April 5, 2006
on becoming more viral in the offline world…
Had an interesting conversation with Anu Gupta yesterday, all to do with how blogs make people more viral, even in the offline world.
Take HR, which is Anu’s profession. I know very little about HR. What I know about HR could could probably be written on the back of a postcard.
So let’s say I’m talking to some hotshot at a cocktail party, and he mentions he’s looking to hire someone in HR.
As I know nothing about HR, nor do I know anyone in that profession very well, in the pre-blog world I would probably have just gone, “Sorry, can’t help you”, and quickly have changed the subject.
But with blogs I can tell the hotshot, “Well, there’s this guy named Anu Gupta that works in HR. Don’t know much about him. Met him once or twice before. Nice guy. Seems pretty bright. Here’s his link. Maybe talk to him etc.“
Suddenly a connection between the hotshot and Anu is made, without the bridge (i.e. me) having had to risk any of his (my) social capital, via making the recommendation.
In other words, the better your blog, the less qualified I have to be in order to recommend you. The easier and less socially risky it is for me to spread your story. Because all I have to do is give the guy your link, and hopefully your blog does the rest.
And if the same is true for everyone else who knows you, suddenly, like Anu, you’ve become a lot more viral.
Which surely is a good thing, right?
[Update: Roy says “it’s how blogs work in the background.” Well put.]
"Hugh's Daily Cartoon" Newsletter.
A new cartoon sent out every weekday morning to your inbox [RSS version here.].
A wee chuckle to start your day off right etc.
/What I know about HR could could probably be written on the back of a postcard./
Ah, Hugh
Ahh — the perils of keeping two blogs, and only updating one frequently !
Thanks for the link, Hugh — if you get a moment, could you point to http://www.scalefree.info instead ?
no worries, anu, already fixed.
nice seeing you again yesterday =)
test
Hugh…
Your spam filter is rather stringent! I’m trying to post a reply to your post, and it’s not letting me.
Bah!!!
Go check out: http://witstrainees.blogspot.com/2006/04/hugh-macleod-on-how-blogging-makes-you.html
Blue skies
love
Roy
Hey — don’t forget your regular comment makers ! And try http://www.theengagingbrand.com.…best HR around…waiting for your call Hugh ! Though I think you can teach us a thing or two.… are you going to do us a business card for the site ?
John, sure, a book would’ve worked. That is, if Anu had written one. And if the hotshot felt like visiting the bookstore and whipping his credit card out.
A much more complicated (i.e. less viral) process than giving out a link to a blog.
‘In order words the better you blog the less qualified you have to be’ to get a job!
We all know there a very large element of ‘who you know not what you know’ and the blogosphere does nothing to solve this, in fact it makes it ‘who knows you’.
Yes, Ed, life is unfair. Heh.
Hey Hugh…
Thanks for posting the link, dude. Much appreciated.
Blue skies
love
Roy
This is just diffusion theory. The only difference is that technology (blogs) are growing your social network. I don’t understand why blogs are being heralded as an innovation that will change the world. They are only an innovation that increases the volume/momentum of already existing mechanisms.
If you recommend the blog of someone who turns out to be a dud, then your social capital will be affected just as much as in pre blog days.
Moreover, with easier connectivity, the risk of this happening increases and we all know that the “pissed off-ness” of having been given a bad steer will linger than the joy of receiving a good one.
Which leads us back to the age old issue of who’s judgement to value. Blogging hasn’t changed social networking, it’s just mulitplied it.
Hi John…
Nah… not true. Your social capital DOESN’T suffer, because the amount of investment it takes to check out someone’s blog is minimal.
In other words, if I suggest a blog to you, and you take a look at it, it’ll take you at most a minute to decide whether or not to keep reading.
Because it’s only a minute or so, you haven’t sunk large amounts of energy finding out about the person you’ve just looked at.
It’s like looking at a trading card. Who cares if you don’t like what you see? You won’t hold that against me.
Blue skies
love
Roy
I disagree with John…
John 0, it’s not what blogs do per se that is the story. the story is about how cheap and easy they are, compared to other alternatives.
Of course your social capital suffers — it’s based upon the quality of your recommendations and not the amount of effort I have to go to in order to check them out. If I have to make a huge effort, then yes I may be proportionately more pissed off with you, but that doesn’t imply that I will not be pissed off with you if I only have to make a little effort. Bottom line, your recommendation wasted my time (how ever little of it) and did not improve my situation, therefore your social capital has fallen.
Yes, I would like to make myself more viral too, get others on board as well. Geoff and I have just had a long chat about you, are your ears red? It would be good to know what you think of my blog.
I shall keep trying to get politicians on board — if they dare.