Word Of Business

Friday 8 August 2014

COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT AND USER ENGAGEMENT Twitter, Facebook, Google+, Whatsapp, Reddit, e-learning, Blackboard, Moodle, BlikBoo are all online communities. Have you ever wondered what an online community actually is? There are several theories out there that explain this environment in more detail and I'd like to introduce you to the two following ones:

1) Community of Practice & 2) Community of Inquiry

Community of Practice (CoP)

Community of practise is in simple words ‘turning conversations into collaboration’. Etienne Wenger is a co-author of the book ‘Cultivating communities of practice: a guide to managing knowledge’ (2002). He is known as a social learning theorist and researcher.

There are three fundamental elements that form knowledge management strategy[1]:

Domains- identity of the community which is established by area of knowledge. Ettiene demonstrates that community of practice is often misunderstood concept. This theory is about forming personal network but with a goal of exploration and development of the area or field of practise/expertise.

Community- personal network that belong to the domain. This means online communities are only the ‘tools’ that enable community to develop relationship among each other, share knowledge and address problems. In order to start this process, all three elements have to meet.

Practice- ‘knowledge’ or user-generated content that is shared on the domain by the community.. The content should be explored in depth as that has a power to accumulate practical knowledge to change community behaviour in ability to act either collectively or individually.

The only important characteristics or requirement for each member of the community is knowledge. Full cycle of the activities within the doughnut has to be fulfilled and integrated in order to enhance mutual engagement between the community members.

Ettiene demonstrates that people organize their social presence as a place where all can engage and learn.

He uses the term ‘learning partnership’ as described in ‘New pedagogies’ by Michael Fullan, which in Community of Practice means if people are engaged with others in the same practise by sharing what they’re experiencing and learning they can recognise themselves as partners. Engaging in a similar practise gives them a sense of recognition as practitioners through ‘learning contract’ that has been established between them. Community of practice establishes on-going relationship among people who have a potential of helping each other when they need to. Ettiene describes having a challenge (or problem) becomes curriculum of the learning partnership between community members (e.g. confusion leads a community member to ask specific question to other community members and therefore resolve it or see solutions from different perspective). When other members of the community join conversation, there is all of the sudden knowledge-sharing experience or knowledge-creation, in other words, effective learning. Very important point is that Communities of Practice (blogs, discussion forums, file-sharing) are only tools for the learning partnership; they are not substitute to Community of Practice. Therefore, knowledge-sharing process is only successful when community members are engaged in producing content and subsequently establish social partnership among each other. This creates sense of belonging and identity that members share. ‘Knowing is not merely an individual experience, but one of exchanging and contributing to the knowledge of a community.’ (Etienne Wenger, 2000)[2] Ettienne interprets this quote as human communities accumulating their knowledge and learning experience. This means that the theory Community of Practice applies not just only to an online environment but also everyday life situations where people meet and exchange their knowledge in a field of expertise they’re all connected to.

Let's apply this theory into the higher education- the main reason why students should interact with each other is because of stimulation as every field/ course they’re currently completing is too complex to cover for an individual at any academic level. Members of any community will only use a resource if they find personal value in participating. ‘Knowledge shouldn’t be in isolation but in constant development’ (Ettienne, 2002)[3].

One of the most important notes is that community members need guidance or support to function optimally, and this is only possible through:

1 1) Community leader who communicate with students internally within an online community of the domain or offline in a class.
2)Technological infrastructure that enables members of the community to communicate on regular basis and most efficiently.

The work of a student produces two kinds of results: knowledge result and grades/rewards. Lecturer has to be in charge of stewardship and provide students with a usable knowledge and therefore contribute to constant development so each student will be able to share the knowledge with others and expand their own capabilities. The key is highlighting importance of a question asked or giving a positive feedback (validation) that shows students right direction in their analytical thinking in a discussion.

This theory still doesn’t clearly address problem proposal questions as it describes only the important parts of a knowledge-sharing process. It demonstrates the process of participating rather than motivational factors that might encourage participants to interact with each other.

Community of Inquiry

Community of Inquiry is a theory that describes whole communication flow on a platform, and either potential for regular interactions of users or gaps preventing users to interact. The theory of Garrison & Anderson (2005)[4] explains potential inactivity of users in depth and contains all fundamental elements that meet users’ expectations in any type of an online community environment.

