You’re probably communicating too much redundant information to your community.
You might be sending out too many messages or by filling those messages with unnecessary information.
This causes two problems.
First, you’re burying the key points in any message. Your members are less likely to do what you need them to do if you’re overwhelming them with too much information. And that point of overwhelm is a lot lower than you might imagine.
Second, it’s training your audience to ignore most of what you say. If you fill your communications with too much redundant information, members get used to ignoring most of it.
Many community’s use some variation of the following in their newcomer journey:
“Subject: Welcome to the community”
“Welcome to the community! We’re thrilled to have you with us and we’re looking forward to helping you in your [xyz] journey. The [xyz] community is a place to ask and answer questions, browse for information and make connections with people just like you.”
This entire paragraph is redundant and the subject line is written to be ignored.
No-one will remember it tomorrow and the word ‘community’ pretty much implies all of the above. If people can see questions and answers on the homepage, then you don’t need to announce that’s what they can do there.
Your members will only remember 2 to 3 points of any communication – and that will only happen if they stand out and are memorably written.
Far better to use something like:
“Subject: 3 Things Insiders Know About [Topic] (that you probably don’t)”
“Let’s get started
There are three things our members know which you probably don’t (yet).
Whatever I write for 1), 2), and 3), I can pretty much guarantee the majority of people will read it.
I can put in unique rules, inside jokes, or some background information that will engage members far better than any dull welcome email.
So, do a review of the copy on your site and the information you’re sending out. Try to remove about a 3rd of your copy and a 3rd of the content within your copy. Then rewrite it to be far more engaging.
“I’ve written a great community strategy, but can’t get the organisation to adopt it”
Then it’s not a great strategy, is it?
It doesn’t matter what’s in the strategy if your organisation doesn’t embrace it. You can’t write a strategy in isolation for an unsuspecting audience and expect them to swallow it whole when it’s published.
That’s simply not how it works.
A great community strategy isn’t written, it’s facilitated. You set up collaborative processes to educate and solicit the opinions of your stakeholders. You bring everyone on the journey with you. You get people into the same room (or Zoom call) to discuss competing priorities, the trade-offs and build a consensus about where and how to move forward.
This also means you won’t get everything you want. That’s how collaboration works. The theoretical best strategy for the community and the best strategy with the resources, permission, understanding, and attitudes within the organisation are often very different.
The final strategy document should never be at risk of rejection. It’s simply the outcome of the discussions and decisions you’ve guided your colleagues through so far.
This is why it might be best to hire an outside consultant. This is a time-intensive process and is a very different skillset from simply managing a community (it also helps to have someone independent from the existing web of relationships within your organisation and with experience working at many other organisations).
A great strategy should feel like a breakthrough. All the critical decisions have been made. There shouldn’t be any more hold-ups. Everyone should be aligned on the community’s value, everyone should know what they need to do to support the community, and everyone should be excited to make it happen.
A simple tip that can save you a lot of pain; validate the problems you’re seeing.
Sometimes community leaders see problems that don’t exist.
Is one member creating too many new topics?
Are too many responses coming from the community manager?
Are there too many posts? (or too few?)
Are too many members posting in one place?
And sure, some of these many have a genuine impact.
Yet if you ask members in a survey (or simply send out an email inviting members to name the biggest problems they see in the community) my guess is none of the above would rank in the top 10.
You might be spending a lot of time trying to solve problems that only you’re seeing.
Worse yet, you might be spending too little time solving your members’ biggest problems.
p.s. When validating a problem don’t list a problem and ask members to say if it’s a problem, that’s cheating. Use an open text field and see if members name it without being prompted.
Too many community strategies prioritise quantity of content over the trustworthiness of content.
This is a shame. It makes the community increasingly noisy without obviously increasing its value to participants.
For a mature community, your goal shouldn’t be to increase the quantity of engagement but to improve the quality of it. People need to have deep trust in the content that’s being created and shared within the community.
Fortunately, the contours of trust are fairly clear:
- Perceived ability of the poster (qualifications, knowledge, experiences).
- Perceived integrity of the poster (honesty, intentions to help others, fairness).
- The consensus of the group (quantity of people who share the opinion compared with those who don’t).
- Trust in the host (is this content hosted on a site known for being trustworthy).
Begin by hosting an annual trust survey.
Ask members about the following (using a 5-point Likert scale):
- Do you feel content posted by members in this community is trustworthy?
- Do you feel members who share content have qualifications, knowledge, and experiences?
- Do you feel members who share content have the best intentions?
- Do you feel enough members share their expertise/opinions in this community?
- Do you feel this website has a reputation for trustworthy content?
You can adapt these as you see fit.
Now you can use this to see which factors are the biggest antecedents of trust for your community. More importantly, you can use this to develop specific actions to increase the trustworthiness of content.
You can find sites that are considered very trustworthy and see the specific steps they’ve taken. Amazon has verified purchases, for example. StackOverflow relies heavily upon its rating system and tight moderation. Find sites that exceed in the areas you’re weak in and borrow their ideas.
