Social Software Design for One

InfoCloud Solutions, Inc. - 2007

Social Software Design for OneThomas Vander Wal

Presented to: DCampSouth2 June 2007 :: Raleigh, North Carolina

Who is Thomas?

Focus on the UserPerson

The Math of Social Software...

x+ ÷

∑∓-

∫∛

÷ ∑∛

∛

÷

÷

∑

∑

∫

∫

+

+

∓

∓∓

--

∛∛

++

÷

∫

Design with + not x, nor complex algorithms

x+ ÷

∑∓-

∫

∛

÷ ∑∛

∛

÷

÷

∑

∑

∫

∫

+

+

∓

∓∓

--

∛∛

++

÷

∫

1 Person

x+ ÷

∑∓-

∫

∛

÷ ∑∛

∛

÷

÷

∑

∑

∫

∫

+

+

∓

∓∓

--

∛∛

++

÷

∫

1 Service

x+ ÷

∑∓-

∫

∛

÷ ∑∛

∛

÷

÷

∑

∑

∫

∫

+

+

∓

∓∓

--

∛∛

++

÷

∫

1 “Friend”

x+ ÷

∑∓-

∫

∛

÷ ∑∛

∛

÷

÷

∑

∑

∫

∫

+

+

∓

∓∓

--

∛∛

++

÷

∫

+

x+ ÷

∑∓-

∫

∛

÷ ∑∛

∛

÷

÷

∑

∑

∫

∫

+

+

∓

∓∓

--

∛∛

++

÷

∫

+Person now sees “2”

- Self & Friend

x+ ÷

∑∓-

∫

∛

÷ ∑∛

∛

÷

÷

∑

∑

∫

∫

+

+

∓

∓∓

--

∛∛

++

÷

∫

Designer & Developer see this as doubling

use in the service

+

x+ ÷

∑∓-

∫

∛

÷ ∑∛

∛

÷

÷

∑

∑

∫

∫

+

+

∓

∓∓

--

∛∛

++

÷

∫

Designer & Developer see “3”

(2 people and the tool)

+

x+ ÷

∑∓-

∫

∛

÷ ∑∛

∛

÷

÷

∑

∑

∫

∫

+

+

∓

∓∓

--

∛∛

++

÷

∫

Designer & Developer usually see in multiples

x+ ÷

∑∓-

∫

∛

÷ ∑∛

∛

÷

÷

∑

∑

∫

∫

+

+

∓

∓∓

--

∛∛

++

÷

∫

+Person adds 1 more

“friend” & finds richness

x+ ÷

∑∓-

∫

∛

÷ ∑∛

∛

÷

÷

∑

∑

∫

∫

+

+

∓

∓∓

--

∛∛

++

÷

∫

+

Designer & Developer see

service multiplying and scaling

x+ ÷

∑∓-

∫

∛

÷ ∑∛

∛

÷

÷

∑

∑

∫

∫

+

+

∓

∓∓

--

∛∛

++

÷

∫

Designer & Developer follow costs & revenues

through formulas

x+ ÷

∑∓-

∫

∛

÷ ∑∛

∛

÷

÷

∑

∑

∫

∫

+

+

∓

∓∓

--

∛∛

++

÷

∫

Designer & Developer sees social network as spikes in service use

x+ ÷

∑∓-

∫

∛

÷ ∑∛

∛

÷

÷

∑

∑

∫

∫

+

+

∓

∓∓

--

∛∛

++

÷

∫

People view social networks as single connections with

other people

x+ ÷

∑∓-

∫

∛

÷ ∑∛

∛

÷

÷

∑

∑

∫

∫

+

+

∓

∓∓

--

∛∛

++

÷

∫

+

People express the richness with another

person by a story about the person

I met Zorba on the beach in Greece as

he was dancing and singing by

himself

x+ ÷

∑∓-

∫

∛

÷ ∑∛

∛

÷

÷

∑

∑

∫

∫

+

+

∓

∓∓

--

∛∛

++

÷

∫

People value the relationship

between others & services

x+ ÷

∑∓-

∫

∛

÷ ∑∛

∛

÷

÷

∑

∑

∫

∫

+

+

∓

∓∓

--

∛∛

++

÷

∫

People see a connection to their

network through the tool/service

x+ ÷

∑∓-

∫

∛

÷ ∑∛

∛

÷

÷

∑

∑

∫

∫

+

+

∓

∓∓

--

∛∛

++

÷

∫

A person’s network is comprised of individuals (1s)

x+ ÷

∑∓-

∫

∛

÷ ∑∛

∛

÷

÷

∑

∑

∫

∫

+

+

∓

∓∓

--

∛∛

++

÷

∫

People use the social tool if it works for managing & connecting

the individuals in their life

x+ ÷

∑∓-

∫

∛

÷ ∑∛

∛

÷

÷

∑

∑

∫

∫

+

+

∓

∓∓

--

∛∛

++

÷

∫

People see 1 + 1 & Designer & Developer

see multiples

x+ ÷

∑∓-

∫

∛

÷ ∑∛

∛

÷

÷

∑

∑

∫

∫

+

+

∓

∓∓

--

∛∛

++

÷

∫

Successful service designers & developers have their sight on the

person & personal needs

x+ ÷

∑∓-

∫

∛

÷ ∑∛

∛

÷

÷

∑

∑

∫

∫

+

+

∓

∓∓

--

∛∛

++

÷

∫

Are you focussed on 1 + 1?


