Steps in Fostering Culture

Intentional Steps and Serendipitous Events

Business Purpose

     In March, 1991, while Lotus Development Corp. was building its unique Business Partner distribution channel for the Lotus Notes product, Arlene Greene said, "Let's use our product to communicate with our Partners!"  She commissioned a couple of 486-based servers, had Lotus Notes Release 2 installed, and had phone lines and modems installed.  It was called "Notes Net."

Intentional Community

     To create "intentional community," we have to know what we mean by "community," and a lot about the "intentions."

Community

     A community is a group of people who've decided, volunteered or elected to join with other people for some common interest.  But, so is a mob.   What distinguishes a community from a mob is the nature of the relationships among the participants:  In a community, there is some concern about the benefits being derived by others; in a mob, no body particular cares about what others are deriving, so long as I get what I want.

     In a community, the participants or members care about each other; a mob has no such caring members.

     A community is defined, also, by some boundary:   There people inside the community, and they are distinguishable in some way from the other people are not members.  The boundary may be geographic (the community of Oak Grove), by affiliation (the community of pilots), or by common interest (the community of vintage car exhibitors).  With technology, we seldom see a geographic boundary; technology allows us to transcend political or geographic boundaries.

     Membership may be directed (say, by assignment from a person in authority; the community of incarcerated juveniles), required (the community of attorneys, to which professional association is virtually mandatory), or voluntary.   With technology, it is hard to legislate participation; these communities are virtually always voluntary.  Part of the reason for this the the kind of motivation:   Extrinsic motivation (that is, under pressure or reward) may inject a person into a community, but they'll fare poorly if their behavior is coerced.  Intrinsic motivation (that is, for personal gain) is always preferred, because such people don't have to pressured into acting on their responsibilities as community members.

     Community membership does carry with it certain responsibilities and authorities.  Unless these duties are carried out in accordance with the culture of the community, the erstwhile participant may be ostracized by other members.  In the database studied here, for example, there was one person who never appeared unless and until he had a complaint to raise or a specific question to ask.   He consistently ignored the duties to be responsive to other messages posted.   As a consequence, people slowly began to decline offering  responses, with the result that the community member who kept violating the taboo against taking without giving found it unrewarding to participate and has not been seen in several months.

Intentionality

     To create a community, the leadership must have the clear intention to do so.  Willful intention drives the long-term interventions that are required and provide the pattern for planning and execution.  You reap what you sow.   If you ignore the problems, if you fail to stimulate responses, if you avoid the events that build trust among participants out of some "non-interventionist" mentality, you have only luck as your partner in community creation.  However, if you look at every posting as a new opportunity to stimulate community

     While some writers would assert that teamsand by extension, communities, can't be intentionally created, we have enough evidence to assert, emphatically, that they can.  However, those intending to form community must be willing to engage in a wide variety of behaviors.

Deep Woods' Role

     As Lotus Business Partner (from 1992), Deep Woods Technology is quite unique:  By exclusively focusing on the intersection of technology (like Notes) and culture, we bridge the fields.  We are neither technologists, developing and deploying applications, or organizational developers; we operate with both sets of skills.  To date, we are the only Lotus Business Partner in that unique niche.   As a consequence, Lotus wasn't quite sure during the early years just what our "magic" was!  So, in early 1994, I asked permission of (then) VP of Business Partner Programs, Don Bulens, to demonstrate what we do by transforming the Partner Forum from a loose technical discussion forum into a strong, supportive community.   By September, 1996, he'd seen the effects of that work (and our results with Lotus customers) and engaged our firm as consultant to Lotus to address other culture/technology issues.

     During those two years, I made a point of participating regularly (usually daily), and making some of the interventions which, if you weren't aware of my intentions, would have looked rather unusual.  For one example, I became a frequent initiator of controversy, and was often associated with controversial topics and positions.  Some participants even worried (via e-mail) that my contributions were "over the top," and potentially destructive.  But, because I held a clear set of outcomes in mind, it was easy to withstand those objections and "stay the course."  (You can find more about the "The Uses of Controversy" in the companion article, "Nurturing Community Through Collaboration.")

Core Influences

     After the initial "false-start" phase, there was some initial growth in participation by a growing population of Lotus BP.  There was some Lotus employee participation, albeit mostly of an "announcement" kind.   The one notable exception was Scott Brown, the Lotus Notes expert on modemsknown to his friends at the time as "Quasimodem."  Scott had more experience than anyone in the world with how to make the vast variety of commercial modems work properly with Lotus Notes across multiple operating systems.  He'd consolidated that information into a unique Notes database, called the "Mobile Survival Kit," that survives to this day as a key customer resource.

