This post is part of the series describing the results of the study of blogger networking practices. Please take into account a couple of things:

• This is a draft. It also comes from the discussion of the study results and surely needs more work.  Healthy scepticism and comments are very welcome.
• Statements are linked to the names of people who talked about particular issue, those might be true or not true for others.

***

Next to non-personal relationships, blogging also enables the building true human connections;

..not pretend or unreal or virtual relationship, the real relationship, where you build up trust and affect and those powerful things that make people work together. Online. (Euan)

What exactly helps to establish and maintain personal relations via blogging? The insights from the research on strong and weak ties (Granovetter, 1973; see also Haythornthwaite, 2005, for a summary of the follow-up research) indicate that the type and frequency of interaction, as well as the number of channels used for it, are important, since stronger ties include frequent and more intimate interaction via a number of channels. While the study results do not provide data on changes in the frequency of interactions between bloggers when their relationships strengthen, they do indicate that those with stronger connections interact on multiple occasions, use different channels and communicate about personal issues as well as professional ones.

An additional view on the factors in the process of growing and maintaining a relationship is provided by Bonnie Nardi (2005), who draws on the research on instant messaging and face-to-face communication (Nardi, Whittaker, & Bradner, 2000; Nardi et al., 2002) to propose that communication includes relational aspects as well as information exchange. The relation between a pair of people creates “a state of communicative readiness in which fruitful communication is likely” (Nardi, 2005, p.91) and includes three dimensions of connection: affinity, commitment and attention. Those dimensions are recognisable in the study presented in this chapter.

According to Nardi affinity is achieved through activities of social bonding – touching, eating and drinking together, sharing experiences in a common space and informal communication – that make people feel connected with each other.

Three of the social bonding activities appear in the data. Although not easily supported by blogging itself, eating and drinking together is clearly important: restaurants are mentioned frequently as a place to meet other bloggers, “Having a coffee” is an important part of microblogging updates and it is food reviews that bloggers mention when talking about Bill Ives, not other items from his weekend blogging list that include, according to the header of his weblog, “art, music, travel, and food”.

Informal communication is supported by the personal nature of blogging: the freedom to choose what to write provides enough opportunities to share jokes, talk about hobbies or “pontificate about life, the universe and such” (Euan). KM bloggers refer to “personal details” on weblogs that help to get to know others, but those serve as conversation starters as well (it is similar in other studies, e.g. bloggers in the study by Lori Kendall (2007) report that posts with something amusing or trivial received more comments than others).

KM bloggers talk about their experiences of connecting to others in terms of sharing spaces: Dave refers to getting to know others in a way similar to how it works in a “common room in a university”, Brett talks about blogging as casual conversations at a water-cooler, Ton talks about “shared spaces” online, neighbourhoods and global villages, Martin appreciates others “coming” to his “place” to leave comments… My own blogging experiences resulted in similar feelings and multiple attempts to explain what might create them (for example, this one).

Commitment is another dimension that Nardi introduces as important. In the case of KM bloggers, expressing commitment to others is manifested through the effort of reading their weblogs (“they took the effort to read what I write”, Luis), repeated interaction and maintaining their own presence via weblogs and other channels.

Finally, capturing and monitoring attention includes, for example, eye contact or negotiating availability of others. In the case of bloggers, linking is often perceived as a sign of attention, and considerable effort goes into monitoring incoming links that help to find new bloggers or keep track of fragments of conversations between weblogs. While weblogs are rarely used explicitly for negotiating availability for an interaction (this is where other channels come into play), they do provide an opportunity to indicate one’s interest in communicating, via comments or linking to a weblog, and leave it open as to if, when and how much one wants to engage in a further exchange.

In creating relationships, publishing and interaction modes of blogging play a role. For non-personal relations to emerge and be sustained, the publishing mode of blogging is enough; in this case, uses of a weblog are informational. For establishing and maintaining personal relations, both publishing and interaction are important. Interaction through weblog conversations helps to develop and renew relations, but it does not happen all the time. Publishing mode (both, reading and writing) provides a backdrop for a relationship: sharing ones’ updates to the network without needing to worry about “spamming” others, developing knowledge of each other, feeling that others are “present” or monitoring when the right moment occurs for an interaction. The power of blogging in respect to networking seems to come from an opportunity to combine two modes with one tool.

***

Granovetter, M. (1973). The Strength of Weak Ties. Americal Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360-1380.

Haythornthwaite, C. (2005). Social networks and internet connectivity effects. Information, Communication and Society, 8(2), 125-147. doi:10.1080/13691180500146185 (public .pdf)

Kendall, L. (2007). “Shout Into the Wind, and It Shouts Back” Identity and interactional tensions on LiveJournal. First Monday, 12(9).

Nardi, B., Whittaker, S., & Schwarz, H. (2002). NetWORKers and their activity in intensional networks. Journal of Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 11(1-2), 205-242. doi:10.1023/A:1015241914483 (public .pdf)

Nardi, B. A. (2005). Beyond bandwidth: dimensions of connection in interpersonal communication. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 14(2), 91-130. doi:10.1007/s10606-004-8127-9 (public .pdf)

Nardi, B. A., Whittaker, S., & Bradner, E. (2000). Interaction and outeraction: instant messaging in action. In Proceedings of the 2000 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work (pp. 79-88). doi:10.1145/358916.358975

• Brett Miller
• Converted to RSS reading :)
• Papers on connections between cyberspace and real cities

This post is part of the series describing the results of the study of blogger networking practices. Please take into account a couple of things:

• This is a draft. Healthy scepticism and comments are very welcome.
• Statements are linked to the names of people who talked about particular issue, those might be true or not true for others.

