Twitter grew by 131% in March alone, and Oprah started tweeting last week (and already has about 175,000 followers), so it seemed like the right time to discuss this technology/service/phenomenon/whatever-it-is in my MBA course. Laura Fitton came to class on Thursday the 16th (thanks, @pistachio!), and we spent more time today talking Twitter.
These were classes when I could really sense that students were grappling with the material in a positive way. They shared both what they knew and what they did not, and worked together to increase their understanding of a complex, unfolding phenomenon.
I started off class today by asking if Twitter really was something new under the sun, or if it was instead largely similar to previous collaboration technologies. After some back and forth, the class decided that while Twitter contained no single revolutionary technology, it was in aggregate pretty novel. This was because of its combination of attributes. Tweets and Twitter, we concluded, are:
- Concise. The 140 character limit constrains “how boring you can be,” in the words of one student.
- Hyperlinked. Tweets can include links to pages and pictures.
- Persistent. Tweets are not evanescent; they stick around over time and are easy to locate and point to.
- Searchable. Persistent tweets mean that Twitter as a whole is searchable
- Asynchronous. Users can dive into the Tweetstream whenever they wish, and can catch up on what they missed. This makes it feel different than a Web-based chat room, where you need to be present during a conversation to participate in it and benefit from it.
- Asymmetric. As Laura emphasized, Twitter’s publish-and-subscribe architecture is fundamentally different than Facebook’s friending mechanism. My Facebook friends by default send information to me about what they’re up to. My Twitter followers do not – only the people I’m following pipe information to me. I perceive myself to be part of a single network of friends on Facebook, but I’m part of two very different networks on Twitter: the people I follow (I select these people because I want to get information from them), and those who follow me (these people select me because they want to get information from me).
- Largely public, but with a private option. Users can send private tweets (called ‘direct messages,’ or DMs) to each other, but all others are part of the public record; they persist in a user’s profile and can be found via search.
- Categorizable. Tweets can be categorized with hashtags (for example, this is how people identify themselves as answering my daily #andyasks question). This is a pretty weak mechanism, but it is useful.
- Open. users can contribute to Twitter from a wide variety of clients and devices, a phenomenon Laura refers to as “multi-facing”
- Universal. Anyone can sign up and start tweeting for free; the technology is open to anyone with Internet access.
- Monolithic. There are a huge number of email systems, bulletin boards, chatrooms, discussion groups, etc. in the world. And many of them are closed to outsiders, making them mutually inaccessible walled gardens. This fragmentation means that all these environments don’t “add up to anything;” they can’t be queried as a whole by any single user, and the beneficial interactions in one have difficulty spilling over into others. Twitter, in sharp contrast, is a single pool of digital content. It’s generated by a legion of people using a cohort of devices, but it all winds up in one place.
We spent a fair bit of time in the two classes trying to understand what this strange combination of characteristics meant – what it added up to and what it was useful for. My favorite comment on this topic came in today’s class: a student said “Twitter’s not a substitute for anything we used to do. It’s a combination of about 17 things we used to do.”
We jotted down some of these in class, and I added to the list afterward. I don’t have 17 items on it yet, but here’s what I came up with. These are Twitter use cases; things we’re doing with Twitter that we used to do (and still do) with other technologies:
- Chat
- Discussion boards
- Identifying trending topics
- Broadcasting breaking news
- Marketing and brand building
- Mining consumer sentiment
- Providing status updates to friends and family
- Communicating location, activity, mood, and other personal information
- Engaging in customer service
- Finding information on topics of interest
- Finding people who share an interest
So that’s twelve off the top of my head, and I’m sure we could come up with at least five more.
And I think that’s what intrigues me so much about this technology. Maybe it’s not that, as some people say, the use cases for Twitter haven’t yet settled down. Maybe it’s that they’re not going to – that this is going to be a generally useful technology instead of a flash in the pan, or one-trick pony. We’ll have to stay tuned and observe its progression.
What do you think? Will Twitter settle down? If so, to what? Or will it fade away as we get tired of it and move on to something else, or as the spammers show up and destroy value? 50% of my students thought that they were going to walk away from Twitter after completing their class assignments; 50% thought they’d continue using it. Which group are you in, and why? Leave a comment, please, and let us know.