The Insider

     But Scott's involvement was more than helping BP with modem questions.  In his very first post (Sept. '92), Scott set the pattern of his involvement by answering an outstanding BP question with information from the Lotus Support organization.  He was also the first person to post a humorous poem, a parody of "The Twelve Days of Christmas" just in time for the holiday season of 1992.   That wasn't, however the first humor in the Forum; that was a cartoon posted by Steve Brown (no relation), of ISI Infortext, who was roundly trounced for putting such a large graphic in the database (about which, see the discussion of  attachments, below), and who seldom posted after that.

     Scott brought an important resource to the medium:  A responsive Lotus representative.  Other Lotus-originated posts were generally announcements, within very narrowly circumscribed areas of responsiveness, and Technical Support people were explictly prohibited from the Forum,  perhaps because management feared the Forum could become an unauthorized route into Support.

     As a contractor to Lotus, Scott was unencumbered by the customary politics that might restrain an employee...and he made most of it.  He represented a link into the larger Lotus from participants who were employees of the much smaller Business Partners.  Because of his position within Lotus' Quality Engineering organization, Scott's most immediate resources were the very people responsible for developing the product.  As a consequence, the Partner Forum began to take a decidedly technical orientation to its posts.  And, as some of the early frequent participants grew their organizations and moved into management (e.g., Mark Tebbe of Lante, Ken Norland of DSSI, now part of Ernst & Young), their participation waned.

No Good Deed Goes Unpunished

     Through 1995, Scott Brown continued to be an unofficial link between Business Partners and the Lotus Support organization.  Occasionally, he would call or e-mail a colleague in another department, advising them to come respond to something in the Forum, and that was all hush-hush, and behind-the-scenes.  But Scott's immediate superior, and the director of the worldwide Business Partner program noticed, and in April, 1996, Scott was officially appointed to the post, and assigned full-time responsibility for that job.  (Since then, Scott has been joined by three other full-time Lotus employees who respond to questions, test for purported bugs reported by BP, and intercede with developers of new products with BP recommendations.

The Outsider

     There are many things an employee of a sponsoring organization cannot do; such things are usually called "career-limiting moves."  It's always useful to have an outsider who can play that role...and I've always said, "There are no career-limiting moves for a consultant."  So, after I'd promised to apply our professional skills to moving the Partner Forum to the next level, the first thing I set out to do was to coordinate with Scott Brown.   After all, he'd been there before me, and already had established a presence; I didn't want to run afoul of a natural leader who'd emerged from the hurly-burly of frequent postings.

Classes of Participants

     We learn to read before we write; the effective participant in a discussion database reads posts to observe the customs of the cyberplace before they post.  Whether they post long or short messages, or they include attachments or not, or whether they use hostile or abusive language or not is determined for most people by the volumes of messages on file that newcomer reads.  And the exemplary practices of the cybercommunity are most often shaped by what we call the Core Regulars.  The newcomers and casual participants have models to emulate in style.

     There have been about 100 Regulars active in the Forum for the past year (the number has grown over the past several years); they comprise about 20-25% of the total number of unique people who participant, month-in and month-out.  Newcomers (defined as people who consistently post for three or four months, never having been seen before); account for about 10% of each months' participants.  Everyone else is part of the General population, those who infrequently participate, or stop by then move on.

Incidentally, it's amazing to me how people can drop in, post one question, and then express disappointment that the other participants aren't willing to drop everything for that query.  As one such "passer-by" said to me when I explained the community spirit that exists, "That's too bad; I just wanted an answer, not a relationship."  Sad.

Movers and Shakers

     There is an elite subset of the Core Regulars who, over time, will make the most memorable contributions.  They're present for a long span of time (not necessarily the full life of the community), and they make frequent posts.  And, in some unmeasurable or indefinable way, the quality of their posts seems to be a cut above the rest.

     I don't have a clue how to create "Movers and Shakers," but they're important to the formation of community in cyberspace.  I do know, however, they need to be encouraged and nurtured.  These are the people who make the most memorable posts, or have a distinctive pattern of humor.  If you were to poll the active participants in the Forum and ask for names of people who's posts they always read, these names would crop up on most lists.