***

The variety of channels bloggers use to engage with each other creates the need to choose which of them to use.

In the process of developing relations with each other, bloggers engage in finding and being found, getting to know other bloggers from a distance, bonding through interaction, getting things done together and staying in touch. Those practices are supported by uses of different channels to connect with each other. Weblogs serve primarily as a channel for discovering bloggers and getting to know them from a distance. While bonding through interaction starts via weblog conversations, eventually it is likely to include meeting in person and the use of other channels, such as email, Skype, phone or microblogging. Finding and “screening” each other via weblogs, as well as shared understanding, trust and a history of interactions enable bloggers to get things done together, however, such collaboration mostly happens outside of blogging. Although weblogs are used to stay in touch, other tools increasingly support this, especially those allowing broadcasting one’s current status to the network, for example with presence indicators in Skype or microblogging updates.

The table below summarises bloggers’ choices between using weblogs (in two modes, publishing and interaction) and other channels to support networking.

When it comes to bonding through interaction, doing work or staying in touch, bloggers pick and choose tools that suit their needs and specific circumstances. My interactions with the participants during the course of this study provide an illustration.

As I did not have much contact with some of the participants prior to the study, I looked through their weblogs for an appropriate mean of contact. I used existing connections on a variety of channels, but also added more connections during the study (email addresses, Twitter, Skype, social network contacts). I used Twitter, email or Skype chat to contact bloggers: Twitter and to a lesser extend their weblogs to see what was happening in their lives to decide when and how to contact; Skype chat to coordinate before the interview start and to exchange links and names during it; Twitter and Skype chat to discuss their preferences for receiving interview summaries; Google documents and email attachments to edit the summaries, email to communicate around them.

Given that bloggers have many tools at their disposal, what are the reasons to choose for or against blogging? While the interviews do not provide enough input to identify such reasons in a systematic way, it is possible to discern a number of weblog characteristics that influence the choice for or against them:

• space to express one’s ideas without pushing them to others;
• slow and open-ended, so not good for direct interaction with a particular goal in mind;
• contextual (at the post level and as a whole as they include a history of the blogger’s writing over time);
• persistent, so are better used for posts that make sense in a long term, not for trivial updates;
• individual-centred, providing history over time, ability not to restrict oneself to writing on particular topics and strong association between blogger and content;
• personal, representing own space and own ideas;
• public, providing a big potential audience, so not well suited for private, confidential or vulnerable writing;
• take time and effort.

In addition to choosing which channels to use when engaging with others, bloggers also make an effort to discover which tools others use, and to connect there. Gabriela says that meeting a new interesting person usually results in searching for them and connecting in different places:

I’ve never seen someone giving me the details [...] you go and see what you can find there. After I attend an event I usually have ten requests [to connect].

Given the number of channels bloggers use to engage with others, maintaining all of them might be a challenge. Luis talks about the risks of “spreading yourself too thin”, since it takes effort to maintain one’s presence on multiple channels.

Another issue to deal with is the fragmentation and aggregation between different channels, especially when they are used, as in a case of Ton, to connect to different audiences. Gabriela is concerned that information about a person that used to be in a weblog is now fragmented across multiple channels, as well as the need to “follow” her contacts to the channels they choose for their activities. However, she is also “a bit annoyed but the fact that social tools are getting more aggregated” and provides an example of her students who started to follow her on Jaiku (used as part of the course), but then turned to other channels (including her weblog) and picked up all kinds of personal details about her.

While at the beginning bloggers connect with each other primarily via weblogs, over time meeting in person and other tools are added to the mix. Bloggers pick and choose tools to engage with others. They also enable those choices by creating connections with others and maintaining their presence on different channels, and by dealing with fragmentation and aggregation of their bits between different channels.

• The best part…
• My boyfriend or why I don’t make things instantly visible
• Blog networking study: getting things done

This post is part of the series describing the results of the study of blogger networking practices. Please take into account a couple of things:

• This is a draft. Healthy scepticism and comments are very welcome. A few specific questions are at the end of this post.
• Statements are linked to the names of people who talked about particular issue, those might be true or not true for others.

***

Weblogs become online representations of their authors, who talk about weblogs as “the core” (Ton), “the record” (Dave), their online presence and a “long-term commitment towards yourself and your personal brand” (Luis), something that continues to represent them as they change (“I can change my job or interests, but the URL will be the same”, Martin). Euan provides an example of the role of blogging in that respect talking about someone he works with who does not have a weblog:

He is using Twitter and some other things… It feels like miasma – I’ve got nowhere I can point people to because he doesn’t got a blog and the other bits are too dispersed. So [the weblog] is like a core, a gravitational pull. (Euan)

The interviews bring several choices in respect to bloggers own presentation through blogging. First, they need to make themselves visible through writing to those they would (potentially) like to reach. Then they shape their writing to address the demands of different audiences that their weblogs expose them to. Finally, they just “let it be”: allowing their “true self” to be revealed through blogging and to be constructed by others.

In order to be present, to exist, bloggers need to be visible to others by writing their weblogs. For Luis the need to start blogging in public came from experiences of blogging internally and his dissatisfaction with a “half-way conversation” with KM bloggers who couldn’t see comments and links from his internal blog. He talks about the need to blog externally to have proper conversations, to become one of KM bloggers, “to build up a community of people to share”, “to help me to position myself as a thought leader within the field”. He says, “[blogging externally] allowed me to have a public face, a public voice”.