One last thought on the topic. Because Twitter is so open and frictionless, it has greatly lowered the barrier to contribution; people can and do fire off a tweet in a matter of seconds. I’ve written previously about some of the drawbacks associated with this, but I recently got firsthand evidence of the strong benefits of frictionlessness.
This past weekend I came back to my rental car to find that I couldn’t turn the ignition key at all. I tried the key while yanking on the steering wheel and the gear shift, but no luck. I was at a loss, and turned to Twitter to see if anyone knew anything about this undocumented feature of the Pontiac G5 (Detroit’s woes are easier for me to understand after this experience). I tweeted “Ignition key won’t turn at all in rented Pontiac G5. Anyone got any ideas – help!”
Within a few minutes I got 16 responses back. They all told me essentially the same thing – that there was no trick specific to that car, and that the key was to keep cranking on the steering wheel while turning the key. I did so, and eventally got the damned thing to start.
My point with this story is not just to bust on GM, but also to highlight that I got 16 shots of altruism from people, most of whom I didn’t know, at a time when I could really use them.
They were willing to help me out not because I’m such a good friend of theirs (not the case) or such an obviously great guy (depends heavily on who you talk to), but because we humans like being altruistic, and Twitter makes altruism the work of a few seconds. The help I got cost each each sender virtually nothing, yet added up to a highly valuable resource for me. I think it’s important not to lose sight of that, and to keep in mind that not all exchanges are governed by incentives, mutual benefit, or economic rationality. Sometimes they’re governed by simple neighborliness, and Twitter is an awfully big neighborhood.
{ 30 comments… read them below or add one }
we humans like being altruistic
I would amend this statement to “we humans have a need to be relevant” – relevant to other humans. altruism is a bi-product of this.
i use twitter to serve as a journal of my life and my relationships as well as my social bookmarking tool (esp when i'm on my mobile device).
Add teleconferences and weekly status reports to your list.
Great post.
I would add at least one characteristic that is IMHO *key* to the importance of Twitter :
the “namespace” is integrated.
By that, I mean that you can “refer” to people by a unique 'handle' (their @name), which has its own features (unicity, notification, soon Twitter connect, etc.)
We grow accustomed to this… but do we fully realize that Facebook (and most other discussion tools) lack this very basic tenet of conversation ? (e.g. when I mention someone in a Facebook status, it is not 'tokenized' ; or let me mention @oprah here, she will likely never know).
See my point ?
@Roald
I think this discussion in a sense, begins at the wrong place, assessing twitter as an innovation, and accepting its surface value proposition at face value.
Social media in a sense aren't a competing set of technologies in an “attention” market, but a co-evolving ecosystem (autopoeisis as it is known). So the right first question, IMO, is “What IS Twitter within the complete co-evolving ecosystem?”
I found that treating it as the “Last page of Web 2.0″ leads to some interesting thoughts on what Twitter actually is. My rather involved (and somewhat metaphysical… there is a yin-yang relationship with Google search involved) is in this piece on the Enterprise 2.0 blog.
Really nice post. I think a lot of people are trying to understanding what is different about Twitter and this is a great reference, thanks (and thanks to your students!)
#13 Networking
#14 Sharing links (distinct from breaking news)
You have hyperlinked as an attribute on the top list but I think sharing links deserves to go on the bottom list too. Once a tweet has a link it becomes something different. It uses Twitter as a pipe to advertise/promote/recommend/share/spread some other piece of content that we used to do with email just about any other type of sharing or advertising or referral.
#15 Does live-tweeting count as broadcasting live events or as meeting notes if it's something more mundane?
It feels a little weak but I'm not sure it's the same as breaking news because an event could have niche appeal and live-tweeting it is a continuous activity for the duration (and could also be collaborative with hashtags) as opposed to pushing out one headline or photo of something breaking.
I agree with SteveD503 – I have about 200 followers and I have yet to get anyone I do not personally know to answer a general question I pose to Twitter.
My wife's comcast email went down a few weekends ago.
Instead of searching using Google or checking cnn, I did a Twitter search on comcast and immediately found out what was going on and general status.
One of the issues in all of the social media constructs, including Twitter, is how we decide on intermediary trust. Historically we would look to intermediaries such as the New York Times or major networks, then we moved to CNN, then to places like the Daily Kos and Drudge Report, and more recently to Wikipedia, and Twitter (perhaps in particular those we follow?).
