Download pdf - Social: Session 5: The Science of Relationship

The Science of Relationship

Michael Wu, PhD (mich8elwu) Principal Scientist of Analytics @ Lithium

April 24th, 2012

Track: Social

twitter: mich8elwu linkedin.com/in/MichaelWuPhD #scon12

agenda ▪ Introduction: CRM data

▪ Development and maintenance of relationship • Anthropology: complementarity between social network and community

▪ Interpersonal relationship and the Dunbar limit • Sociology: the attention economy

▪ Customers relationship (with brands) • Application: dealing with the Facebook irony

▪ Future work


what’s the “R” in social CRM

3

▪What data do CRM system store? • Contact record

• email, phone, address • twitter, facebook, linkedin?

• Transaction record • purchase/sales history • order/fulfillment data

• Support record • support case history • service delivery data

▪ Where’s the “r”elationship data in CRM system?

twitter: mich8elwu linkedin.com/in/MichaelWuPhD

#scon12

Today’s CRM system

“R” ≈ record

≠ relationship

4


where do we find relationship data? ▪ On social media • Facebook • Linkedin

▪ It’s a huge ecosystem of tools+services

▪ There are too many places to look!

5


where do we find relationship data? ▪ On social media • Facebook • Linkedin

▪ It’s a huge ecosystem of tools+services

▪ There are too many places to look!

5


#scon12

Social is not new!

Human have been social since they were caveman

6


#scon12

Social anthropology perspective of social

Tech relationship

1. Social network 2. Community

7


#scon12

Social anthropology perspective of social

Tech relationship

1. Social network 2. Community

7


how do social networks form?

8

Emeryville = community

Bob old members new / casual members

weak ties strong ties

A story of how Bob’s social network was built


how do social networks form?

9

college

work

Emeryville = community

Social networks form naturally within communities as people establishes relationships

Social network maintains relationships as people move between communities

http://lithosphere.lithium.com/t5/Building-Community-the-Platform/Community-vs-Social-Network/ba-p/5283




what do real social network data look like?

10

https://www.facebook.com/notes/facebook-engineering/visualizing-friendships/469716398919


▪ Social Network • Held together by pre-existing

interpersonal relationships between individuals

• You know everyone in your network (ego-network), people who are connected to you directly

• Each person has only one social network, despite there are many social network platforms

• Structure: Network

communities vs. social networks (on/offline)

11

▪ Community • Held together by some common

interests of a large group of people

• Most people, especially new members, do not know majority of the members in the community

• Any one person may be part of many communities at any given time

• Structure: Hierarchical, overlapping & nested


▪ Social Networks

communities vs. social networks (on/offline)

12

▪ Community


lifecycle of relationships

13

disconnected

weak tie

strong tie

2. building tie strength

3. maintaining relationship

1. creating a weak tie

do nothing

do something

bad

Easy! All it takes is an “hello”

http://lithosphere.lithium.com/t5/Building-Community-the-Platform/From-Weak-Ties-to-Strong-Ties-Community-vs-Social-Networks-3/ba-p/6834

http://lithosphere.lithium.com/t5/Building-Community-the-Platform/Maintaining-the-Strong-Ties-Community-vs-Social-Networks-4/ba-p/6854


#scon12

But what is relationship?

14


▪ Relationship: sociology perspective • A tie or a connection between two entities (e.g.

people, companies, cities, or even nations) • Tie strength = strength of the relationship

▪ Granovetter: components of tie strength • Time: • Intensity: • Trust: • Reciprocity:

▪ Strong relationships requires more time & attention

the components of a relationship

15

Time: amount of time spent together Intensity: emotional intensity & sense of closeness Trust: intimacy or mutual confiding (transparency) Reciprocity: amount of reciprocal services

http://lithosphere.lithium.com/t5/Building-Community-the-Platform/Figuring-Out-the-Relationship-Puzzle/ba-p/11290


▪We only have 24 hours a day

▪We only have fixed amount of attention

▪ How many meaningful relationship can we have?

the attention economy

16 via nielsen

http://lithosphere.lithium.com/t5/Building-Community-the-Platform/The-Relativity-and-Economics-of-Relationship/ba-p/12058


▪ Prof. Robin Dunbar found a relationship between brain size of primate species and their group size

▪ Extrapolate data from 38 primate species to human neocortex ratio Dunbar number = 148 (~150)

▪ Verified by surveying pre-industrial villages/tribes

~150: the Dunbar number (or Dunbar limit)

17

we know the human neocortical ratio

148

http://lithosphere.lithium.com/t5/Building-Community-the-Platform/Where-is-the-New-Dunbar-Limit/ba-p/10676


▪ Order our relationship from the strongest (immediate family) to the weakest (acquaintance)

▪ This creates a relationship profiles for each person

▪ In pre-industrial villages & tribes, people only know ~150 people on average

does Dunbar limit still applies in modern society?