For Monica, it was important to be able to put her name on previously anonymous weblog once her authorship was discovered by a journalist and become known in her organisation. She talks about her own practice of checking weblogs of others to find out who they are and dissatisfaction of not being visible in the same way. She also provides an example of a need to become invisible when her former colleagues commented on her presence with them even after leaving the research group (that didn’t support her PhD aspirations), as a result of continuing to blog about her ideas:

I had mixed feelings, so I stopped posting work-related things there. [...] I felt used. (Monica)

However, writing a weblog is not enough to be present as a blogger, it is also important to use the language that potential audience will understand. Gabriela tells about creating a blog in English next to the one she wrote in Romanian to be able to connect to bloggers she met at a conference. Monica and Martin, who write primarily in Portuguese and German as a way to connect with their national audiences, talk about struggles to make choices between languages. For them connection with local audiences comes at a price of being invisible to their English-speaking network that they address once in a while by writing in English.

With a weblog one may be also present to different types of audiences: peers, existing or potential clients, and friends. Relations with those people involve different ways of writing and interacting that do not necessarily coexist well together, resulting in a need to shape the way one is represented by a weblog.

Martin provides an example by telling what led him to stop blogging 1,5 years ago, referring to the dynamics around his weblog as one of the reasons for it. In the German-speaking internet his weblog became “quite famous” and got exposed to a “different sphere of people”, who expected him to “be a pundit who knows everything”. From one side he wanted to play that role as it allowed him to get more business. From another side catering for these expectations in his weblog collided with the open and vulnerable style of blogging necessary for learning and networking with peers. At the certain moment there was too much confusion, so he decided to stop blogging. According to Martin, blogging for marketing purposes “has a different attitude and you get clash of the contexts”.

Even when blogging is supporting one’s business as in the case of Dave, it is important “not to push your ideas”:

if you say interesting things or link to interesting stuff people will come and talk to you anyway (Dave).

In additional to managing tensions that might arise around different professional uses of a weblog, there are also choices about the degree of revealing personal details of one’s life in it. While many respondents emphasizes the blurring boundaries between personal and professional, professional contacts and friends for both business in general and blogging in particular, they also limit the degree of exposing personal details in a weblog. Euan notes that weblogs “rely on you having an opinion and expressing it and it’s not the most easy thing in a work context.” Monica considers many bloggers she knows friends, not professional contacts as she observes the details of their lives that “only friends have a privilege [to see]“, however, she is also not comfortable revealing too much on her weblog: “I will not talk about myself. For me blogging and being in public are the same”.

Given the impact of blogging on one’s reputation it is tempting to think of it as a way to construct a favourable image of oneself. However, the interviews hint that while weblogs may be viewed by bloggers as their online representations, their uses in that respect may not be fully intentional and directed. Not only bloggers comment on networking as a side effect of blogging rather than an explicit purpose for it, they also seem to believe that there are limits of how much their image could be controlled.

For example, when talking about his weblog as a “trustworthy anchor point” for his clients, Ton explains that it works that way “because you can’t fake six years worth of blogging”. Dave, reacting to my comment about his experiences of presenting to big audiences says “keynote is a performance, blog is more intimate” and then tells about being surprised with “the degree you reveal yourself on the weblog”, sharing “half-formed ideas” and starting to “chat with people as they were your friends”.

Blogging under one’s own name as a professional might be one of the reasons not to “fake it” as others can eventually get into a closer contact anyway. For example, Euan tells about the temptation to become “more guarded” to address increasing business risks of blogging when getting self-employed and his decision against it: “it’s better if people know what I’m thinking before starting to pay me”. Martin, reflecting on his experiences says that now he would rather express what he thinks and “people will appear who appreciate that”.

In addition, bloggers are not only “revealing themselves” to others, but also exploring who they are, through their writing and reactions of people to it:

I existed and had a life apart from my existence, just because of the insights I put in the blogs I created… I also discovered things about myself I didn’t know… when more people started saying something about me. (Monica)

One can have a preferred image of oneself as a professional, but readers of a weblog construct their own anyway based on weblog writing, as, for example, with Nancy, who tells about others positioning her weblog as a “KM blog” or “educational blog”, when she doesn’t view it this way.

Participants view their weblogs as their online representations and also shape their actions accordingly. In order to “exist” for the audiences they may want to reach and potential connections to emerge bloggers not only need to be blogging, but also do it in a way connected to one’s name, continue blogging over time and written in a language that the audience can understand. While there they have to draw boundaries of what and how to include in their writing, they also let their image to be shaped by their writing and their audiences.

***

This is the part of the results that I’m most unsure of, so any comments are welcome. If you are a blogger I’d love hear how much what I say here is true for you personally.

Things that are not covered here, but would be interesting to discuss as well:

• how “my blog is my online identity” works for people with multuple blogs and mainly contributing to a multi-author blog
• how bloggers deal with addressing multiple topical audiences of their blogs – are there any struggles there?

I’m also thinking about this whole issue in respect to identity management and playing with a couple of ideas from Goffman (giving vs. giving off via the weblog, weblog as a backstage), so if you are into those things I’d love to talk.

• Cross-cultural reading
• Out-of-the-box thinking
• Blogs are smokescreens as much as windows

This post is part of the series describing the results of the study of blogger networking practices. Please take into account a couple of things:

• This is a draft. Healthy scepticism and comments are very welcome.
• Statements are linked to the names of people who talked about particular issue, those might be true or not true for others.

