15 Days, 15 Seconds
At dinner last Friday with Beth Kanter, the scholar of social media and tech for nonprofits, used the phrase “a solo in a social media world.” That phrase has stuck with me. I wonder whether social media is changing the relationships I have with my friends?
Beth’s statement came at about the same time that Maki sent me to a study that explains the nature of relationships.
Some friendships are short and fleeting, while others may last years. Although a wide variety of factors go into determining the strength of our relationships, the long-lasting ones seem to share a number of the same characteristics, according to a recent study of a cell phone network.
Lasting relationships have these things in common. The most important of these is reciprocity.
- The more often we connect with friends in a 15-day period, the stronger our relationship will be.
- Most strong ties between two people lasted for just one 15-day interval. Only 20% of relationships lasted longer than a year.
- The strongest factor in lasting relationships is reciprocity — returning a phone call.
It’s a simple thing. When someone calls, writes, comments, links, or asks for help, do we respond or do we let it ride? Lasting relationships last because we are persistent in nurturing them.
By knowing the characteristics of persistence, the researchers could look at the features of the network for the first 15 days, and predict what the network would look like in the future.
Now we have access to a world of online and offline relationships, but we still only have so much time for reciprocity. Does social networking put us in danger of making vast communities of fast 15-day friends — folks we meet today and hardly know in a year? Is social networking causing us to neglect the reciprocity that made our relationships last?
Social networking offers us access to start and spark incredible new relationships. People connect, relate, and do business, who would otherwise never have met. Together we accomplish, build, create, innovate, solve, fix, and nurture. Some of us even fall in love and get married. Social media can have powerful, important, and lasting effects.
BUT, a 140 character touch within 15 seconds isn’t the same as a conversation within 15 days.
Friday, Rick Wolff said, “Someday, somebody’s REALLY going to plead for help on Twitter. . . . ”
Will that tweet be recognized?
Lasting Relationships in a Social Networking World — is that the new balance we have to find?
I don’t want to be a solo in a social media world.
–ME “Liz” Strauss
Work with Liz!!
Check out Models and Masterminds too
Ankesh Kothari says
June 17, 2008 at 8:35 AMThanks Liz.
I am one of those folks who is bad at keeping in touch with people online. Running 14 websites doesn’t leave time for a lot of frequent networking and reciprocating.
But one thing I’ve learned is how to “cement” relationships.
To connect the thought with an advertising formula…
Impact * Frequency = Success
If you can’t keep in touch with people frequently, make sure you make a big impact on them.
* Use offline snail mail instead of emails
* Surprise people with a goodie / unexpected help
ME Liz Strauss says
June 17, 2008 at 9:05 AMHi Ankesh!
You’re advice is great. You should turn it into a blog post. Everyone could use the reminders you’ve just left here. 🙂
Karin H. says
June 17, 2008 at 10:23 AMHi Liz
Isn’t it more the character of the social media-ist than the Social Media Network tool?
I know/have long lasting relationships on and off line – but only with persons who genuine want this relationship. I know/have a lot of fleeting relationships on and off line – networks come to mind.
IMHO the balance for successful long lasting relationships lays with the persons involved, not the ‘modern’ media. So I believe that a real cry for help on Twitter will be heard by many and reacted on.
(I’m a non-twitter btw)
Karin H. (Keep It Simple Sweetheart, specially in business)
ME Liz Strauss says
June 17, 2008 at 11:08 AMHi Karin!
The 140 characters run by quickly in a stream on Twitter. Do I thinkk the message would be heard? Yeah, I do, but I think it would depend most on who sent it.
A lone voice in a crowd is often overlooked and crowds don’t make for deep conversations.
I agree that the person controls the relationship results. But like, “perceived productivity,” in which we work hard on the wrong things . . . it’s easy to spend a lot of time collecting short-term friends via these tools.