You have to call it a test before you begin.
Plenty of failed ideas are reclassified as tests when they don’t pan out.
And if it is a test, define success and failure first.
How many people need to do [x] for the test to be considered a success?
There should be no confusion about whether the test was a success or not.
And be clear about what you will do if the test succeeds or fails (again, before you begin).
The point of a test is to take a hunch and remove any subjective bias for the benefit of the community.
You should test your hunches in your community, just set some standards before you start.
Many online discussions are simply one person asking a question and another providing an answer.
This is obvious in most brand communities.
Once this kind of participation has been established as a norm, it’s very difficult to change it.
If you want people to have more general discussions, ask one another about their best practices, and get to know each other, you usually need to create a new environment for that to happen.
Sometimes that’s sub-groups. You can (slowly) create different groups for each product/topic where members can share best practices. Other times it’s a different category or section of the community entirely.
The odds on members changing their behavior within the current environment are slim.
The odds on you being able to shape their behavior in a new environment are a lot higher.
I’m in the market for a lightweight tent.
Two distributors have their own communities.
One is filled with positive comments about their products. The other has a mixture of both good and bad remarks.
I emailed the former out of curiosity to find out why there were no negative posts.
Their honest answer (after a little probing) was simple; “if people post a criticism we contact them directly and remove the negative post.”
You can see why this sounds smart (at least at first). The upset member gets a direct connection and the company doesn’t have negative posts about their products.
The problem is a community filled with only positive posts doesn’t feel authentic. People need to see the good and the bad to make decisions.
Without negative posts and reviews, people trust positive posts less.
You can’t remove the negative comments without also removing the authenticity of the community.
I once worked with a director of community who had a simple policy; she would always pick up the tab for the IT team.
This wasn’t cheap, sometimes the bill ran up to a few hundred dollars.
But to her, it was a bargain. It meant she could ask for a favour, get help quicker than other departments, and help get her priorities on their agenda.
Far too many lofty visions for a community becomes grounded because they can’t get the support from the IT team they need. The problem isn’t usually money or expertise, it’s simply implementing the changes to execute the next step in the strategy.
Maybe picking up the tab isn’t the right approach for you, but I’d start building up credit with the IT team long before you need it.
It’s scary to start a new job managing a community in a topic you’re not very familiar with.
What if you say something dumb or incorrect? Members might lose respect for you and never regain it.
What if you say something which contradicts what the previous community manager said?
What if you don’t participate in exactly the right way and form the same strength of relationships as your predecessor?
You need a few things here.
First, you need a boss or mentor. You need someone who can show examples of what great participation looks like and what standards or guidelines are key. You also need a boss who encourages you to go out there, make mistakes, learn from them, and not pressure you to be perfect.
Second, you need to be honest with yourself and your members. Don’t pretend to be an expert if you’re not. When you introduce yourself to the community tell them they have far more expertise than you do and you’re hoping to learn from them and ensure the community serves their needs. When they have problems, tell them you’ll do your best to solve it.
Third, you need to see this as an opportunity. You’re in the same position (new to a topic and to a community) that countless other future members will be. This is a gift. You can see what resources people like yourself most need. You can quickly identify what things in the community could be improved for newcomers.
I often see an implicit assumption in community strategies along the lines of:
If we keep doing what we’re doing, activity and participation in the community will grow.
Why would that be the case?
It’s far more likely if you keep doing the same things you will get the same level of activity as you do now.
Activity will only grow if one of three things is happening:
1) The sector is growing. A rising tide lifts all boats and your community will benefit from that. In which case your targets should reflect the rate of growth in the sector (or new customers etc..).
2) Search traffic increases. If your community is public and properly indexed in search engines, more questions should naturally result in more search traffic as you hit more search terms. However, often communities create ‘thin content’ which reduces search traffic. This becomes a bigger problem as you grow.
3) Word begins to spread. This only happens if a) prospective members are connected to
each other through other channels and b) they mention and talk about the community in those channels. That doesn’t happen much unless you give them something to talk about.
Even when one (or more) of these is true, the rate of growth is usually around 10% per year.
Which means, if you want to grow activity in your community, you need to radically shake up what you’re doing today. That typically means you either need to expand the focus of the community (to target more people) or satisfy more of their desires to come back to the community more frequently.
I really like this one from CodeAcademy.
The banner provides simple links for navigating around the community and satisfies the needs of the majority of members that visit.
Too many banners take up too much space to say very little. Getting your banner right can solve a lot of challenges members face.
I’ve recently been using a much simpler measurement framework with a client which I like.
Instead of getting sucked into all the things you could measure and hope some of it is interesting, you simply measure the execution of your strategy against a handful of core metrics.
See the image below:
Now you drop in the results each month. Either you’re hitting your goals or you’re not. If you’re not, then probe deeper into the engagement-level metrics to see what is and isn’t working.