***

When connections are established weblogs provide a way to stay in touch regardless the degree of interaction between bloggers at any particular moment. Martin noticed that after he stopped blogging, reading other weblogs become even more important, “to see what [his contacts] are up to without having to interrupt them, to contact them directly”. Gabriela gives an example of former colleagues who are following her weblog to find what is happening in her life “without sending an email”.

When the participants talk about the weblogs they read regularly, those usually include weblogs of people they know well. “For the people I know I read to find out how they are going”, says Shawn. He does so to find out “if there is something important to ring them up” and tells that it often prompts “some other way of communicating with the person”.

For Ton keeping up with others’ “online traces” (blogs and other channels) helps to maintain a relationship. He emphasise the importance of trivial exchanges (e.g. updates on Jaiku or Twitter – “I’m having a coffee”) that create a sense of connection similar to the same type of exchanges with people in a close physical proximity. It is the similar for Luis, who says that Twitter provides a space to share “titbits on what I’m doing” resulting in a sense of “ambient intimacy” , while weblog is for “more elaborate thought” or Gabriela, who “keeps an eye on people via microblogging and other tools”, picking up their weblogs once in a while to read in more detail.

Ton suggests that once connections are established the intensity of interactions might decrease:

In the beginning you also have to show each other that you are making and effort, to may be seduce each other a bit. Network starts by giving [...] and part of it is an attention and an empathy; you have to make the effort first.

He tells that after a while it’s different, still an effort, but very different type of interactions:

Even if there is no interaction I still see the connection [...] I see other people coming online with their status updates [e.g. on Skype]. There is no real interaction, but I know that he sees me coming online as well.

When connections are established and there is less need to interact, weblogs provide a way to keep up with life and thinking of their authors without directly contacting them. However, many bloggers also stay in touch via other tools. Microblogging tools are mentioned often in this context; they are used for sharing mundane updates and details of everyday life, creating a sense of connections similar to those that appear when sharing a physical space with co-workers.

• Ton Zijlstra
• Blog networking study: presenting oneself through blogging
• BlogTalk 2.0: Panel 6 – weblogs and KM

This post is part of the series describing the results of the study of blogger networking practices. Please take into account a couple of things:

• This is a draft. Healthy scepticism and comments are very welcome.
• Statements are linked to the names of people who talked about particular issue, those might be true or not true for others.

***

When I ask about the role of blogging in making possible to do something together, Martin describes how relations grow from shallow to more deep, starting from a shared interest and then eventually building an image of someone as trustworthy. Others describe similar process of gradual engagement that builds a foundation for working together: the knowledge of common interests and shared context (Gabriela), “a feeling that just talking is not enough and there is a shared need to do something together” (Ton) and “trust which is crucial for collaboration” (Luis).

In addition, weblogs help to make a decision about “doing business” with a blogger. For example, while Nancy doesn’t keep track of how her weblog contributed to her business, she assumes it to be “a kind of screening device” where potential clients can check her background. Ton tells a story about a client worried that he would take a technology-driven approach to work on a case, who then became reassured it wouldn’t be that way after reading Ton’s weblog. Such “screening” might also work in the opposite way, as for Dave who “certainly used weblogs of some people to decide not to collaborate with them”.

Sometimes bloggers find difficult to isolate the role of their weblogs in working together. Shawn gives an example of getting to know Nancy through her blog and other online activities, inviting her to stay in his house when she travelled to Australia, and their collaboration that followed. He also tells about potential clients contacting him as a result of blogging to ask for a meeting: “it might turn into business or may not, it’s a beginning point”. For Ton joint work often had “started somewhere in a weblog” and then “spilled over to other channels”. For him meeting people in person before being able to work with them is essential; he has to “look in their eye”, to see “the whole person” next to knowing about their shared interests from blogging.

While meeting another blogger in person is often cited as part of the process that led to working together or a prerequisite for it, it is not always the case. Martin tells about several of “only online” relations that turned into joint work: “the way we worked together fits the image I’ve got from blog interaction, there were no big surprises”.

When it comes to doing the work, often a weblog is not a primarily tool to do so. For Gabriela “email or twitter is the easiest way” for contacting bloggers and not a weblog, which is “slower”:

When I don’t need a quick answer and its something related my blogpost, I leave a comment or write a post myself. If I have a concrete idea and want to put it in practice now, I use other tools.

Luis comments that embedding blogging into the workflow of day to day interactions is not easy: while email is part of work, blogging still feels as an extra.

For Martin blogging is good for learning and exploration, but “a different mode is needed” to get things done. He notices that for him it is easy to confuse work with online interactions, indicating that at times blogging might have a negative impact on work: “I have to pull myself out of conversations and learning to do my work [...] to get things done offline… to write that article…” He adds that for some jobs blogging might be a better fit, giving research as an example.

Euan suggests weblogs are good for supportive activities: “in a sense of establishing, sharing [...] they are great tools, probably better than face to face”, however, “in a context of making something happen there is a limit to how far you can go.” He explains that weblogs have a different rhythm: “if you want to set up a meeting you wouldn’t pontificate about life, universe and the such…”

While weblogs of the study participants are work-related, they do not necessarily document their work. Ton says his weblog includes reflective writing “on the edge” of what he is doing. He explains that does not chronicle what he does in his weblog since it would involve his colleagues and clients. He adds that he started to feel more free do to so after starting to work for himself (“they are completely my projects, so it says more about me now”) and, although content-wise his work didn’t change much, now he also needs “to be a bit more visible as an individual consultant”.