Garrison & Anderson in their theory Community of Inquiry demonstrate that there are three pillars which drive successful e-learning experience:

1) Social presence, 2) Teaching presence, and 3) Cognitive presence.[5] Each element plays a significant role for improving student satisfaction level in online learning.

Strong teaching presence fosters efficiency of the cognitive presence. There are three essential parts of the teaching presence:

· Instructional design and organization (establishing curriculum, macro-level communication, designing methods)

· Facilitating discourse (encouraging, acknowledging or reinforcing user contributions)

· Direct instruction (presenting questions or content, focusing discussion on specific topic/issue, identifying misconceptions, and explanatory feedback).

Strong teaching presence also means that community leader and all members would initiate discussion with an initial activity that might be engaging for others to discuss further and establish peer-driven discussion.

Garrison demonstrates that social presence is group of individuals who share common interests and have personal relationships so the interactions will be then easier to happen within an online community.

Social presence[6] consists of three categories:

· Affective (being able to express emotions, feelings and beliefs by means of technology)

· Cohesive (in other words group cohesion- individuals contributing to perform a task on an intellectual level with guidance from a teaching presence)

· Open communication (building and sustaining commitment to the community- referring or quoting from others, asking questions, expressing agreement/disagreement).

Cognitive presence is a group of individuals who discuss and analyse certain events. There are four phases of cognitive presence:

· Triggering event- problem, issue or task that members are intended to discuss or work on as designed by the instructor or community leader.

· Exploration- members start talking and discussing a problem or topic (feedback, brainstorming, exchanging info and different ideas)

· Integration- members discuss ideas or topics proposed by an individual or community leader and try to reach consensus and find relationship that reach a group agreement

· Resolution- testing of the solution outside of an online space.

The theory Community of Inquiry also focuses on knowledge management, but compared to Community of Practice, it explains communication flow on the platform more in depth. The model highlights that teaching presence needs to provide social presence with means of cognitive presence to encourage community members to participate in an online collaborative learning.

[1] See (Ivey Business Journal, 2004) ‘Knowledge management as a doughnut: Shaping your knowledge strategy through communities of practice’

[2] See Jayant R., Singh J., (2008)

[3] See (Ivey Business Journal, 2004) ‘Knowledge management as a doughnut: Shaping your knowledge strategy through communities of practice’

[4] See Daspit J., D'Souza D., ‘Academy oí Management Learning & Education’(2012)

[5] See (Journal of Consumer Research, 2009) ‘Pragmatic Learning Theory: An Inquiry-Action Framework for Distributed Consumer Learning in Online Communities’

[6] See (Jayanti R., Singht, 2009) J. ‘Pragmatic Learning Theory: An Inquiry-Action Framework for Distributed Consumer Learning in Online Communities’

Monday 21 July 2014

Nir Eyal & his Hooked Model
Online Community management

Nir Eyal’s Hook model and Fogg’s Behavioural Model

Hook model reflects on main factors that have a power to establish the habitual product use. American author and entrepreneur, Nir Eyal[1], in his book ‘Hooked’ published in December 2013 describes the process in which success of the company solely relies on offering products that are highly engaging to users and where users typically engage other users.

Nir Eyal wrote the book Hooked as a reflection of Fogg’s Behaviour Model[2]. BJ Fogg, Director of the Persuasive Tech Lab at Stanford University created a behaviour theory for persuasive design in 2009 called Fogg’s Behaviour Model (FBM)[3]. He initiated the scientific research and experiments to show that technology can change human behaviour in a predictable way. This theory is designed to better understand human behaviour, analysis of persuasive technologies and fundamentals that drive motivation.

BJ Fogg demonstrates that human behaviour is a product of three elements: motivation, triggers and ability. If human behaviour doesn’t occur, it means that one of the elements is missing as all the three elements have to meet at the same time. This means user needs to be sufficiently motivated, has the ability and be triggered to perform an intended behaviour. The Fogg’s Behaviour Model together with Hook model might help community management to access which psychological element of the users is lacking to perform the target behaviour which is using online communities for enhancing collaborative learning.

Factors underlying behaviour change[4]

Main influences of user’s motivational level: 1) Pain/ Pleasure, 2) Social acceptance/ Rejection, 3) Fear/ Hope, 4) Confusion/ Certainty.

Main influences of the user ability:

1) How much Time does the action take?

2) How much Money is involved?

3) Non-routine- repeated habits or practice that lead to progress or targeted goals of the user.

