Since the election, I’ve watched with great interest — and some trepidation — as a few Facebook groups that were launched to create a community of like-minded people post-election have grown at an incredible rate. One group is aimed at lawyers who are opposed to many of the policies of the incoming administration and the other was formed pre-election for Clinton supporters and since the election has morphed into a group with a similar focus as the lawyer group. The groups are marked “secret” on Facebook and although each has been covered in the press, I won’t disclose their names for purposes of this post.
As I’ve watched these two groups (and a sub-group) grow, I’ve done so with a sense of foreboding. I’ve been online for a long time now (I even met my husband in an online forum in 1995), and am very familiar with the typical patterns that occur over the lifespan of larger online forums. In my experience, you can get away with minimal structure with smaller groups, but when membership grows, larger forums often devolve into lots infighting and power plays amongst different members.
But because each of these forums arose with an overriding purpose and unified goals, my hope is that perhaps their paths will be different from those of other online forums. So I’ve been monitoring each group (along with a regional sub-group of the Clinton supporter forum), hoping that my expectations would be defied. Thus far the groups continue to have very active engagement, but have gone in very different directions both in terms of how the groups are managed and how they meet their members’ needs.
Although I don’t claim to be an authority on running online forums, I’ve been involved in enough of them to have a sense of what works and what doesn’t. Because I believe in the causes behind the creation of both forums, I offer the following advice, based on my observations of how the different groups are being managed, in the hopes that doing so will increase each group’s longevity.
Provide a short description that explains the group’s purpose
It’s important to come up with a clear description of the group and its overarching goals that consists of one or two sentences. This description can change over time, as members help shape the direction of the group. But some specificity is required, even in the beginning, and avoiding vagueness is important.
Creating a clear, short description provides a clear sense of purpose and unifies members behind a common cause. It’s an important foundational element of a successful group.
Quite frankly, none of the groups I’m watching has done that as of yet. The descriptions are either vague, unclear, or nonexistent. This failure to identify what the group is about and what its end goals are leads to confusion, causing members to make their own determinations as to what the group is and what it will be doing. There is a lack of clarity from the outset that is perpetuated as the group grows.
Clearly and concisely state posting rules
A very brief set of guidelines regarding the rules for posting is necessary so that members are on the same page regarding what the goals of posting to the group are and what is permitted. Of course, if the group’s goals are not yet identified, then it’s difficult to establish posting rules that make sense and are aligned with the group’s purpose. The reason for interacting in a forum should be clear, but when the group’s purpose is not settled, then posting rules will likely seem arbitrary to members.
The groups I’m watching are all over the map on this. In the largest one, which has nearly 4 million members, the leaders of the group seem to have made a unilateral decision that all posts should be limited to people sharing personal accounts about how the election has affected them. They review all posts before publishing them to enforce this rule, thus turning what began as a political movement of sorts into a mass hand-holding support forum.
The regional group I follow that is an offshoot of the pro-Clinton forum has a more activist, political bent, but has an unnecessarily complex — and lengthy — set of rules regarding the format of posts and the content of posts. That being said, there seems to be little moderation of posts. However, the posting rules regarding formatting are strictly and frequently enforced in a way that is off-putting and, in my opinion, unnecessarily stifles interaction.
The lawyer group does review posts before publishing them. Because there are no clear rules regarding content, the moderation feels somewhat arbitrary. This group would benefit from a short description of the types of content allowed, thus increasing transparency and trust.
So, although all groups have a very different approach to this, none have quite hit the mark. While this might seem to be a minor part of running an online group, it really is an important step to take in order to foster an engaged environment grounded in mutual understanding that is devoid of resentment or distrust.
Identify the group’s goals via member input
When moderating a large group, it’s so important to ensure that the group represents the interests of those invested in it. Once the group gains momentum and grows, it no longer “belongs” to its creators. Instead, its strength and future growth depends on the engagement of the group as a whole. So founders must make sure to ascertain what the majority wants and take steps to make that happen. Otherwise the group will flounder and ultimately dissolve.
As best I can tell, the larger pro-Clinton group has utterly failed in this regard. In fact, in its lengthy introduction to the group, the founders specifically write off the complaints of many of its members regarding the lack of activism. This does not bode well for the group. It’s not listening to its members.
The regional group seems to be doing a bit better in this regard. The members’ goals seemed to be aligned with what’s occurring in the forum, although this seems to have occurred by happenstance. I suspect it’s because the posts are not moderated much, if at all, in terms of content. So the forum is organically becoming the voice of its members.
The lawyer group has done a really good job at obtaining and acting on input from its members. There have been a number of polls conducted and the founders have used the results to identify the group’s goals and concerns and have then taken steps to act on that information and further organize into action-taking sub-committees and regional groups. But there was one notable exception: the founders changed the name of the group without input from its members. This unilateral decision definitely caused some angst and distrust.
As the group grows, implement structure as needed
As online groups increase in size, structure is needed to maintain focus and get things done. Depending on the group’s goals, that structure can consist of organizing online and/or offline. But creating structure via sub-forums, sub-groups, or committees is important in order to create order in what will begin to feel increasingly chaotic due to the sheer amount of online interaction.
The larger pro-Clinton group did a good job at creating regional forums and, for now, seems to be allowing each region to go in its own direction. The regional forum I’m involved in is organizing both on and offline as needed, thus keeping its momentum.
The lawyer group is in the process of establishing an organizational structure designed to allow its members to take action and mobilize as needed to address the different issues that are of importance to its members. It will be interesting to see whether the attempt to create an organizational structure is successful. I hope it is since this group has so much potential and its members are very motivated to work for change.
The Internet has always been a powerful tool for organizing and connecting with others and it has been incredibly exciting to see its power used to unify and organize large numbers of like-minded people into post-election Facebook groups. Whether these online groups will survive over time remains to be seen. But watching them emerge from a common cause and then quickly grow has been a fascinating spectator sport. My observations and constructive criticisms aside, I truly hope that each one maintains its momentum and is able to set and achieve its goals, allowing each group, in its own unique way, to make a difference in our world post-election.
Nicole Black is a Rochester, New York attorney and the Legal Technology Evangelist at MyCase, web-based law practice management software. She’s been blogging since 2005, has written a weekly column for the Daily Record since 2007, is the author of Cloud Computing for Lawyers, co-authors Social Media for Lawyers: the Next Frontier, and co-authors Criminal Law in New York. She’s easily distracted by the potential of bright and shiny tech gadgets, along with good food and wine. You can follow her on Twitter at@nikiblack and she can be reached at [email protected].