Working in organisational settings adds other concerns to blogging about work. For example, while Gabriela did field studies with IBM, she couldn’t blog about work as “smallest detail could provoke some damage”; she wrote about concerts instead. Euan talks about the challenges of blogging in a case when individuals are exposed to an audience “only in controlled circumstances”. He talks about writing while in BBC as “generalising the topic” that “it stays interesting without compromising anything.”

In sum, blogging provides a foundation for working together by allowing to choose with whom to work with and by building shared understanding and trust. When it comes to doing the work itself or reporting about it, a weblog is not necessarily the tool to choose since such work requires a different mode of writing and interaction and might not benefit from being visible in a weblog.

• My Friday 5: bloggers I’d love to meet
• BlogHer aftermath: more on the speakers list
• Out-of-the-box thinking

This post is part of the series describing the results of the study of blogger networking practices. Please take into account a couple of things:

• This is a draft. Healthy scepticism and comments are very welcome.
• Statements are linked to the names of people who talked about particular issue, those might be true or not true for others.

***

Next to an opportunity to learn about others from a distance, weblogs support interaction that may grow into a relation between bloggers over time. When Ton describes how interactions that start from comments help a relation to grow and strengthen, he talks about his weblog as a “gravity pull”: “it’s like they are entering your gravity field, falling towards you”.

Luis emphasises the importance of reacting to comments in his weblog as a starting point for an interaction (“last thing you can do is to ignore your comments”) telling that others appreciate the feedback. While Shawn also believes that interaction in the comments is important, he admits that he is not good in it as he uses his weblog mainly to organise his thinking rather than “as a network building or communication device if you like”. He tells that he is “not much of the typer” and leaves comments only if he “can add to a conversation in a constructive way” and then starts wondering what other people “read” into this behaviour. He also gives an example of Johnnie Moore, saying that his blogging style “seem to have the interaction going”.

Nancy echoes this point emphasising that engaging in personal connections (as opposed to “information relations” described in the section 1.5.1) depends a lot on personalities of people, as some as more likely to initiate contact and to “reach out”. Brett provides an example of others “reaching out”:

I’ve had people I’ve left comments on their blog and by doing that they discover mine and they initiated contact with me. [...] they commented on the weblog and followed it more closely [...] I guess [they were] more involved, did more steps for a relation than I did. I just commented once and they came to my site and commented frequently. To some extend it makes you feel an obligation almost to go back to theirs to read it more, to comment more. [...] I feel that I should look at their stuff more closely to see if I want to reciprocate.

Although initial contacts often happen in comments to a weblog post, at the later stage cross-linking between weblogs and trackbacks that notify bloggers about it becomes more important. For Luis linking conversations between blogs helps to “corroborate what someone else said” while also adding own experiences and sharing with others. For Euan permalinks that allow others to link directly to a weblog post “is another big thing” as “each of those little ideas could be linked to and that allows to distribute sense-making networks.” Martin describes conversations that “travelled around weblogs” as “collective intelligence” (“if we talk about questions long enough the idea would emerge somewhere”). In discussing how blogging helps to develop trust Dave talks about it as “fragmented frequent conversation” and draws parallels between blogging and the way human brains work:”We don’t tell stories to each other, we swap anecdotes and blogs are very similar to that”.

When I ask Ton about the differences between comments and conversations across weblogs he refers to the differences in format and length, as well as different types of conversations they enable:

…the comments are usually short-lived, [...] they are immediate responses to the blog post. And a blog conversation spread between weblogs goes on longer. And you can connect it to more things since if you would add links to six different blog posts in your comment it would probably be classified as a spam.

However, he thinks that those different weblog conversations are part of the same process, talking about difficulties of reconstructing paths one follows between comments, people, what they write.

Interaction via weblogs often serves as a starting point for getting in touch via other channels. Shawn suggests that “if someone got the weblog, they are inviting people to contact them” and adds that this is usually the case when he attempts to contact other bloggers by email. He adds that when contacting another blogger, the fact of both blogging creates a commonality, even if content is very different – “I am a blogger, you are a blogger, we should catch up”. Brett calls it “an instant credibility”:

Even if I don’t know someone just the fact that I saw something on their blog, posted a comment, asked a question and they see that I have one. It establishes almost an instant credibility: that this person is worth the time to respond, to read, as to say.

Gabriela explains that having weblogs that provide the context and the history of previous interactions makes contact easier: she feels she can “tap into knowledge of fellow bloggers without [providing] any details”.

Many participants talk about connecting with fellow bloggers via multiple channels. Gabriela gives an example of Jack Vinson, KM blogger she’s never met in person, and says they are mutually connected on different channels. Shawn is not constantly interacting with other bloggers via the blogosphere, saying that if it happens it’s often an email, phone or meeting in person. Luis talks about enhancing his connection with KM bloggers by knowing about their day to day life from Twitter.

For Martin other, more personal channels are needed to get to know others really well “to have a more secure exchange which is not public, to be vulnerable”, which is difficult to do in a weblog “once you become an A-lister”. Ton adds that for those relationships that are established via weblog, most of more personal communication happens via other channels (email, Skype, sharing photos and videos).

Meeting in person is often an important part of the process of building a relation: bloggers tell stories about making an effort to meet other bloggers or synergies of connecting in person after discovering that those they knew via blogging were actually in close physical proximity.

When bloggers meet the history of their interactions comes into play. Luis talks about meeting Bill Ives for the first time, while knowing him via weblog for several years:

It was amazing. [...] It was like two old pals talking about KM and picking it up where we have left it in the blogs.

