators and consumers & some people are pure consumers (Lurkers) - value decreases as participation decreases Measure Social-Bookmarking Consumers 10896 Bookmark -Originators 4213 ROC(Consumers) 2.59 Originators and Consumers 3654 Lurkers (consumers-only) 6683 Originators-only 559 ROC(Lurkers) 1.59 Consumers 6683 Return on Contribution (ROC) = = = 1.59 Originators 3654+559
    16. Slide 16: ROC can help us understand the impact of these tools on employee participation and the organisations culture change
    17. Slide 17: Metrics can support the success of the tools within the business.
    18. Slide 18: Next?
    19. Slide 19: Can I help? * Business Value Assessments * Web 2.0 Consulting Chris Sparshott (Sparkbouy) sparkbouy@gmail.com Portfolio http://www.slideshare.net/sparkbouy/slideshows IBM chris_sparshott@nz.ibm.com

    Feed RSS

    What's new?

    © 2008 SlideShare Inc. All Rights Reserved