OK it’s not really dead. Actually, social networking is alive and well. And thriving.
The “networking” part is fine. It’s the “social” part that needs to be killed off–at least when discussing the idea to professionals who have no patience for the likes of MySpace and Facebook. Here’s the problem: those who are unfamiliar with the versatility and value of the features of social networking tend to be fixated with the word “social.”
Social, according to the New Oxford American Dictionary, means “relating to or designed for activities in which people meet each other for pleasure.” So, it’s not surprising that busy lawyers generally cringe when the hear about social networking. <sarcasm> There’s just no room in most law firms for pleasure </sarcasm>.
This idea prompted the Twitter question, “is it really “social networking” if you use social networks for business reasons? Should we simply call it networking?
Blogger–tweeter Nicole Black agreed that it should just be “networking.” Blogger–tweeter Doug Cornelius had some thoughts, too.
And what about LinkedIn? It’s a networking site, but it is geared toward business networking. Steve Matthews reported that the number of lawyers on LinkedIn has increased by 98,000 in the last two months. Kevin O’Keefe pointed out that LinkedIn site traffic (unique visitors per month) is way up and that all major law firms have profiles on LinkedIn.
Those who are unfamiliar with it tend to lump together LinkedIn with MySpace and Facebook, but the focus is different. Kevin refers to LinkedIn as a “professional social network.” I kind of like that concept, but I am not completely sold. My gut feeling is still to strike “social” – but really only when the discussion involves those who don’t get it. And just in case my readers aren’t familiar with their work, Nicole, Doug, Steve, and Kevin all get it.
The Wall Street Journal ran a piece called Social Networking Goes Professional, back in August 2007. It describes how some doctors use social networks to share ideas about solving medical problems. When doctors connect with each other online (at a site called Sermo) to seek advice on a tricky diagnosis, it seems to be “all business” to me. There are social networking platforms that target lawyers, too (see e.g., LawLink and Legal OnRamp – Doug has written a lot about them.) Some of these social networking sites are a step in the right direction, but they attract those who already “get it.” Any lawyer who would join one of these sites doesn’t need to be convinced of the value of social networking. [Tangent: doctors and lawyers have no problem with social networking on the golf course, why the aversion to social networking online?]
Those who don’t get it may point to this IBM commercial, which features a Generation Y slacker employee wasting time on a social networking site. His boss points out that his networking is much too “social” and not enough about “business.”
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obCHKPYHuhA&hl=en]
I really like that commercial. The implication, of course, is that IBM can provide solutions that harness the power of social networking and put it to business use. My fear, however, is that some people will use it as ammunition in their crusade against using technology to connect people – just because they think that the technology might be misused by the likes of the slacker.
What we must understand–and communicate–is the idea that it’s not the platform, but the way that you use it. For example, I started using Facebook (which was originally exclusively for college students) to connect with fellow legal KM folks for business networking. (I’ve slowly expanded my use of it to connect “socially,” as well.) There are several KM and technology groups on Facebook – for legal and other fields (see a short list below).
So, when trying to promote the features and benefits of social networking in your law firm or other organization, is it a good idea to dispense with the “social” and just focus on “networking?” Or maybe call it “business networking” or “online networking.” Please discuss in the comments.
Facebook Groups (please feel free to add more in the comments):
- Social Networking in the Enterprise
- Lonely Lawyers on Facebook
- Knowledge Management for Legal Professionals (also a LinkedIn Group)
- Real Lawyers Have Blogs
- The Lawyer’s Guide to Collaboration Tools and Technologies
- Between Lawyers
- Stem Friends
LawyerKM :: Knowledge Management & Technology for Lawyers and Law Firms
If you liked it, please share it.
The theme is solid. Consider looking at it this way.
The big societal transformation taking place is connecting people to each other for information and knowledge exchange, listening and collaborating, and driving value and outcomes. Effectively, that takes place in networks – open (public networks) closed (working teams) and hybrids (open and closed) where the public and working teams work together.