Euan gives similar example:

First time I met Doc [Searls] there were hugs and smiles and really energetic enthusiastic conversation in a restaurant. And we said at that time that others in the restaurant had known that we’ve never met each other they would think we were mad.

Ton explains that meeting in person brings a relation at a new level. He gives an example of meeting Chris Corrigan and how walking in the forest having “the same conversations” they would have online, created a deeper level of understanding:

Rereading his postings I now hear his voice, but I also know in what kind of context he wrote it, and this additional information helps me interpret what he means on a deeper level.

Martin has similar experiences: “[realising] that they actually have a body helped to appreciate their writing more and use their writing more effectively”.

However, Dave is not sure meeting in person is good or bad after getting to know each other online, as some people “create a different persona in their blog” and meeting in person might results in “identity structure shifts”. When I refer to other bloggers who are eager to meet in person, he tells it depends on a scale: “I can’t afford the time to meet everybody I track or listen to”.

Interacting via multiple channels over time does not only help the connections grow and strengthen, it also contributes to the development of shared understanding and a sense of community. “And then you are talking not about silos [...], but interconnected complex network of blogs”, where bloggers know whom to go to for help or an advice (Luis). Gabriela talks about other bloggers as “permanent support network”, “a sort of fraternity” that she can rely on.

While first interactions between bloggers often happen via weblogs, as relations between bloggers grow they engage with each other via multiple channels. In that respect conversations created by linking between weblogs play a special role: those “fragmented frequent conversations” support both collective development of ideas and strengthening the bonds between bloggers. Over time meeting in person and other channels are added to the mix to continue blogging conversations, to interact in more private and secure settings and to get to know others better. Over time those interactions create a foundation that might enable bloggers to collaborate to get things done together.

• Cross-cultural reading
• Weblog as a backstage: performance is counterproductive
• There will be no BlogTalk 3.0

This post is part of the series describing the results of the study of blogger networking practices. Please take into account a couple of things:

• This is a draft. Healthy scepticism and comments are very welcome.
• Statements are linked to the names of people who talked about particular issue, those might be true or not true for others.

***

Weblogs provide an opportunity to get to know their authors “from a distance” (Martin), to learn about them to be able to decide on engaging further or not and do so without a “commitment of giving time and attention to the relation” (Nancy) and to allow others “to build up an opinion without knowing you” (Luis).

In this process a weblog provides a representation of a blogger through their writing. It not only gives others an impression of “who you are and what you do”, but also allows to “get an introduction of your community” by seeing who comments (Luis).

Shawn suggests that weblogs provide “some level of reputation”, exposing people and their interests:

It is not explicit; you intuitively get a feel for type of the person they are and whether that [...] is your type of person. It’s almost like a pre-dating.

Bloggers point that although weblog is a form of publication, it works differently from publishing an article: “if you read somebody’s paper you get to know their ideas, if you read their weblog, you get to know them as a person” (Dave), “when you write a blogpost you are giving yourself out as a person” (Luis).

What exactly helps to get to know a blogger as a person? Several bloggers mention passionate writing and “personal things” that appear on a weblog (for example, when talking about Bill Ives both Luis and Shawn mention his passion for food and restaurant reviews next to his KM writings).

However, it is more than that. Euan suggests that there is also

something about the pacing and the size of the blogging window, two or three paragraph idea that’s weighty enough [...] That’s why I still blog even if I have Twitter: you can put more thoughts into a blogpost. You are expressing something hopefully slightly more profound about yourself and your ideas.

For Nancy blogging helps to get to know others by providing “a window into their life over time”, “exposure of their thinking over time”, however it depends a lot on how well people write, so “you don’t get to know crappy writers via their weblogs”. Martin tells about the type of weblog writing that helps him to get to know others as those that show “willingness to expose what you don’t know [...] willingness to learn… not yet finished thinking” or the opposite, “being brave and bold”, taking a radical position that invites criticism. Shawn says that “photos seem to give your more than just the text”, “you also get a sense of the people in terms of links and depth of their posts”.

Learning about other bloggers comes through an aggregation of various signals:

You can pick up little subliminal or subconscious or peripheral bits and pieces about people through what they write, how they write, how their blog looks, how they react to things.(Euan)

Euan gives an example of observing how bloggers engage in an interaction in weblog comments that gives signals about them similar to observing their behaviour in a face to face conversation.

Since the process of getting to know others “from a distance” involves reading and browsing that does not leave many traces, a blogger does not necessarily knows about it. Monica tells about an invitation to come as a keynote speaker that she though was a joke until she’s got a confirming phone call:

I didn’t know I was followed by them. If [people] leave comments, you have a clue, a footprint. It turns out that the guy who was reading my blog suggested that I would be a good person to talk as a keynote speaker.

Gabriela is aware of people using her weblog to find more about her. She gives an example of a job interview for her current job, where her boss knew a lot of things about her from the weblog. However, she says, “I never had a bad experience with exposing myself through my blog. I didn’t feel threatened.”

Shawn gives an example of meeting readers of his weblog at a conference:

…people come up to you and they know you through your blog, but you have never met them before. It’s a kind of a disarming experience… you feel it’s quite an asymmetrical relationship. They have a really good sense who you are, what you do, what interests you and you don’t even know their name. I think that’s kind of peculiar to people who blog and have some sort of readership…

Luis, who has similar experiences with meeting previously unknown readers of his weblog at events, finds it “fascinating”. He says “that person gets my attention full at that moment” because “they took the effort to read what I write”.

