OneStop and Community Equity

My colleague Peter Reiser has been making great strides forward with his notion of Community Equity. For a detailed write up see his blog post. He was even interviewed by Scoble on the subject!

(Heresy, heresy) but I have mixed feelings about Community Equity in the context of OneStop. I like the notion of community, and I really like the notion of encouraging participation. Having our users easily rate and comment on OneStop pages should prove invaluable. Ratings will supplement our current metrics of downloads and currency to give users a good solid indication of page value. Comments will evolve into discussions, where as we currently only offer page feedback. Discussions will then move into forums. All great stuff!

I'm a little more skeptical on the Community Equity front. I not sure our users will be motivated to participate (more) if their Personal Equity rises. Historically the lion's share of OneStop accesses has been from people looking for answers, and secondarily browsing for information. I don't expect that to change any time soon.

The big question is  "What's in it for me?". We're asking our users to spend their limited time, rating and commenting. In my experience people need a recognizable return on investment to participate. Is a high community equity rating, and being listed in the top 10 on the homepage enough? I don't know; I hope so. I do anticipate arguments about the formula in how CE is generated. Is it fair that a person who (perhaps without a lot of thought) rates 50 documents, gets a higher rating than someone who moderates a couple of OneStop pages that aren't popular products, or a person that has submitted one "white paper" or Technocrat article?

Comments:

What is OneStop? It would be helpful if every posting on your blog on that topic either defined the term or linked to an earlier posting that does. Thanks.

Posted by reader from BSC latest postings list on March 07, 2008 at 11:54 PM PST #

good post Mike -
You are raising some interesting points

"What is in it for me"
I don't think just adding a ranking system of the top contributors/participants is enough.
We need to link the equity model to some compensation and recognition models ( and yes we are working it..)
"Rating Algorithms"
By doing our pilot we are gathering a lot of data and input from the community members and can/will tune the mathematical algorithm.
As we calculate Contribution (e.g submitting a White Paper) and Participation Equity (rating a White Paper) we can distinguish between contribution and feedback.

Posted by Peter Reiser on March 08, 2008 at 04:35 AM PST #

I agree it needs to be linked to established models. Many companies have performance management goals- and when i was team lead for a group of 5 i made sure that part of their bi-annual review outlined what they were contributing back to the group, down to looking at uploads into a DMS a painful data gathering exercise- a standard equality rating across the board would have been wonderful.

Think back to our grammar school days our report cards graded our core subjects (equate getting an A in 'science' with hitting your revenue #s for example) but things like 'contributes in class' and 'plays nice with others' where also graded and valued and that hopefully made us well rounded individuals!

Posted by daniela barbosa on March 10, 2008 at 02:54 PM PDT #

Post a Comment:
  • HTML Syntax: NOT allowed
About

mbriggs

Search

Categories
Archives
« April 2014
SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
  
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
   
       
Today
Feeds