This seminar looked at the challenges and opportunities of user generated content.
The level of engagement with user generated content across the third sector is highly varied. Some organisations have thriving online communities, others have made costly investments which have failed to live up to expectations, and some have yet to dip their toes into this area.
The seminar, held on 24th November 2010, looked at the practicalities organisations face when implementing user-generated content and the dangers of choosing not to engage at this level.

Introduction to Managing User Generated Contents
Some key points:

Sharing Knowledge and Building Trust in Online Communities
Find out more about Steve's award winning local government communities platform: ![]()

Neil's Slide 22 is particularly interesting, giving a process for social media engagement, including having an Agile Strategy and measurement - there are huge parallels with Agile Methods.


Family illness meant that Steve was not able to attend to give his presentation, but he has shared his slides:
Be the first to hear about our events and white papers by joining our IndigoBlue 3rd Sector CEO networking LinkedIn® group
or emailing seminar@indigoblue.co.uk.
All information supplied will be treated with the utmost confidence and will not be shared with other organisations.
Comments and feedback welcomed:
I get asked the question ‘who is your favourite 19th century Prussian Field Marshal’ quite a lot, as I suspect you do as well. There are of course several great contenders for this title, but my vote has to go Helmuth Von Moltke the Elder. Why? Because of his contribution to the concept of dynamic planning! Trying to convince people that planning is a continuous and never ending process and not something that’s completed at the start of a project is a constant challenge for me and I will grab any support I can get.
Join our IndigoBlue 3rd Sector CEO networking LinkedIn® group and be the first to hear about our events and white papers.
JOIN OUR
Comments
09 Dec 2010 16:40
Steve Dale was asked on our LinkedIn group whether it is advisable to control to group access and if this increases trust?
He responded:
"I think you can establish trust more quickly within a closed group (i.e. a 'request to join' process). But the downside is that it eventually becomes one more knowledge silo, with limited information flows with and between other groups. There's also the issue of how you select who's 'in' and who's 'out'. It is advisable to have some clear (and published) criteria as to who would qualify for membership, or who might be specifically excluded, in order to avoid any dispute from those who are refused access.
Having an open membership brings it's own risks (you may not get your ideal cohort), and trust takes longer because of the randomness of people joining. But on the plus side, you'll get a better mix of skills, experience and knowledge, which can fuel more group/community activity. It's even more important with open groups to have a published charter describing what the group is about, or what it's objectives are, and the rules of acceptable behaviour. You could of course include this in the Ts and Cs, but you can use less formal language in a charter, and make it more contextually relevant to the group. All of this gives you some protection should you need to eject someone from the group - i.e. in the sense that they have broken one or more of the rules.
What I've done in the past is to start with a closed group (i.e. limited to people you know and trust) until such time as a method of working has been established and conversations are seeded, and then make the group open (but make sure your current members know that this is part of the strategy). The original (and trusted) members of the group will support each other, and provide a foundation for taking the group forward as well as supporting the induction of new members.
It's never a black and white issue with open or closed groups, but hope this helps."
Login to post comments