In sum, blogging provides a “living portrait” that not only shows ideas and interests of a blogger, but also helps to get to know her as a person, by observing writing, linking and interaction over time. Such observation is not necessarily reciprocal, so asymmetrical relations are something that bloggers have to deal with. While it may be one-sided, learning about other bloggers from a distance provides an opportunity to make informed choices about possible closer contact with them, knowledge of their interests and personalities, as well as enough starting points for an interaction.

• Blog networking study: bonding through interaction
• Writing books for managers
• Natural selection

This post is part of the series describing the results of the study of blogger networking practices. Please take into account a couple of things:

• This is a draft. Healthy scepticism and comments are very welcome.
• Statements are linked to the names of people who talked about particular issue, those might be true or not true for others.

***

The participants of the study are professionals in knowledge management or related fields, although they do not necessary explicitly associate with KM. They live in Europe, US and Australia, know English enough to write on professional topics in it (although only occasionally for Martin and Monica). They are established bloggers (2-7 years), some of whom tried blogging with a variety of tools and have an experience with multiple types of weblogs (e.g. KM and parenting blogs for Brett, internal and external for Luis, personal blog in Romanian vs. professional ones in English for Gabriela).

Participant’s weblogs have different degrees of connection to their work. Dave, Shawn and Nancy integrate blogging in web-sites of their companies, while Monica has an experience of blogging anonymously to hide the connection to her employer. All bloggers write about work-related topics; however the degree of explicit connections (including linking) to their work is different.

It is important to note that for most of the study participants (except of Brett) visibility as a results of blogging contributes to their work as entrepreneurs, consultants or researchers. Also four out of ten participants have a connection with IBM – as a current or past employer for Luis, Dave and Shawn and as a research site for Gabriela (I didn’t realise it when selecting people to be interviewed).

All participants talk about their professional networks expanding as a result of blogging. The degree of this expansion is different and seems to have a relation to the size of blogger’s network prior to blogging, the interest of developing new relations, as well as motivations for and the style of blogging. Blogging might change one’s awareness of own network, for example, by helping to discover people previously invisible (Nancy) or by expanding network without blogger’s awareness of it (Monica).

Using Martin‘s terms, blogging networks of the participants could be characterised as both “diverse and not diverse“. From one side the connections that bloggers establish tend to cross topical, geographical, organisational and hierarchical boundaries. From another – there seem to be a shared culture of embracing diversity (Martin), contributing without direct expectation of a gain (Dave, Nancy) and shared interests and professionalism (Ton, Luis). Several bloggers (Luis, Gabriela) also talk explicitly about a sense of community that emerges in those networks.

Those networks (and practices associated with them) change over time. For example, more people starting blogging change not only the numbers of potentially available others to connect to, but also the intensity of connections with them and topics that connect bloggers (Euan). New tools that appear change the ways bloggers connect via their weblogs (Gabriela). Growing uses of weblogs in a business context might change the perceptions of a weblog by its readers and change the connections as a result (Martin, Monica). While for many bloggers connecting with others is a side-effect of blogging, as they reflect on their experiences they might become more intentional with using weblogs as part of their networking (Brett, Euan, Luis).

• Large social network imposes an higher attention degree on what goes on worldwide
• WikiDashboard: transparency, privacy and other consequences of measurement
• Blog networking, blogwalking and being a boundary subject

In summer I did interviews with several bloggers writing on “around knowledge management” topics about their practices of networking via weblogs. It took a while to work out summaries for those interviews (mainly due to all kinds of research issues), but now I’m happy to share them online. A bit of the “methodological” details are at the end of this post; the results of the study are coming up as a series of blog posts.

Interview summaries:

• Brett Miller (Theoria cum Praxi)
• Dave Snowden (Dave’s blog)
• Euan Semple (The Obvious?) – Euan asked to put audio of the interview online, it’s coming and I’ll link it here
• Gabriela Avram (Coniecto)
• Luis Suarez (Elsua)
• Martin Roell (Gute vragen)
• Monica Andre (B2OB)
• Nancy White (Full Circle Associates)
• Shawn Callahan (Anecdote)
• Ton Zijlstra (Ton’s Interdependent Thoughts)

When selecting bloggers for interviews I aimed to represent a variety of blogging and networking experiences. Bloggers were selected by what I call a “diversity snowball” approach. Since I wasn’t following KM blogophere as actively as before I first talked discussed a list of KM bloggers that might be interesting to interview with Jack Vinson and then proceeded by asking the interviewees to suggest other bloggers they thought were different from themselves. I contacted more people for the interviews, but had to stop somewhere due to the logistics around summer holidays and looming PhD deadlines. I’d love to be able to hear from more bloggers about their own practices – hopefully sharing the results of this study online helps to have a public conversation on those.

When asking bloggers to participate I indicated my intentions of publishing summaries of the interviews and draft results online, as well as using their real names and links to their weblogs in the reports. Semi-structured interviews covered the following themes:

• professional background of a participant and characteristics of her network in KM field prior to blogging
• changes in the network or networking practices because of blogging
• uses of weblogs for developing, maintaining and activating relations as a starting point for articulating stages of the process at more granular level
• place of the weblog in the ecosystem of networking tools (mainly focusing on what weblogs are good for and when they do not work).
• important networking-related issues that haven’t been discussed

I did all interviews via Skype, recorded them and made notes. I then used anonymised summaries of the interviews to discuss emergent themes with two other researchers (colleagues who are aware of my work, but not blogging themselves or doing research on blogging). That discussion served as an input to start working on the study results and on revising summaries to make sure they included important information. Revised summaries were sent to the participants, edited to address their comments and then published online.

