Technology, meet collaboration management

By | December 8, 2011
I wonder when tech companies are going to pick up on this: Platforms focusing on social interaction are characterized by the type of interaction and content that they attract, not by the technical features and specifications that they offer.

True: A site does need to provide tools to enable users to interact with each other, and enable for community-identified leaders to moderate discussion, and take care about data privacy, security, ease-of-use, and everything else that might get a user annoyed. But these tools themselves don't sell the site – once these tools are in place, it's a matter of marketing to the right 'beta test' group in order to get the type of interaction that the platform owner is looking for. And the ability to manage this – the ability to create platforms that enable collaboration management – is a rather interdiciplinary sociology + machine interface field that technology companies still need to recognize the value of, acquire, and get right. There's a big future market out there…

Reshared post from +Siegfried Hirsch

Great article about Google+

It is not so much about friends, but about knowledge. Yesterday in our hangout, we had a discussion going in that direction too. FB is where you have all your known friends, but in Google+ you find interesting people, that you want to talk to and learn from them or educate them.

Read!
via +Martin Koser

Why Use Google+: It’s What You Know, Not Who You Know
Why use Google+? The question has dogged Google’s social networking site since its launch in June.

3 thoughts on “Technology, meet collaboration management

  1. Phil Ashman

    Oh my usual rant about filtering/subscribing to reduce noise in feeds…;)

    As far as focused interest based discussion, I was thinking more of a dynamic list. I guess I would consider it similar to a well organized stream or a unique interface with which to dial in on dynamically updated discussions or topics. I don't think a search box or saved searches are really enough for these specific use cases or mashups.

    Reply
  2. Sophie Wrobel

    +Phil Ashman What are the main tool improvements you're waiting for? I agree there's a strong use case for a mashup focusing on cross-platform consolidated interest discussions, just not sure how it should look. A list itself would be somewhat lacking – would probably need to be more of the Google+ kind of incoming stream, as Google's stream does encourage interaction, whereas a list is more of a static directory.

    Reply
  3. Phil Ashman

    Just waiting for the tools to improve..;). I commented somewhere else yesterday on how cool it would be to have a mash-up of Goodreads and Google+. Imagine a list of active hangouts/discussions of everyone talking about whatever book you are reading. Takes the book club idea to a whole new level!

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.