In Search of Friends

Loretta suddenly got hooked on Facebook.  In high school my best friend’s mother was desperately worried that we would become hooked on heroin.  She once warned us that if we drove down 4th Avenue, where the hippies live, someone might leap at us with a heroin syringe while we were stopped for a red light. That seems to be what happened to Loretta this week as she plunged suddenly and quite deeply into a Facebook addiction. What started as a gentle nudge from Pablo for her to get in the social networking game turned into an insatiable urge for Loretta to collect friends. She even began recruiting friends using her Blackberry while riding the bus.

It appears that Loretta will be anyone’s friend. I don’t take that jab at her simply because she mocked me on her Facebook page for not having many friends. I’ve known Loretta for almost two decades, and she is no Julie McCoy (remember Julie from The Love Boat? She was the social coordinator on the cruise. For confused twenty something people, check out old episodes on hulu). Loretta doesn’t prefer to spend a lot of time at large social gatherings. So why, suddenly, is she proactively making online friends?

Setting aside the re-branding of the term “friends”, which among other things has given us permission to think fondly again of former co-workers and fleeting acquaintances, the Facebook phenomenon is very much about fostering certain types of collaboration.

Beyond Facebook’s cute kitty photos and virtual presents is the sophisticated and fascinating science of collaboration on display. Last month the Harvard Business Review (HBR) wrote an in-depth piece on the underlying principles of collaboration. Looking at collaboration with a critical lens helps communications pro’s figure out what project structures are aimed squarely at failure and which ones will succeed. Software advances have allowed a lot of organizations and causes to set up their own version of Facebook – but most fail while Facebook and its counterparts grow. Why?

Millions of dollars spent on web design and technology acquisition get flushed every year because the cool technology tool is driving the project. The HBR article takes the opposite approach. It suggests figuring out what kind of collaboration is best suited to the ultimate goal, and then building the tool to match it. Will solutions be found in a flat style (much like Facebook) or a hierarchical model? There isn’t a value judgment attached to either style, but rather recognition that understanding how decisions will be made is critical to successful collaboration.

Here’s a real-life example. The FDA regulates how drugs are used based on a hierarchical model; certain elite players conduct evaluation and the FDA bases its decisions on this narrow set of data. Meanwhile, many doctors are using a flat model. Doctors prescribe drugs “off-label”, commonly referred to as “evidence-based medicine.” In this flat model, the common knowledge derived across the practice of medicine is used to convince doctors to prescribe drugs in ways that the FDA has not approved. Most patients aren’t aware, when they are getting a recommended treatment from a doctor, whether she or he is using FDA-approved protocol or evidence-based protocol.

Sometimes the FDA wags a finger at off-label practices, other times they shrug and acknowledge the limits of their control over medical decision-making. This type of role switching happens in coalition-style organizing all the time. Sometimes players believe that by having a seat at the table, they are impacting decision-making. In reality, a lot of coalitions are not operating in a flat model; they are operating in a hierarchical model with the pretense of a more robust collaboration. Or, like the FDA, they are vacillating between the two models (only use the drug the way we tell you to versus follow the science even if we haven’t given it our stamp of approval yet).

HBR writes that that there are two ways to manage a flat collaboration:

The Innovation Mall, where problems get posted and anyone can propose a solution (kind of like most of the computer tech support today) but the company or entity decides on the solution;

The Innovation Community, where anybody proposes problems or solutions, and makes decisions about them (much like Facebook);

HBR then describes two ways to manage a hierarchical collaboration:

The Elite Circle, where a select group of participants defines the problem and solution;

The Consortium, which is a lot like the Elite Circle except that a private group of participants may be working across organizations or entities.

Every model has benefits and costs. An innovation model invites new creative solutions that may be beyond the imagination or expertise of the establishment. A consortium model may work best when an industry has become fragmented and artificial walls are preventing the best practices from emerging.

When I think about social networking as a strategy for collaboration, Loretta’s sudden Facebook addiction makes sense. She is rarely hierarchical; what matters to her is finding the right solution, not having the solution come from within or outside an establishment. She is someone who has a genuine interest in the lives and ideas of a diverse network of collaborators. Contrast that to my long-time friend Michelle, who does not use Facebook but who I have often referred to as Julie McCoy. Michelle consistently has a very full social calendar, but her model is hierarchical. Just as Julie is only interested in the cruise ship guests, Michelle is primarily interested in a particular circle of connected people.

I mentioned to Loretta that I was writing about her Facebook Friend Frenzy. She said proudly in response, “…you may want to note that I’m up to 68 friends – and we’re talking quality folks here. Kate Clinton, Mandy Carter, the national action VP at NOW (she invited me), and all of my cousins. The list goes on and on…”

Addendum:

Right after posting this, I got an email from an old friend who found me on Linked In.  We haven’t spoken since 1987 — she is amazing and I’m so glad to have reconnected.  And, Loretta updated her numbers: she’s up to 74 Facebook friends.