This morning, four of us went down to the Innovation and Networks of Influence event held at NESTA in central London for what turned out to be a refreshingly different experience from many of the usual discussions of what influence is.

The most common ways of describing influence in social networks is to draw diagrams with blobs on them – typically there are some very large blobs with lines radiating outward to smaller blobs, which in turn radiate to even smaller blobs. While this concept is useful for specific purposes – and can be mapped algorithmically – it should not be taken as a complete model of a social process. It doesn’t account for two-way conversation (or the lack of it), nor can it help explain where and when a message gets altered, or any other form of change that a lack of centralised control can bring about. There is also context to deal with – while one person may be influential on, say, technology, they may hold very little sway when recommending a florist.

Refreshingly this wasn’t the way influence was treated here – instead looking at it from above and instead of a mathematical modelling perspective, it focused on interactions and behaviours. A lot of games were played – the kind which you get on managerial courses and you make a bit of a fool of yourself. It’s easy to be sceptical of a game’s effectiveness – but as it turns out fun is a pretty good heuristic for getting a bunch of strangers to quickly bond and share ideas.

Out of it we got some pretty interesting observations out of these little mini-experiments. Activities where the rules were incomplete quickly lead to mutation, with people agreeing on extra ad hoc rules such as deciding tiebreakers, without falling out in open conflict. Even in moderately complex tasks, spontaneity can be more productive than organisation. Messages are prone to mutation and reinterpretation much more quickly than we think, and that it’s very hard to keep even the simplest ones the same. And verbal cues only form a small part of this continual process of cross-influencing when face-to-face.

That last part is perhaps the most interesting one, as social media is dominated by verbal, without the non-verbal cues nor the synchronicity of face-to-face conversation. This is gradually being broken down (think about how synchronous and seamless Twitter is becoming, as well as the growth of mobile and video & audio on the go), and there are the blurring of boundaries between and online and offline – just look at the amazing take-up of the Twestival worldwide (including Twestival Paris, which we are organising). But still, there are gaps, as evidenced by workarounds such as smileys and endless text acronyms and abbreviations, and people working in social media need to be mindful of the limitations they face.

On the same subject, there was very little talk of online, marketing or even ‘social media’ at the event. Not that I’m tiring of the term like Bobbie Johnson is – it’s just a word, after all – but it’s a mere means, and it’s far more interesting to look into the people behind the media and what interests them.

The play element of the day was just as important – reminding us that what we do in our profession should be fun, useful or preferably both, if we’re to do work that we can be proud of. Our thanks go to Mark Earls, James Cherkoff and Johnnie Moore for a highly stimulating morning, and if you get a chance to see them lead a discussion any time soon, we strongly recommend it. How about that for influence?

The idea that ‘markets are conversations’ dates back to the The Cluetrain Manifesto, which if anything, is more relevant today than when it was first published:

I remember it seeming so revolutionary when I read it in 1999, articulating for the first time what those of us involved in the internet felt about the coming change it was bringing. That change has taken longer than we thought it would, but the tenets of the manifesto still hold true.

One of its most important points is that real conversations are conducted in a human voice and it gives good advice about how companies can learn to speak human. Our friend Adriana Lukas has more:

It’s something that’s all too easy to forget when subject to corporate groupthink, and something we try our best to help our clients remember…

Update: Jonathan Hopkins reminds me that similar things have been said recently about being nice and being human by our friends James Warren, Faris Yakob and James Whatley. It’s well worth reading all of their posts. I’ll leave you with a quote from Mr Whatley:

Social Media isn’t about Technology, it isn’t about being online or offline. It’s simply about being Human.

You may remember that Peter spoke at Disruptive Media in Stockholm in early December. During the conference he was interviewed by the Editor of Sweden’s Internet World magazine, and the resulting article hit the presses a couple of weeks ago (original version in Swedish).

He talked about the need for organisations to be open and honest about the way they act and communicate with the people who care about them – whether they be customers, suppliers, shareholders or the general public. Talking to these people on their own turf, whether that be using blogs or other forms of social media, is a good way to start.

I’ve been bugging Peter to blog about this himself for a while, but he’s obviously too modest about his new found fame in Sweden.

At We Are Social towers, we were rudely awakened on Thursday morning to a brewing Twitterstorm to deal with. Robert Scoble was Twittering to his 53k+ followers live from the Davos summit. Here are the edited highlights:

Scobleizer: @AnthonyHocken I hear Stephen Fry’s Twitter account isn’t done by him but rather is done by his PR firm. Lame if true.

Whatleydude: @Scobleizer I believe a PR firm helped @stephenfry set up his account (@wearesocial) …but us Brits can assure you, it *is* him.

Scobleizer: Getting lots of pushback on Stephen Fry from people who say he’s actually doing his own Tweets.

RobinGrant: @Scobleizer @wearesocial helped @stephenfry get set-up and gave him initial advice, but his tweets are all his own – see http://is.gd/hfNI

mbites: @Scobleizer yeah @stephenfry is the real deal

wearesocial: @Scobleizer @stephenfry is doing his own Tweets! We helped get him set-up and gave him initial advice, that’s all. Could you please RT?

Scobleizer: RT: @wearesocial @stephenfry is doing his own Tweets! We helped get him set-up and gave him initial advice, that’s all.

Scobleizer: @wearesocial glad to help clear that up. A PR company exec told me it was done by PR. I love Twitter took minutes to clear up incorrect info

vendorprisey: @scobleizer Surely the next tweet should read, sorry @stephenfry ?

Scobleizer: RT @vendorprisey: @scobleizer Surely the next tweet should read, sorry @stephenfry ? (My answer: yes. I’m sorry).

This may seem like a Twitterstorm in a teacup, but the threat to Stephen’s reputation (and ours) was real. It was essential that we acted fast to establish the truth before it spiralled out of control (in the end we were able to nip it in the bud within an hour). In fact, it was a microcosm of how we pre-empt and deal with situations like this on behalf of any of our clients:

1. Make sure you’re already respected members of relevant communities and have built strong friendships in them before any crisis erupts.
2. Listen carefully to the conversations relevant to your brand at all times
3. When appropriate, respond quickly in an open, honest and human way

Those friends mentioned in point 1 are the ones who are likely to come to your aid when it matters, just as ours did above – remember that their voices may carry more weight than your own, especially in these cynical times.

This is an approach that works for clients large and small, both in everyday conversations about their brands anywhere in social media and when confronted with much bigger crises than the one above. It was battle tested during Skype’s China crisis last year and passed with flying colours.

If you’d like to know more about how we helped Skype handle that situation or our how we help brands with online reputation management, conversation response, corporate blogs or advocacy programmes, then don’t hesitate to get in touch.