An overview of the study as a whole and links to the results are here.

• Networking: YASNs vs. blogs
• Defining expertise and messy methods
• Themes and insights from SHiFT

This interview is part of the study of blogger networking practices: links to other interviews and some background, links to the results.

***

Luis works at IBM as social software evangelist. He is located in Spain, but travels frequently for his work.

He blogs since 2003, first two years internally at IBM (as a KM manager then) and in public since 2005. Between other things he is known for his experiment with eliminating work-related email.

He says his internal weblog has started to show “how blogging can make a difference” inside the company and it worked well in that respect. While blogging internally, he followed a few KM weblogs and engaged in what he calls “half-way conversation” – he linked to them and commented, but they couldn’t see it. He talks about the need to have proper conversations, to become one of KM bloggers, “to build up a community of people to share”, “to help me to position myself as a thought leader within the field”.

He adds how blog creates an online presence for him, it is way for “establishing yourself within a network of people who share the same interests” and “eventually meeting up in person”. He gives an example of people who approach him at events because they know him from blogging. While some people may “freak out” when others know so much about them, Luis finds it “fascinating”. He says “that person gets my attention full at that moment” because “they took the effort to read what I write”.

When he started blogging, his (internal) network of KM people was active, but relatively small. Blogging expanded it to other communities, other business units. We also discuss how blogging helps to breaks barriers – hierarchical, organisational, geographical, time zone. He says that activities that he was engaged into as a result of blogging tripled…He became more visible as a KM leader, getting more visible place within the company and better understanding of the rest of the company.

He had similar changes with his external weblogs, however “a bit slower” as it takes time to “build a reputation”. “The impact has been more significant”. He gives an example of one of KM bloggers saying “when I think about IBM, I think Luis”. “It allowed me to have a public face, a public voice”

“They allowed me to position myself in a KM blogosphere, to share what we were doing internally and how we were doing. A public voice of KM in IBM.” This turned into “a whole bunch of relationships”.

“I feel being part of the community of passionate people around KM.[...] I’m not longer alone. Many people in most companies were facing the same issues I was facing. Sharing those experiences was a tremendous experience – that’s why I’m still blogging”.

Roles weblog plays in networking

“Weblog is crucial to allow people to build up an opinion without knowing you”. Luis compares weblog to an “internet business card”, that not only tells “who you are and what you do”, but also allows to “get an introduction of your community” by seeing who comments. He emphasises how important is engaging with others who comment on a weblog – “last thing you can do is to ignore your comments. I hear from people ‘I’m a big fun out your blog because you reply back’”.

“Weblogs allow you to get beyond what people publish and to get as sense of what a person is like”. “to build a profile of a person as a person”, not a “business entity”. “Not how long you have been married, but how people write articles”. “When you write a blogpost you are giving yourself out as a person”. He adds, “the line between life and work is going to disappear”.

Later weblogs “consolidate the initial contacts”. He says that it’s more in trackbacks and cross-linking between blogs than in comments. He talks about meeting Bill Ives for the first time, while knowing him via weblog for several years. “It was amazing”. “It was like two old pals talking about KM and picking it up where we have left it in the blogs”.

Linking conversations between blogs helps to “corroborate what someone else said” while also adding own experiences and sharing with others. “And then you are talking not about silos [...], but interconnected complex network of blogs”, where bloggers know whom to go to for help or an advice. Luis talks about the sense of community that emerges thought those interactions

Forming of a community via weblogs is much slower than you could have e.g. with social networking site, as “you don’t constantly bombard them with the updates”. He says that building those connections takes time, but they are “the most ever lasting”, since “people understand the hard work that goes into weblog post”. He emphasizes that blogging is not an overnight success, it takes time and effort. For him his weblog is a central part of his online presence, “social networking sites come and go, your blog won’t”.

When we talked how blogging helps in getting things done work-wise, Luis says that blogging lays a foundation, building trust “which is crucial for collaboration”. He also gives an example of the role of his internal weblog in getting “last three jobs” once he announced in his weblog that he was ready for new challenges. He adds “Your never know when you are going to be unemployed. Start blogging now.”

What is difficult with weblogs is the embedding blogging into the workflow of day to day interactions. While email is part of work, blogging still feels as an extra work.

Blogging in comparison to other tools

Blogging is a “powerful way to build up your personal brand”; “you don’t get it from social networking site, there you are just one of many people”. Blogging allows “to tell the world who you are”, to share passion. In a weblog it is also possible to “expand without bugging people”, so the readers can decide what and how much they want to read. What Twitter does (and blog doesn’t) is providing a space to share “titbits what I’m doing”, “ambient intimacy”. “Weblog is for an elaborate thought. Twitter for building social capital”. He talks about enhancing his connection with KM bloggers by knowing about their day to day life from Twitter.

Talking about different tools he tells about the risks of “spreading yourself too thin”, since it take effort to maintain one’s presence, adding that if he would have to choose one tool, it would be his weblog – “most of my hard work went into there”. For him “blogging is more a long-term commitment towards yourself and your personal brand”. “Twitter is like you treat acquaintances, blog is how you treat good friends”.

For Luis blog “is an essential tool”, not only as a personal KM system, but as a way to manage connections.

• Knowledge workers redefined: responsibility and creating value by acting on knowledge
• Blog networking study: non-personal relations and lurking
• Blog networking study: establishing and maintaining relations via blogging