How To Treat The 90-9-1 Theory

There is a theory that states in any online community, 90% lurk, 9% participate and 1% create. There are different ways you can treat this theory…

You can treat it as a huge opportunity. Most community managers are doing a bad job if only 10% of members are engaging. You can step in and save the day.

You can treat it as a benchmark. Anything below is bad, anything above is good. Clients like benchmarks.

You can treat it as a warning. Online communities are overrated and no-body really wants to get involved.

You can treat it as a strategy. You need to focus on finding the participating 10% and growing that number.

You can treat it as a tactic. If you kick out members that don't contribute you've got 0-0-100% participation. Guaranteed.

You can treat it as a multiplier. If you need at least 20 people creating content, you need to attract 2000 members. That’s a target.

You can treat it as irrelevant. It’s an aging theory based upon communities that are nothing like yours.

How do you treat it?

Comments

[Johnny Truant]

This is an interesting thing, this 90-9-1 ratio. I read a good article on it here: http://is.gd/4GIQ , with the upshot being that businesses hoping to gain from participation in social networks (and interactive internet in general) need to pay serious attention to their power users, because they are the influencers.

So in other words, it may feel pointless to interact with that top 1%, because you're only... well... interacting with 1%. But the other 90-99% is out there watching, reviewing, judging.

One suggestion is to view forums and other Web 2.0 ventures as theater: Only a few people are on stage, but there's a whole audience watching.

[Stacey / Create a Balance]

Can you clarify the difference between participating and creating? Thanks!

[jenx67]

If I focus on numbers too much, it starts messing with my head and my content. What bothers me most about blogging is when someone spends hours and hours writing a post. It will be a thoughtful, intelligent post. You comment maybe three dozen times on the three dozen posts, and you are one of three people commenting. The blogger has few readers, but clearly they are writing for a national audience in an OP ED style. They never, ever respond to your comments or visit your blog. I tolerate this for about three months and then don't comment anymore. I may stil visit the blog, but it is not a dynamic experience. I think many bloggers still do not understand the value of participation. They just don't get it. I see so many putting up store front blogs to basically boost their Etsy sales, etc. They want to drive traffic to their commercial sites, but they do nothing to build community. There are brilliant exceptions to this, of course. One final thought - lurkers for me are people who probably know me in my personal life but don't want me to know they read my blog. How weird is that? Truthfully, maybe I don't want to know they read it either. hahahahaha

[LisaNewton]

Richard, I hadn't heard of this theory, but I've experienced it. In regards to your question, I've tried to look at it as a challenge. How do I get community members to participate more? What can I do to keep them engaged? A few ideas have worked and a few haven't, but for me, the key is to keep trying new ideas and to keep learning. Your blog is part of that process.

Thank you............:)

[Ken Wagner]

Depends on your goal for your site or post.

Many folks don't care if others participate; the site is a personal exercise, period. Some close comments or drive them to a forum.

Many folks act *as if* they care about community participation, but do nothing *effective* to prompt a reader response. They scorn the spiteful readers who visit without a trace.

Some provide content in a design format that compels a response. Not from everyone all the time, but from at least someone each time. This creates a culture of engagement, where visitors learn to linger, click, and contribute. Even purchase.

Your site creates that culture of engaged response.

I have found paranormal blogging techniques helpful. I am surprised that more bloggers haven't started leveraging their psychic abilities to attract traffic and compel participation.

[Pace]

I treat it as a diagnostic. If a community has a 90/9/1 ratio, it's average.

If it's closer to 99/1/0.1, it's more of a soapbox-style community with one (or a few) leaders, lots of followers, and few additional contributors.

If it's closer to 60/30/10, it's an active, tightly-knit community with lots of active participation.

It's definitely one of the factors I take note of in an online community. For instance, the fact that Triiibes is closer to 60/30/10 makes it an amazing place where effective collaboration happens.

[Tawnya]

Interesting. I'm still trying to learn the best way to encourage participation, but when I organized offline groups I always looked at it as a strategy and worked on multiplying the overall number so the small 10% wouldn't get overworked.

I'd love to hear specifics on the strategy/multiplication side of growing online communities.

[Trina]

What about the potential value of the 90% who may lurk since they value the content of a blog, yet have nothing new to add, BUT, may well be 'influencers'? (in reference to your Charlie,Chuck and Vicki post)

[Jodith]

I also would be interested in the difference between creators and participators.

My guess would be that creators are the ones who bring up new topics/post new threads, where as participators are those who reply.

That would make me mostly a participator in most communities. I've never been much of an initiator, probably because I'm such a desperate introvert. How does one who is such a strong introvert inspirt community participation. That is the kernal of my struggle on Administrative Arts.

[kenya]

i think trina's on to something (considering the possible value in the 90% lurkers who may be passing on your info to others who log on).

but i probably think that bcs right now i don't have a community centered online; my online presence drives my community for in-person services at my studio.

what i should focus on is what is the long-term value of building an online community; what will the investment of time cost me and will it take away from the current business at hand; how do i want to grow my business and what role the community will have in it.

so, i'm a bit behind in being to apply the content of your posts. but, they work to inspire me to think a bit differently about what i do and what i want to be doing.

[Mary]

Thanks for a very useful post, Richard. A clever way of explaining many things about PR!

[Grant Simmons]

I look at this as an opportunity.

Increasing 'creators' is a worthy goal.

The opportunity is there to not only increase contributions through conversion and encouragement, but also test usability and technology platforms to empower the creativity and conversions.

It's important to realize that sometimes our technology offerings are responsible for lack of adoption or conversion. Testing and then improving touch points, ease of use, facilitating social interaction and empowering word of mouth can skew the 90-9-1 ratios in your community's favor.

[Ken Allan]

Kia ora Richard!

I am impressed with the way you have picked up my baton and run with it. You did the right thing here, which was to ask others how they felt before making a decision on the facts.

My take on it is not much different from most of your commenters. The 90-9-1 theory is an artefact of observation. One that has been scrutinised by many from many different points of view.

It permits me to realise that because I was one of the 90 for a very long time, and laterly became one of the 9 who quickly found the niche to be one of the 1, I should reconsider what my common sense told me before I learnt about the 90-9-1 theory.

And you are also right - it is still a theory, but it is rapidly developing along the time-line that takes it above theory status to something else.

In the interim, we have a lot of time to think about the facts and what they may mean to you and I and the rest. Some call it Science.

Ka kite
from Middle-earth

[Ulla Hennig]

I would want to replace the word "lurkers" with "silent readers". Quite often I am a silent reader myself, because I have the impression that all the important things have already been said and I won't be able to contribute something new.

[Ken Allan]

Kia ora Ulla!

B Nonnecke and J Preece call them the ‘silent participants’ of discussion forums and have extensively researched their behaviour. Check out:

http://www.cis.uoguelph.ca/~nonnecke/research/silentparticipants.pdf

Catchya later
from Middle-earth