What’s the Value of Your Indirect Network?
September 18th, 2008
We all place great value on the importance of our various networks, whether it’s people (friends) who comment on our websites regularly, or a Twitter follower who says hello every morning. This is indeed your direct network.
image source: nadya
But, what about the network of the person that left a comment, or the “followers” of the follower who “retweeted” your message about the launch of your new project?
By default, this is your “indirect” network.
Today I was reading a post on Aaron Brazell’s website, The Rise and Fall of Friends. In the article he mentioned a recent interview that he had done with @newmediajim about Twitter, so I decided to check out his profile.
When I went to his page and checked out some of his messages, I thought…this is someone I should be following and did so right then. About two minutes later I got a note in my email saying that “newmediajim” was now following me, too. Which got me to thinking about how my network had just increased again, because not only was @newmediajim now following me but, through him, I now have the potential to reach his followers as well. Should I post a message that he deems “retweet” worthy.
Which leads to my question, thought really, regarding the almost infinite indirect value of our online (and offline) social networks. And let me qualify, I am talking about intrinsic value and not monetary, as well as, the value of what *I* can hopefully do for them and not necessarily what *they* can do for me.
As an idea person and entrepreneur I am always looking to connect with new people, new ideas, and new theories…which can be rather difficult from a small island.
However, if we’re talking the indirect value of online networks, well then that’s a different story. As such, I decided to have a look at how many people are following me (not many) and in turn, how many people are following folks who are following me.
Due too time limitations I didn’t analyze everybody but I did a sort of a random sampling and came up with the following fourteen people:
@newmediajim / Jim Long = 9901 followers http://vergenewmedia.com/
@technotheory / Jared Goralnick = 780 followers http://www.technotheory.com/
@akemigaines = 44 followers http://yes-to-me.com/
@tallivansunder / Talli van Sunder = 482 followers http://www.beinghealthy.tv/
@kristiewells / Kristie Wells = 1898 followers http://kristiewells.com/
@seanbohan / Sean = 442 followers http://www.seanbohan.com/
@Pistachio / Laura Fitton = 5882 followers http://pistachioconsulting.com/
@dariusmonsef / Darius A Monsef IV = 168 followers http://www.colourlovers.com/
@jonathanfields / Jonathan Fields = 1131 followers http://jonathanfields.com/
@chrisbrogan / Chris Brogan = 14,574 followers http://chrisbrogan.com
@jeffpulver / Jeff Pulver 6790 followers http://pulverblog.pulver.com/
@kathryn_n / Kathryn Nudelman = 70 followers http://www.newlevelgroup.com/
@jalaine / Jarkko Laine = 77 followers http://jarkkolaine.com/
@TheNanny612 / Shana Albert = 985 followers http://www.socialdesire.com/
For a grand total of 43,224 in this random sampling of my “indirect network.” Just for the sake of scale, that’s almost twenty times more people than live on Culebra and that’s the kind of network that you just can’t place a value on.
As you can see the possibilities are truly amazing. I might be altruistic but I see all of those people, both direct and indirect, as part of my network for good (read: http://trainforhumanity.org). Likewise, in return I also hope to be able to support what they are trying to do.
How about you, how do you support, or capitalize on, your direct and indirect network value?
Bookmark at:StumbleUpon | Digg | Del.icio.us | Reddit
September 18th, 2008 at 1:48 pm
Huh! Had never thought of it like that, but boy…the numbers really do stack up don’t they?
Thanks for pointing it out
September 18th, 2008 at 2:19 pm
Yep, they sure do.
And if you’d count the third level, that would be something huge… Of course counting that number would already be quite an effort (just the thought of going through each of @chrisbrogan’s 14,574 followers and counting their followers makes my brain hurt ;))
But that just proves the point: if @chrisbrogan decides to retweet your post, most likely at least some of his friends echo the message. This way, your indirect network is even larger than that 43,224 you got in your random sample.
Great post, and great thoughts, Mark!
September 18th, 2008 at 2:44 pm
Wow!! Well said, Mark. You have made an excellent point about Social Media & it’s wonderful goodness!!
Through social media the conversation travels fast and multiplies over time…. its what social media is all about.
September 18th, 2008 at 5:08 pm
You’ve got another 1350 here!
I think LinkedIn shows similar stats to the third level - it sure gets ridiculous!
September 19th, 2008 at 4:40 am
Hi Lid - yeah, when I looked at how many followers @newmediajim has it kind of hit me that *we* really do have an amazing ability to reach a LOT of people.
Hi Jarkko - can we commission you to count what @chrisbrogan’s third level is…? :)
Hi Shana - even on a site like StumbleUpon the indirect network factor is HUGE.
Hi Ross - I’m adding your 1350 now. :)
September 19th, 2008 at 5:22 am
Hi Mark, I saw this on Twitter this morning and had to click over. The value of the indirect network is, as you point out, almost impossible to measure. I see the same thing with StumbleUpon, where I meet lots of cool new people who find me via my other connections.
BTW, I just connected with the previous commenters, great stuff out there gang! If you come by later, you can find me on Twitter at @the_future.
September 19th, 2008 at 7:21 am
Spot on! It’s the wiki phenomenon. Connecting from person to person, blog to blog. My friend is now your friend.
September 19th, 2008 at 7:47 am
I think all of this begs the question of quality vs. quantity, as well as the nature of the network.
While the size of one’s network does have a correlation to one’s reach, I think it’s more important that we seek out a few closer connections on these sites rather than consider the potential reach.
Similarly, different networks all have different dynamics in terms of how they spread or are designed to spread messages. For instance, the digg effect can have much more impact than even hundreds of connected Twitters spreading a message.
So when considering the reach of one’s network, one always has to consider what their relation is to their network and what the nature of that network is with regard to spreading messages.
It’s easy to get caught up in the numbers. And I see what you mean by how fascinating it is how connected some of the people we know are. But I also think that sometimes a number is just a number, whereas a relationship is deeper and more significant. So that’s my contrarian perspective on this whole phenomena: it’s important to amplify one’s voice but also to recognize the nuance of that amplification is much more than sheer numbers.
September 19th, 2008 at 8:24 am
Hi Jared - excellent points! I think the real value begins when you start to make connections with your “indirect” network…
September 21st, 2008 at 8:00 pm
Mark,
I am not sure how or when I started following you, but by simply commenting on your blog, My Tropical Escape has become one of my top referrers.
Thanks for the traffic, via Indirect acquaintance.
Brian
September 23rd, 2008 at 4:08 pm
Some interesting observations there Mark, I like your thinking. One of the best ways to get extra exposure to this indirect social network on twitter is to ask a question. Everyone who answers will be tweeting back your profile and brand name if that is your username.
September 24th, 2008 at 3:47 am
Hi Mark - that is fascinating - over 40,000 people. This has made me want to think about my indirect network a bit more.
Quite by accident one day - I found a comment on someone’s MYSpace profile advising them to read an article of mine. I was totally amazed that complete strangers were taking the time to promote my work.
October 12th, 2008 at 8:22 am
http://twinfluence.com/ figures out your “reach” which is your second-order network.
I have 1,468 followers but their networks mean I can potentially reach 1,346,642 people. That’s pretty amazing! Even more amazing is the fact that it is growing at 2,841 followers per day!