memberships consulting research events speaking books clients company
email
password  
Register   Help Sign In


Search our

advanced search
Search

 

WHO OWNS COMMUNITY?
An Approach to Aligning Community Authority and Responsibility
By Matthew D. Lees, November 1, 2007

NETTING IT OUT

Online communities and social networks are changing the ways organizations do business in this customer-empowered, Web 2.0 world. Different companies have taken different paths in defining the ownership of community initiatives. But community is, almost by its very nature, a cross-departmental thing. Interactions with community members, therefore, don’t always fall neatly within the established (and often guarded) lines that define business units.

As companies develop and hone their customer community and social media strategies, a fundamental and paramount issue is deciding where these initiatives should live within the organization. To get at this issue, we break ownership down into two parts: sponsorship (authority and accountability) and responsibility (management). Through this lens, we discuss six factors on which community ownership depends, as well as a seven-step approach to deciding how these factors relate to your organization.

INTRODUCTION

What We Mean by “Ownership”

In his 2002 speech to the BBC on “Broadcast Institutions, Community Values,”1 Internet writer and consultant Clay Shirkey says, “You may own the software, but the community owns itself.”

We agree with Shirkey’s assertion, based on the generally accepted usage of the word “ownership.” In a community, the members “own” the community’s conversations, issues, and culture. But, here, what we mean by “ownership” is really a mix of business sponsorship and management responsibility. In fact, discussing “ownership” of customer communities is a short-hand way of asking several questions that many organizations are struggling with.

The Germane Questions to Ask

The way we see it, ownership is really about authority (sponsorship and accountability) and responsibility (management and administration). So the relevant questions to ask are:

1. WHO HAS AUTHORITY OVER THE COMMUNITY? This can also be phrased as “Who sponsors it?” and “Who creates the strategic vision?” There are issues relating to technology, staff, service providers, and there are always new initiatives. Who’s paying for them? Who’s accountable for business results?


2. WHO HAS RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE COMMUNITY? Who manages the community? There are policies to set, best practices to implement, customers to engage, and findings to share with other stakeholders. Who runs things?

Other Considerations

In the reality of business, lines drawn are seldom as crisp and clear, and processes rarely function as smoothly, as they are made out to sound in reports like this.

SOME GROUPS WEAR BOTH HATS. Sometimes, a single business unit, department, or group will both sponsor and manage the community. So when thinking about community sponsorship and management, focus at first on the roles—on what needs to be done—not on who is going to take them on, before making assignments.

INVOLVING OTHER STAKEHOLDERS. What happens in the community doesn’t stay in the community. And it shouldn’t. From customers’ perspectives, the boundaries defined by business units are artificial and meaningless; they aren’t concerned if a given thread relates to your product development, marketing, and/or accounting departments. They just want an answer.

But from your organization’s perspective, other stakeholders should not just be aware of what’s going on in the community, but also be involved in it.

Usually, it’s the business sponsor who identifies the key stakeholders, while those who manage the community ensure successful communication with and participation by stakeholders.

FUNDING MAY COME FROM MULTIPLE SOURCES. As with many new and ongoing business initiatives, funding for a customer community may come from several sources. As a non-community example, paying for day-to-day IT operations generally comes from the IT department’s budget, while specific departments may fund custom applications to address their particular needs.

This also happens with customer-facing initiatives such as online communities. When we talk here about sponsorship and funding, then, we’re referring to the dollars tied to implementing a particular strategy, and not so much the day-to-day community operations. Another way to think about it is based on the business results. The community’s sponsors are the ones who not only put dollars toward it, but are accountable for its ROI and impact on the business.

Why It’s Important to Know (and Communicate) Who Owns Community

The problems that manifest themselves due to unclear or imperfect community ownership usually start out as internal ones. Problems usually aren’t apparent, at first, within the community, but they are felt within the organization. Turf wars tend to spring up as insufficient or improper resources are provided, as community participation and growth falter, and as complaints and confusion rise. Eventually the community itself is impacted, because its value to members, especially the essential core members, is diminished.

This doesn’t typically happen quickly; it can take six months or more before ownership problems turn into community problems. Unfortunately, turning things around at this point is difficult. The good news, though, is that it’s relatively easy to recognize early when ownership is ill-defined, so the right (for your organization) structure can be put into place.

WHO OWNS COMMUNITY?

Above, we broke down the overarching question of ownership into two parts. Here, we answer each question, with the rationale and context provided throughout the rest of the report.

Q: Who should have authority over your community?

A: The individuals and group that…

• understand the importance of aligning their goals with the community’s goals,

• care the most about developing the long-term strategy for the community,

• can fight for the budget to do so,

• are accountable (in whole or in part) for the success of business initiatives, such as products and services.

Q: Who should be responsible for your community?

A: The individuals and group that…

• have a passion for it,

• care most about your customers, their needs and their perspectives,

• can give the community the energy and focus it needs,

• can provide the necessary resources to learn and implement best practices,

• share the voice of the community to specific business units and throughout the organization, and

• can act as a buffer between the community from inappropriate interference from other business units.

Of course, if one group wears both these hats—which is often the case—they’ve got their hands full with all these bullet points.

WHAT OWNERSHIP DEPENDS ON

There Are No Absolutes

Karen Orton is vice president of Enterprise Solutions at Lithium Technologies, a provider of technology solutions for large-scale customer communities. When asked for her take on this topic, she said “There really are no rules. It’s like asking ‘Who owns the Web site?’” (Recognizing her sales role, she added “If I knew who owned the community, my life would be easier; I would always know who to call.”)

Web site ownership is a good analogy. Although typically better defined now in most organizations, the early days of Web ownership were not unlike what we’re seeing now with community. Think back 10 or so years, when mainstream businesses were really starting to embrace the Web. Most corporate Web sites were built and managed, at least initially, by IT groups. These were the folks who had the expertise and inclination to dabble with the cool new technologies, such as HTML, PERL, JavaScript, and Shockwave.

It became clear, though, that while technologists should indeed play an important role in building and supporting Web sites, Web-based applications, and Web initiatives, you don’t want your IT teams driving the strategy and analysis of your Web business.

Karen’s experience points to our primary finding, that there are no absolutes. When it comes to the question of community ownership, the quick answer is “It depends.”

Dependencies

The corollary of not having absolutes is that an organizational structure that works for one company, may not work for another similar company. We clearly see that community ownership doesn’t simply depend on its business focus, because customer communities fall in a wide variety of business units, including departments and groups in IT, customer service, product support, marketing, sales, product development, R&D, media and publishing, program management, and more.

So what does community ownership depend on? We see the following six key factors:

1. Type of Community

2. Number of Communities (within an Organization)

3. Industry

4. Company Size

5. Company Culture and History

6. Personnel/Staff

Table A shows several of these dependencies as they cut across business sponsorship and management.

Community Ownership and Goals
(Please download the formatted PDF to see the table at http://www.psgroup.com/detail.aspx?ID=853.)
Table A. This table provides a matrix of community ownership, stakeholders, and selected goals, broken down by community type. Treat these more as rules of thumb for thinking about community sponsorship and management within your organization, rather than as rigid guidelines.


*FOOTNOTE*
1) http://www.shirky.com/writings/broadcast_and_community.html

 

This report continues...

To read the full report: http://www.psgroup.com/detail.aspx?ID=853.