The Focus of the Web has Changed


Was


I Go Get Web

❖ We sought “their” information

❖ Focus on content provider

❖ One device

❖ One use

❖ Proprietary formats

❖ Findability focus

❖ Development metaphor was navigation


Is


Come To Me Web

❖ “My information” is found or created❖ Focus on person using❖ Reuse❖ Attracting and keeping attracted❖ Across devices❖ Open formats❖ Refindability focus❖ Development metaphor is attraction


Attract to Where?


Personal

InfoCloud


InfoClouds

Personal

InfoCloud

Local

InfoCloud

Global InfoCloud

External InfoCloud


WorkOrganizations

Affiliations

LocationSocial Software

Near in Thought

Portals

Friends

Local InfoCloud

Local

InfoCloud


Trust

People


Trust

Resources


Trust

Devices


Personal Information Workflow


❖ Person-centered

❖ Access to information

❖ Organization

❖ Tasks, actions, context aware

Design for Personal Workflow


Personal Info Cycle

Global InfoCloud

Local InfoCloud

Personal InfoCloud

Seeking

Recognizing

Retaining/Storing

Using/Creating

Following


Information is needed


Everywhere


Everywhere withContext


❖ Build around & for people

❖ Capture perceptions, needs, & uses/reuses

❖ Design information for adaptability

Foundation for Development


Attraction Receptors


MOA - Receptors

Intellectual Perceptual

MechanicalPhysical


Sharing


Spheres of Sociality

Mob

Collective

Selective

Personal


Directional Sociality


All RelationshipsAre Not Equal


Real Relationships

Self Friend

Self Friend

Self Acquaintance

Self Friend

Self Stranger? ?


Public & Private


Unequal Access

Private

Public


What Is Tagging?


Tagging: Definition

❖ Simple data/metadata externally applied to an object

❖ Used for sorting

❖ A hook for aggregating

❖ Provides identifier and/or description

❖ Personal markers


The “F” Word


Folksonomy


❖ Folksonomy is the result of personal free tagging of pages and objects for one's own retrieval

❖ The tagging is usually done in a social environment (shared and open to others)

❖ The act of tagging is done by the person consuming the information

Folksonomy: Definition

http://vanderwal.net/folksonomy.html




The value in this external tagging is derived from people using their own vocabulary and adding explicit meaning, which may come from inferred understanding of the information/object.

Folksonomy: Value

The value in this external tagging is derived from people using their own vocabulary and adding explicit meaning

People are not so much categorizing, as providing a means to connect items(placing hooks) to provide their meaning in their own understanding.


“The beauty of tagging is that it taps into an existing cognitive process without

adding much cognitive cost”

Rashmi Sinhahttp://www.rashmisinha.com/archives/05_09/tagging-cognitive.html

http://www.rashmisinha.com/archives/05_09/tagging-cognitive.html

http://www.rashmisinha.com/archives/05_09/tagging-cognitive.html


Every person is an expert in their own vocabulary (tags)


Every Tag is Sacred


Object Identity

Metadata

Interest

VocabularyDefinition

Folksonomy Triad


Object Identity

Metadata

Definition

Vocabulary

Terminology

Interest

Culture

Community

Dual Folksonomy Triad


The Business Value of Tagging


Business Tensions

Naming control People’s vocabulary

In-house Outside service

$$$ w/ value $ w/ unknown value

Consistent Emergent

Sample groups Every perspective


Cold Start Problem


Understanding Scaling


Scaling and Functionality#

Peo

ple

Tagg

ing

Times Object is Tagged

A

A - Personal Use

B

B - SerendipityC C - Social Tagging

Mature

D

D - Complex Social System


Phases of Interaction❖ Saving and tagging ❖ Refinding ❖ Clicking, pivoting, exploring ❖ Searching

❖ One’s own tags❖ Other’s tags

❖ Group❖ Everybody

❖ Group Social Interaction


Personal to Social

Personal Serendipity Social Mature

Complex

Save & Tag X X X X

Refind X X X X

Pivot & Explore X X X

Search X X

Group Interaction - X


Social Web Ecosystem

Platform ~ .1%

Developers ~ 1%

Creators ~ 10.%

Consumer ~ 88.9%


E-mail: [email protected]: [email protected]: vanderwalYIM: tjvanderwalSkype: tjvanderwal

Contact

mailto:[email protected]




Social Software Design for One

Technology

Transcript of Social Software Design for One