4) How much Physical effort is required?

5) Brain cycle- The harder something is to understand the less likely it is for that behaviour to occur.

6) Social deviance- referrals, word of mouth.

Triggers can be any form of communication that lead to informing a potential or existing user about product or service benefits and persuade them to follow call-to-action.

Nir Eyal suggests the main two questions to be asked by any enterpreneur: What’s the habit-forming potential of the product?, and if the product has the fundamental elements- How can we improve upon those fundamental elements so the product will be even more engaging and habit-forming?

Nir describes the path where behaviours are individual actions which lead to routines, and routines lead to habits. The main goal of every company is to develop product that will be used on habitual basis. The book ‘Hooked’ demonstrates that some products provide solutions to users’ discomfort, but they shouldn’t be designed to be an addiction. Some products can profoundly change our behaviour, and the best example would be Facebook. When people feel lonely or bored, one of their solution might be logging to their Facebook accounts and chat with their virtual friends. Difference between addiction and habit is that habit is formed based on frequency and attitude change. If the firms want to reach unprompted user engagement, they should worry about process, not the outcome. This is crucial for a start-up business, as constant data evaluation might lead to the right decisions within a product development based on customer interactions. Nir in his book ‘Hooked’ introduces a new theory called Hook model which means an experience that connects user’s problem to company’s solution. A Hook consists of four elements: trigger, reward, action and investment. Trigger face is the first step of a Hook model. There are external and internal triggers. External triggers are cues of our action (e.g. Click this, Share, Tweet, word-of-mouth). In today’s ever changing consumer lifestyles and business environment, it is difficult to reach company’s target audience and that’s because of less real estate to rely on ‘call-to-action’. However, external triggers can be optimized through growth hacking tactics that are discussed under the section ‘Growth Hacking’ in my previous post. Nir demonstrates that what marketers don’t often consider is the internal triggers to be the part of their product development strategy. Only companies that are able to manage their focus will be successful in designing longer term habits/products. Internal triggers are in simple words human behaviour (e.g. emotions, routines, and lifestyle). In my understanding, internal triggers are emotions or routines associated with the user’s mind to which users respond with certain actions- habits. Nir Eyal demonstrates that emotions dictate our habits, so therefore marketers should know what is the user itch to form those habits upon their technological product. Triggers have a power to make product or service habit-forming and negative emotions are considered to be very powerful internal triggers.

Other elements of a Hook are action and reward. Nir describes action as an ‘anticipation of reward’. This simply means fulfilment of the user dissatisfaction. There is certain trigger behind every consumer using a product, either positive or negative.

The action face is simplest behaviour in anticipation of the reward- ‘call-to-action’, such as search on Google, play button on YouTube etc. Reward face is linked to the brain reward system, that is by Nir explained as stimulation of Nucleus Accumbens. Stimulation of this part of the brain is caused by various factors described as a ‘stress of a desire’ (anticipation, cravings). ‘Nucleus Accumbens becomes more active in anticipation of the reward.’ When we fulfil the object of a desire, that part of the brain will become less active. Nir therefore highlights that marketers have to identify their users’ itch in order to provide them with a product that has a power to satisfy their cravings. The unknown is fascinating therefore what usually social network notification system does is to provide the user with only part of the message that will increase their focus through the variability and complete an indented call-to-action immediately. Product with a high degree of variability, such as Facebook, might fulfil the internal triggers based on the user’s last activity/investment (e.g. how many likes have I received since the last time I logged in to my account?). There are three types of variability: 1) Tribe- social reward (empathetic joy, partnership, competition, cooperation), 2) Hunt- search for the information needed, 3) Intrinsic motivators (mastery, self-achievement). Entrepreneurs try to give users what they came for, but leave them for wanting more. The final part of a Hook model is the investment face. Investment face is about a value creation that might lead the user to perform the next action and bring them to the first face of a Hook model (Internal triggers). This is understood as, more content the user creates more likely he/she is to use the product on habitual basis.

5.3.1. Applying Hook model

In habit-forming technologies, the model starts with triggers, then action, rewards and investment. Internal triggers are associated with the user’s mind (e.g. misunderstanding course material and fear of failure). However, internal triggers can be considered as users’ unconscious cognition (e.g. community members are not fully aware of their existing internal triggers). Nir noted that all marketers should ask one question: ‘How do we build better products to help people knowing this information of their internal triggers?’