Sims Learning Connections

Since writing my first post regarding Twitter, I continue to refine my own usage pattern and think about “why Twitter?” — what is it exactly that makes it so addictive, or perhaps even so useful? Including within the enterprise?

First, I thought about communication alternatives: (with a loose attempt at some clustering within the list)

• Face-to-face, one-to-one, unscheduled — the “water cooler”
• Face-to-face, one-to-one or small group, scheduled (e.g. the typical physical meeting)
• Audio or web-conference, small group (e.g. for a virtual team meeting)
• Face-to-face, large group, scheduled (e.g. presentation or lecture)
• Virtual, large group, scheduled (e.g. webcast)
• Land line phone, one-to-one
• Mobile phone, one-to-one
• Voicemail, one-to-one
• Voicemail, broadcast, one-to-many
• Instant message, one-to-one
• Instant message, broadcast
• Micro-blog (e.g. Twitter)
• email
• Mailing list (e.g. listserver)
• Discussion functionality within collaborative workspace (e.g. SharePoint)
• Traditional blog
• Traditional print mass media (newspapers, magazines, white papers, journal articles, direct marketing, books, etc. — many variations, with various degrees of the parameters outlined below)
• Intra or inter-company print media (e.g. the design document, the marketing plan)
• Wikis
• Traditional web pages (static, or essentially static, internet or intranet)
• The good ol’ fashion snailmail letter

Next I thought about communication parameters (as with the previous list, I imagine that I’ve left off at least a few critical points…please use comments to suggest important additions):

• How much fidelity? (in the sense of the likelihood of the intended meaning being in-fact the meaning absorbed)
• To what degree personal or personalized?
• How formal or informal?
• Synchronous or asynchronous? With some shades in between, e.g. for text (SMS) and instant messaging, depending on the particular usage scenario.
• Mobility? (e.g. can I do it during a cab ride?)
• Supports non-verbal communication?
• Is there a potential network effect? (i.e. does the value likely increase as more join the communication?)
• Opportunity for feedback? (e.g. replies, or opportunities for questions and clarification)
• Likelihood of building new connections? (echo to network effect)
• Facilitates multi-tasking? (i.e. can it be done during a meeting or conference call? — the crackberry under the conference room table.)
• How much overhead? (i.e. is it quick to do? Natural and easy to learn?)
• How much information volume? (i.e. War and Peace at 1000+ pages, or?)
• Is there a recording, is there a way to review the communication later?

Applying these parameters to Twitter:

• Surprisingly the fidelity is pretty good. Unlike with email, with only 140 characters available, there isn’t a whole lot of room to get yourself in trouble. Plus, it is highly public, which also contributes to keeping the flaming down.
• Surprisingly personal via author pictures, personal information (e.g. “having dinner with my daughter”), and at some fashion personalized to my current of potential Followers (e.g. in the sense of “if you are Following me, then you might be interested in this link”)
• Very informal (in general, a good thing in my world view)
• Asynchronous, while still being fast-moving, e.g. for breaking news
• Highly mobile and cross-platform
• Gets a zero for non-verbal (hmm, a micro-video-blogging parallel to Twitter?)
• Has a network effect, both at scale of the application overall and for an individual’s Followers
• Limited opportunity for feedback, although does support “@ replies” and also via links handing off to blogs where more extensive feedback is possible
• Strong likelihood of building new connections. Your mileage might differ; however, I have “discovered” and started to connect with interesting people that to date I had missed via my blog and social networks.
• Facilitates multi-tasking? — yes, primarily due to the next point
• Twitter is quick and light-weight, low overhead
• Low information volume; however, high link density…leading to increased information volume
• Twitter is recorded in the sense of being able to search and find prior tweets (hmm, a good thing or bad?)

For now, I’ll leave it to the reader to pick other communication methods and compare. Still, even without the rigor of a full spreadsheet, I’ll go out on the limb and claim that Twitter (and other micro-blogging applications) do fill a unique niche untouched by other channels — a niche worth exploring within forward looking enterprises — while still very thankfully not being the be-all to communications.

Further Reading:

• Twitter Is The Tech Water Cooler, ReadWriteWeb, 19 March 2008
• What do I need Twitter for, anyway?, Andy Piper, 1 November 2007
• Enterprise Twitter, Curt Monash, 11 February 2008 (one of several entry points to this discussion)
• Making the Case for Twitter in the Enterprise, Ann All, 18 February 2008 (another entry point)
• Twitter- Can It Add Value In The Workplace?, Melina Murray, 21 February 2008 (a third entry point)
• More on Twitter and Why It is Good for You and Your Enterprise, Bill Ives, 13 September 2007 (a much earlier entry point with some still remaining unique points)
• Plus, the Further Reading in my earlier post regarding Twitter, 8 March 2008
• (added 30 March) Matt Moore’s 2×2 matrix that positions email, blogs, instant messaging, and Twitter. In a single 2×2 Matt captures at least 75% of what I was working through above. Nice.