When trolling the Twitter stream it is interesting to try and figure out what we trust and what we don't, and why.
Whether or not I'd “walk away” depends heavily what the next frictionless medium is out there. Twitter's low barrier to entry drove a lot of adoption and gave me access to a wide range of ideas, and then tools like TweetDeck let me manage the influx of information effectively. I'd give up Twitter only if something came along that met both needs — and somehow, FriendFeed isn't working for me yet.
Crimson Hexagon is doing some interesting mining of the Twitter data to see where opinion is falling out on specific issues (Michael Phelps is a good example). I'm with the NYT on this — the ability to pull insights from all the Tweets is the next big thing.
@perryhewitt
Twitter is big brother's pilot program. And I'm sad to say that I'm utterly addicted to it.
Great insight about the 0.5% hit rate. That's a pretty standard click-thru on banner ads, too. I wonder if it's a golden ratio of the internet: “1 out of 200 people will respond to any call to action”.
I like the notion that a prime source of Twitter's value is trivia. It struck me that the origin of the term “trivia” is relevant: In Rome, where three roads met, a number of signs would be posted sharing information. Some info was relevant, some wasn't. You'd scan the info, takeaway what was meaningful to you, and move on.
Seems similar to how many people use Twitter.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trivia#Etymology
How interesting that something so seemingly simple can yield relative complexity upon analysis. Great post and helps me further crystallise my thoughts on Twitter.
I'm definitely in the “continue” camp btw.
Andrew – This is a great analysis and I'm thrilled that HBS is grappling with this phenomenon in real time (Twitter's mainstream popularity is really only 4-6 months old). My personal suggestion of another one to add to your list is that Twitter is a mechanism to mini-blog. I blog every few weeks when I have a meaty topic, but I enjoy using Twitter to share quick bursts of opinions. I confess to being a Twitter skeptic at first, but am now a convert.
Hmmm, i find that Twitter gives out a signal to the world about your own presence in what really is quite a simple, frictionless way. Then everything else comes along with it like the power to contribute, connect, be informed and a kind of easily reviewable log of your own life as well – but with reference not just to time and event but to vis-a-vis set of people as well.
Great piece as always, Prof!
Hi Andrew, I find Twitter allows me to access people who are considered thought leaders in thier field (like yourself), that I would not normally have met personally, nor have access to in other ways. I find people are less likely to accept Facebook 'Friends' or LinkedIn 'Connections' from complete strangers. (At least this is what I do).
#18 Twitter Spam (unfortunate consequence of ease of access)
@steven_cornish
Good analysis and summary, Andrew. Thanks for sharing it with us.
I spoke at length today with a friend who just joined Twitter, mainly because as a small business owner, he kept hearing it “would be good for business.” He said to me, “I still don't get what it's all about.” I told him that I considered Twitter to be a technology vehicle for any individual's interests. If you're a teenager obsessed with rumors and gossip, that's what you'll use Twitter for. If you're passionate about environmental legislation, that's what you'll use Twitter for. If you're focused on the market for wireless technologies, that's what you'll use Twitter for.
Essentially no different than the telephone, Internet or email.
Practically speaking, as the head of a company that develops and manages conferences, events and exhibitions, I find Twitter extremely helpful for communicating with a team of individuals working together to execute a complex event. It can save hours if used well. And we continue to discover more about Twitter and its broad range of applications.
I wouldn't have been able to follow your article if I had not taken the plunge and decided to start twittering about a week ago. I have 32 followers. Perplexing, actually.
My purpose in joining on was to wrap my head around the phenomenon, not get left behind ( as I seem to have been with the whole facebook thing which is the life line of my 26, 25 2nd 24 year olds) and — honestly …3rd reason to twitter… to create traffic in the direction of a book I am about to release.
Most interesting to note is that I discovered ( someone explain if they can?) that unlike all of my other twitter followers/followees , I have direct message capability to both Barack Obama and Stephen Harper. How did that happen? Am I missing an option feature – can everyone establish direct messaging with everyone? I am certain I am not that special.
Anyway, my book is about lead exposure ( Called Lead Babies – http://www.nomoreleadbabies.com) and since Obama is all about the lead issue – and harper needs to be — works for me.