     In the Partner Forum, there are probably about 100 whom I'd identify as the "Movers and Shakers."  In a discussion within the Forum coincident with writing this monograph, several people raised objections to naming the people by name, so I've elected to individually inform them via e-mail.   But, there are a few people to stand out so dramatically, I really want to use them as models:

Steps Taken

     From early 1994, as I've said before, when I mentally stepped in the role of an unofficial facilitator of the Forum, I responded to the various posts with the intention of seeing just how strong a community could be created in this new medium.  Some of the significant events in time include:

     In addition to the specific actions I took with the intention of fostering community (see here), there were many on-going kinds of interactions that several members of the Core Regulars engaged in:

Cultural Emergence

     It is my contention that community does not emerge spontaneously; it requires the execution of one or more of these important influences:

     During October, 1993, there was a newly emerging population of users, some of whom assumed the database was strictly for technical issues, others of whom came to the experience with the assumption they'd relate to their peers.  One of the "technology only" proponents was Richard Davis who proposed those who really wanted to share humor in the Forum precede the subject line with the ">" mark, so the serious participants would know they were safe to ignore that message.   A 50-message thread ensued, during which the practice of using ">" to flag non-technical topic "drift", including humor and personal remarks was adopted.

Evoking Passion

     At several points in on-going discussion topics, I made a point of offering affirmation, thanks or other positive feedback.  My intention was to model the process of respect for each other, and to mark off those posts that were, in my opinion, contributory to community.

     At the same time, I sometimes used a response in an attempt to provoke some passionate response.  And, some of those seeds sprouted.

Avenues Not Explored

     With 20/20 hindsight, there are things I'd certainly do differently.  The most difficult problem, largely in Scott Brown's hands, was the inclusion of other knowledgeable Lotus employees in the discussion.  Many of the most informed people have been reluctant to participate because it would expose their name and e-mail address as the person responsible for a particular topic.  From time-to-time, Scott has had to post reminders to Forum participants that they should not abuse the good people who lend their expertise and their time...yet some people persist.

     If we had it to do all over again, I would attempt to collaborate with Lotus to have more direct engagement of more senior people in the Forum, under stricter rules of engagement.  That would have attracted more participants, earlier, achieving critical mass sooner. 

     There have been about 4,100 different individuals who've participated in the Forum over it's life.  There is a population to draw on of 18,000 Lotus Business Partners; if each of them have, say, three technical employees, that a potential population of 54,000 people who should be participants.  (We do not know how many of them are "lurkers," reading but never posting to the Forum.)   With a more aggressive program to "draw" people to the Forum, we could probably have tripled  population statistics.

Fortunately, we are now engaged in a project where we have the opportunity to test this hypothesis within a completely new discussion that we'll be transforming to community.  We'll be using the same technology, drawing on the same Business Partner population, and testing a much more aggressive approach to attracting that initial critical mass of participants.  We'll report on our progress when the trend is clear.

     Another issue that non-participating Business Partners cite is the appearance of "time-wasting" reading of irrelevant posts.  But, active participants will testify to the virtues and benefits to them that far outweigh the time they spend.  One may spend hours reading and participating in the Forum...and find a solution that saves days of effort.

Taboos of the Culture

     One of the classical signs for the existence of culture is the appearance of taboos:  Generally accepted rules of behavior that are seldom explicitly defined, but for which there are penalties for violation.  Some of the taboos of the Forum:

Cultural Self-Policing

     I assumed the self-assigned responsibility of enforcing the evolving norms of the community from an early time.  As new participants showed up and appeared to violate the taboos, I took it upon myself to offer feedback.  During 1995 through early-1997, I tried to check the Forum for messages at least once a day.

     Once, in 1996, while a new person was violating several of the taboos, I reproached him in the Forum.  He responded with a demanding query about my authority to be dictating rules to him.  Several of the Core Regulars then took up the battle, defended my recommendations, added their own opinions, and sanctioned my actions.

     Since then, I have relaxed my vigilance, relying on the fact that many of the Regulars will now step in and take care of the policing function if I leave them the room.  Most of my contributions during 1997 were as a Regular member of the Forum, or to identify issues that I saw emerging that deserved further discussion or attention.

     In early 1996, some of us were notified that Lotus planned on expanding participation beyond North America into Europe, the Middle East, and Africa (EMEA).  Knowing that we would have many new participants for whom English was not a native language, I was concerned about our ability to maintain the cozy, unofficial self-policing.  So, in February, I posted some recommendations for the formation of a Forum-elected governing council.  That became the largest thread of discussion to-date.  And, in the end, it was clear that it was about a 50/50 split between those who wanted leave the status quo and those who feared, like me, that a lack of formal rule-setting body might allow the Forum to degenerate to anarchy.  Without a clear majority toward change, the discussion withered out, leaving the status quo.

     We needn't have worried.  Our EMEA colleagues, largely from the U.K., and Northern European countries, have joined our community, made it richer and more varied, and help reinforce the culture.