18

wife children

parents

siblings close friends

…………

# of relationships

tie s

treng

th

16 ~150

acquaintance

http://lithosphere.lithium.com/t5/Building-Community-the-Platform/Can-Social-Technologies-Increase-Our-Dunbar-Limit/ba-p/13694


▪ Dunbar’s limit may not apply in modern society b/c • necessity for social cohesion is

substantially lower • communication (an important part

of socializing) is much more efficient

▪ But our brain hasn’t changed for millennia…

does Dunbar limit still applies in modern society?

19

wife children

parents

siblings close friends

………… 16

acquaintance

# of relationships

tie s

treng

th

~150


we can have more than 150 friends

20 # of relationships

tie s

treng

th

~150 strong ties weak ties

if have fewer strong ties

attention shift from stronger ties to weaker ties


we can have more than 150 friends

21 # of relationships

tie s

treng

th

~150 strong ties weak ties

if have weaker strong ties

attention shift from stronger ties to weaker ties

We can shift our time/attention around, but the total amount of time/attention remain roughly the same

area under the yellow relationship profile

area under the blue relationship profile =


#scon12

What about the relationship between customers & brands?

22

customer relationship < personal relationship (with brands) (with people)

always weaker

http://lithosphere.lithium.com/t5/Building-Community-the-Platform/Figuring-Out-the-Relationship-Puzzle/ba-p/11290


▪ Facebook contains a lot of our strong ties • By definition, these stronger ties will demand more attention, and will win more

of your limited time/attention

▪ Irony: because Facebook is “too good” at maintaining our strong ties, it created problems for itself: • In the presence of strong ties, weaker ties

are harder to develop into strong ones • If you already have strong relationship with

your customers. Great! maintain them with Facebook is the way to go

• Otherwise, the strong ties on Facebook will hinder the development of weak ties

the Facebook irony

23

but it’s too fast for your dog


#scon12

How can brands build stronger relationships with their customers?

24


▪ “time” = time spent together ≠ duration of relationship

▪ “time” increases tie strength if the desires to spend time together is mutual

component #1: time

25

time

trust

reciprocity

intensity

LOVE

desire = mutual


▪ “time” = time spent together ≠ duration of relationship

▪ “time” increases tie strength if the desires to spend time together is mutual

▪ Key: know when your customers want to spend time with you, and be there for them

component #1: time

26

trust

reciprocity time

intensity HATE

desire = non-mutual


reciprocity

▪ Customers’ intensity for brands is much lower than their intensity for friends

▪ It is genetic! We have no control over it

▪ Tactic: appeal to greater causes that customers have strong emotions for

▪ Key: don’t try too hard on this component

component #2: intensity

27

intensity

time

trust

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bE3KAuWaz8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bE3KAuWaz8


▪ Transparency creates an environment that’s more conducive for building trust

▪ 2 types of transparency • brand–customer

• blog, twitter, etc • customer–customer

• community discussion forum

component #3: trust

28

trust

time reciprocity

intensity


▪ People trust themselves, so they tend to trust brands that co-create with them

▪ 2 types of co-creation • passive: listening + collect customer input • active: crowdsourced ideation + filtering

▪ Key: 1. Create transparent & authentic

communication channels to customers & among customers

2. Co-create with your customers

component #3: trust

29

trust

time reciprocity

intensity


time

trust

▪ Reciprocity = reciprocal services

▪ Customer Brands • Make it easy for them to help other

customers of yours • Reward them properly and serve

right

▪ Create a sustainable cycle of reciprocity by co-creation

▪ Key: don’t forget to let your customer help you

component #4: reciprocity

30

reciprocity

2 way

intensity


trust

time

▪ Customer community • Opt-in: it’s there when the

customers want it • May have a great cause • Transparent channel • Platform for co-creation • Enables reciprocity

▪ Customer relationship are build the same way as inter-personal relationships, in a community

building customer relationship

31

intensity

reciprocity


#scon12

Now we know how relationships are built, can we measure it?

32


not yet, but each pillar is ~quantifiable~

33

how much time spent in your brand community?

how much time spent engaging & participating on your fan page, youtube channel, etc.?

how deep are the engagements with your brand?

sentiment ratio, emotions

hard to measure. But that’s OK, b/c it’s hard to influence too

how transparent is your brand to your customers?

how responsive you are to your customers?

how many inter-customer discussion do you enable?

at what rate are content being co-created w/ your customers?

at what rate are reciprocal and mutual services being carried out?


future CRM

34

Big challenges:

Combining the metrics for the 4 pillars into a single metric that quantifies the

strength of relationship.

There are nonlinear dependencies between the 4 pillars of a relationship, so

a simple linear model, such a weighted average, won’t be sufficient.

Hopefully, future CRM will not only have data on your customers’ relationship with

your brand, but also the strength of relationships among your customers.


Thank you Q&A + discussion

@mich8elwu

35

https://twitter.com/



http://www.amazon.com/The-Science-Social-Followers-ebook/dp/B006ZNN602/

4/24/2012 ©2012 SugarCRM Inc. All rights reserved. 36

#SCON12