Social information architecture - an interesting approach

Kudos to Findability.org and Peter Morville (which in turn cites Gene Smith; check out Gene's cool Slideshare deck here) for surfacing a new (new for me at least) construct of social information architecture (click to enlarge visual at left for full effect).

What I find particularly compelling is how "softer" things like identity, group, reputation and relationship are addressed in this model. When we are planning how to get people involved in social media for clients (a staple of most Active Branding big creative marketing ideas) I find it's all too easy to just focus on the "do" activities (sharing photos through Flickr, using Twitter to tell your friends where you're hanging out), and overlook the more deeply "human" (less functional) aspects of the behaviors we are trying to stimulate for consumers with brands. "How do we get people to share?" is usually an easier question to answer than "How do we make people feel good about themselves?" - for us as well as clients.

It all makes sense - people like to feel good about themselves, feel they are connected to others, and build productive, rewarding relationships with each other (yes I've studied psychology).

If you diagrammed Ebay on this model (yes it's a commerce site but I'd argue the "social" aspects of it are essential to its function and at its heart it's just a great big ole social network with an enormous cash register attached to it), I would argue the softer dimensions of reputation and relationship would actually be dark green (primary rather than secondary) - as would sharing and conversation. Match.com is probably similar (though one must wonder about the precise nature of the "transaction" component......).

I wonder if there are examples (or will be or should be) where the "softer" things are dark green and the traditional "harder" things are not addressed or are light green - meaning the primary purpose of the social network is to put people into relationships with each other, make them feel good about themselves, promote their good reputations, etc. - and there's no focus on functional stuff like conversing.

I do think we've done some remarkable work lately that heads in this direction - first to mind is a recent AARP effort enables younger folks to create an identity of sorts for the lives they envision for themselves.

Let's keep it up.....

Comments

[Sean Kegelman]

Curious to see if anyone can think of an example where the "do" activities are not addressed. It breaks down to "being" and "sharing" and I can't think of anything that doesn't treat the sharing part as core. In fact, I'd argue that you can't "be" without "sharing or projecting yourself" -- sorry to get philosophical.