NETTING IT OUT

LinkedIn Needs To Do Something With Groups

Of all the things that there are to like about LinkedIn (and there are many), LinkedIn’s groups and group discussions are not near the top.  I won’t pretend to know what is going on behind the scenes at LinkedIn, but I sincerely hope that someone there is looking at figuring out what LinkedIn users really want, and how to make groups and group discussions more attractive to and inviting to LinkedIn users.

I follow 14 LinkedIn groups, and I find far too often that the activity level in these groups, while variable, and not without some more significant activity in some groups than others, is by and large very disappointing:

Bob Eastman's LinkedIn groups

As you can see, the groups I follow have anywhere from 91 members to more than 12,000 members, averaging more than 2,600 members per group.  There are more than enough members, therefore, to support some very rich discussion.  As it happens, however, the average number of discussions in these 14 groups is well under 10% of the number of members, no matter how you count it.  Where there are discussions in my groups, some 60-70% of the
initiated discussions went without any response or comments.

There is, of course, no reason why you should consider my groups to be “typical” – or to be the same groups that you would be interested in.  I do not, however, subscribe to anything as ‘unmainstream’ as, say, the ‘Keystroke
Counters of America’ (oh how I hope no such group really exists).  My groups are for the most part a mix of academic and professional affiliations, and supply chain and technology groups.  You can check my LinkedIn groups
for yourself on my LinkedIn page.

While I would be remiss in not admitting to be part of the problem myself, I do start out every few days with at least a fresh intention to be more of an active participant in some of my groups.  But LinkedIn’s groups just do not seem to have a compelling enough look-and-feel, content, or capability to invite greater participation.

I do have a couple of theories – the email digests provide no grouping to, or sufficient detail with, the topics in the email; the layout of the LinkedIn group screens themselves do not seem to be well-laid out, or designed for focusing on and participating in a discussion; and of course there are numerous other forums, message boards, groups, and other collaboration areas on the Internet.

LinkedIn has gained considerable recent prominence as the businessperson’s social collaboration space of choice, and there is a lot to like about what LinkedIn has to offer.  This is all the more reason to hope that LinkedIn has something better in store for us soon.

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

June 14, 2009 - Posted by Robert Eastman | Business