Urs E. Gattiker says
June 17, 2008 at 11:49 AMThe problem I see with Twitter is the fact that too many people provide status reports and other chaff. As well Twitter is not scalable, so once you have beyond 150 people you follow and each one of them sends 2-3 status messages a day, how do you keep sane or avoid wasting too much time?
social media – ropes to skip – Twitter – FAQ #4
In the networked world we may have been given new opportunities to stay in touch. Nevertheless, to develop and maintain close ties little if anything has changed. And while Ankesh is right that snail mail helps and doing good for people builds relationships (social exchange theory says people have a counter, I do you good, I get something in return). However, there is only that much time we have.
ME Liz Strauss says
June 17, 2008 at 12:06 PMHi Urs!
Welcome and thanks for coming!
I’m with you about the signal to noise ratio on Twitter getting in the way of conversational goodness . . . As I said my worry is that we put our time in the wrong place when we’re all, already feeling time poor. 🙂
trista says
June 17, 2008 at 6:51 PMall bets are off if you’re a fair weather friend
Beth Kanter says
June 17, 2008 at 7:51 PMLiz,
The phrase “going solo” came from a conference with that name – it was one for freelancers
http://going-solo.net/programme/
It was a conference for freelancers – and I would have loved to gone for my own learning – having been freelance since 1984.
Anyway, I think I added “in a networked world” or maybe someone else used it.
But your post here about relationship is awesome …
Another thought is the idea about that dunbar number – the number of human relationships that one person can really manage – 150. So, how does social media change or enhance that?
Chris Marsden says
June 17, 2008 at 11:03 PMI think part of my problem with all this new media stuff and “friends” is that the reality of real relationships, reciprocity, and friendship still exist, but the language and perception have changed.
It used to be that some friends were temporary (as you mention). I had friends in school that were simply friends in school. School ended and several years passed and while we had memories to share, we were no longer friends in the same way we once were.
Today, the web gives a permanence to friendship that isn’t necessarily good. I have “friends” that I interacted with a few times a few years ago. Maybe I still follow their blog, maybe they still follow mine, but often we simply are a number on their facebook or myspace page. “We’re Friends”.
I do think there is some advantages to this, though. Even though some of my “friends” are simply someone I once knew, having them connected in real time allows for things that an old outdated address book does not.
Rick Wolff says
June 18, 2008 at 8:22 AMTo complete the thought: the topic of suicide came up when I joked about slitting my wrists if I don’t change jobs, a joke I kind of regretted making in light of the possibility that someone might actually make some desperate plea on Twitter. Would it be taken seriously? What could you do to prevent an act of desperation?
ME Liz Strauss says
June 18, 2008 at 10:18 AMHi Beth!
The more I think on it, the more I realize that from where I sit everyone is solo in a networked world . . . and getting moreso.
I know the 150 Dunbar number. They say that when our friends know each other, we might still keep in touch with each other. All I know is that more time than ever is spent saying “hello,” and less time is spent actually talking.
ME Liz Strauss says
June 18, 2008 at 10:22 AMHi Chris,
When I read your comment last night I was really taken by the thought that I’m “permanently linked” to some people I’ve friended. That’s another problem with these databases, they track whomever I once knew — even those I would care not to know anymore.
I’d always been looking at the side of those I would miss, but you made me think of those I wish were no longer there.
ME Liz Strauss says
June 18, 2008 at 10:23 AMHi Rick!
I think your twitter comment and your comment here are important ideas that we should be talking about. The problem is that we don’t hear each other in the concrete world either. Cries for help get ignored on every listening channel.
Beth Kanter says
June 18, 2008 at 11:17 AMI have been chewing on this post .. partially digested …
http://beth.typepad.com/beths_blog/2008/06/giving-and-rece.html
ME Liz Strauss says
June 18, 2008 at 7:04 PMRead your post, Beth.
It’s fabulous. Glad you included so much information along with your thoughts. 🙂
Thank you for ever word of it.