Every organization of humans is a network. Social networks aggregate people first, who connect to form relationships. Other types of networks connect people for a purpose – usually solving a specific problem. Networks form in all conceivable ways and dimensions. They all look very different depending upon their purpose and the strength of the network.
Some networks form to build commerce through relationships – the Social Web. Some form to achieve continuous business improvement by building collective intelligence (imagine a group of lawyers who collaborative with diverse experience to build a model act – often from different states, some practitioners, some judges, some academics. This is the smart web – also a dimension of using engagement to build value and to drive outcomes.
One of the challenges for the legal profession is that it largely is built on an organizing principle of advocacy – meaning that the best results are achieved through strenuous argument of divergent viewpoints. The world is moving in the opposite direction. Most societal institutions in business and government view collaboration as a way to eliminate the transactional barriers (and costs) that are largely created by the advocacy model.
What the social networking sites have accomplished is that they have shown the world that it is possible to interact as a way of life. You can engage with others geographically dispersed with both similar and different interests. That is the really big deal.
The point is that in law, the engagement can drive value through collective intelligence. But don’t confuse the working tools -peer to peer social networking tools like facebook, myspace, etc., – with the network architecture that is going to best serve working processes (many of which you will find have a social element designed to build peer trust). Those are two very different things.
I practiced law for over 20 years, became very frustrated with the inefficiencies and counter productiveness of many of the legal structures and the business model, and co-founded and built an enterprise social networking company for a period of over 9 years. See http://www.neighborhoodamerica.com/corporate and watch the video for insight. I also have a podcast series on related topics. See web.mac.com/kpkobza for Inflection.
This theme that you are raising is extremely important. Just raise the bar on the discussion and it will elevate the possibilities.
I am a small business professional and networking can be the difference between success and failure. But I don’t get very many leads from befriending 200 strangers on Facebook. I have a group of associates I know and trust and invite them to exchange referrals on a service such as http://www.referralkey.com/ (I believe they work closely with the legal community too) and I can then track and create new business relationships. It sounds like you and your readers could benefit from a tool that will allow you to turn those 3 or for connections into a rewarding referral network.
Lisa Katz
If social means : relating to or designed for activities in which people meet each other for pleasure
then how do you explain: social worker, socialism, social responsibility, social contract, social institution, not to mention the related words, like sociology, sociopath and so on?
Can it be that rather than the meaning you cited here, the reason could be the fact that Facebook and MySpace are “kid places” for college students?
Merriam-Webster gives several meanings:
1: involving allies or confederates
2 a: marked by or passed in pleasant companionship with one’s friends or associates
b: sociable
c: of, relating to, or designed for sociability
3: of or relating to human society, the interaction of the individual and the group, or the welfare of human beings as members of society
4 a: tending to form cooperative and interdependent relationships with others of one’s kind : gregarious
b: living and breeding in more or less organized communities
c of a plant : tending to grow in groups or masses so as to form a pure stand
5 a: of, relating to, or based on rank or status in a particular society
b: of, relating to, or characteristic of the upper classes
c: formal
6: being such in social situations
Actually, none of them contains the word pleasure. Working with people more like. What do lawyers do? Fullfilling a social role?
I agree with your conclusions and all, but I think the reason people don’t take it seriously, because it did not start seriously. Teenagers and college students are not role models for lawyers and doctors and mature, serious businessmen. That would explain why they can accept social networking on the golf course and not on Facebook.
Just my thoughts, it is a good post.
Oops, must be the late night. I would lie to cross out the “none of them….” part. 2a contains it of course.
*goes for coffee*
@rolandhesz – I was waiting for some sharp reader to bring up the other definitions of “social.” Clearly social goes beyond pleasure, and you’ve hit the nail on the head: the aversion is because of the roots of social networks (kids throwing sheep at eachother). I’m adding your name to the list of those who “get it.” 😉 Thanks for commenting.
Patrick
Pingback: Social Networking for Law Students | Knowledge Management « LawyerKM