As for the future of twitter … I think it has mostly commercial appeal in the long run. I hope I can learn how to leash its full power to drive traffic to my site. I think the a percentage of users will dabble in the abstract messaging aspect – but the majority will be commercially motivated.
Your story about your rental car is great though! Doesn't mean that people with a purpose other than connecting socially, won't take a moment to also be altruistic.
Nice article. Thanks.
Sandra Cottingham, Vancouver, Canada
….and in the six days since Oprah had 620,439 followers! Great blog post! I don't Twitter will fade out.. I don't think its fully mainstream here in the UK at least so there is still huge place for growth!
I refer to your interesting post and related it to Twibe groups in my blog http://bit.ly/Aquei.
It would be interesting to hear what you (and your class) think about Twibe groups and how they impact (enrich?) Twitter.
I´m shocked to see how fast this social groups can grow and the importance that people gives to such way of communicating. Great topic.
CASUS TELEFON
TELEFON D?NLEME
D?NLEME C?HAZI
It is amazing how quickly social media is changing everything. I'm a (relatively) young 26 year old and I am feeling left behind with twitter!
I am part of the 50% who will remain on Twitter until something better comes along. As of right now, I can communicate with friends/strangers, get product updates, post pictures, and even go on a “flash drive hunt” around LA (markhoppus of Blink 182) all from one page. This by far trumps the multi-clicking necessary on Facebook and Myspace. Let's face it, with the number of great sites popping up increases every day, who has the time for more than one click on any site?
Great post. I especially found it interesting. For this matter, once I discussed with one of my friends, not only about the content you talked about, but also to how to improve and develop, but no results. So I am deeply moved by what you said today.
A bit late… Really nice post! My ideas for your list: expertise network and selling products.
Did you know that more than 50% of twitter users newer twitted? That 70% have no followers. It's more a toy and I think that in two or three years nobody will care about twittering.
D.G.
Twitter is more like just *another* thing to do. It will eventually find its place amongst all the others 'things to do'.
Fundamentally, I think it does nothing differently but it's a shorter and faster version of everything else. It's blogging for the texters. It ADD inducing. How much shorter can our attention span get?
I can't tweet yet while walking around in my forest (no coverage whatsoever!) and I kind of like it that way. There will be a revolution, but it won't be twitter – it will be back to nature, people meeting people again and having conversations. Remember those?
I think one of the biggest contributing factors to how long a person uses Twitter is their personality. A simple example is that a person who is likely to “stick to something” is likely to use Twitter longer than someone who is more likely to “move on” as something doesn't seem to serve them. There is also a characteristic of how “connected” one needs to be to feel comfortable. Some people crave instantaneous feedback from others to know they're “not alone”, and some are solitary by nature and actually enjoy a sense of isolation. Another factor is how much benefit a person perceives from using Twitter. Your car ingnition example is a very obvious one, but ones personality will dictate what value Twitter has to them, based on the relationship they have with the people they follow or are following.
Personally, I joined twitter and was posting about 1 tweet a day for about a week or two. After that, I checked it once or twice, and it's now been a few months since I've logged on. (I'm the type that “moves on”.) I will probably become more active on twitter once I get my new cell phone with social networking capability.
I think one of the biggest contributing factors to how long a person uses Twitter is their personality. A simple example is that a person who is likely to “stick to something” is likely to use Twitter longer than someone who is more likely to “move on” as something doesn't seem to serve them. There is also a characteristic of how “connected” one needs to be to feel comfortable. Some people crave instantaneous feedback from others to know they're “not alone”, and some are solitary by nature and actually enjoy a sense of isolation. Another factor is how much benefit a person perceives from using Twitter. Your car ingnition example is a very obvious one, but ones personality will dictate what value Twitter has to them, based on the relationship they have with the people they follow or are following.
Personally, I joined twitter and was posting about 1 tweet a day for about a week or two. After that, I checked it once or twice, and it's now been a few months since I've logged on. (I'm the type that “moves on”.) I will probably become more active on twitter once I get my new cell phone with social networking capability.
When Twitter first appeared I didn´t take it serious and thought ‘yet another trend I don´t like’ but after twitter grows and grows I think it is used by so many different people that it will stay on focus for a long time. A exploding user amount like at twitter is a little bit scaring. But the concept of following everybody and everything seems to work.
By the way: Nice article, I will FOLLOW your site