Keenan 411

Jim Keenan is Vice President of Sales Strategy and Operations with a Global Technology Company, an Enterprise 2.0/Web 2.0 Connector, an Entrepreneur still trying to get it right, and a PSIA Certified Ski Instructor for Vail Resorts. Husband to Big E and father to four great kids. In a nut shell, I'm a Sales Guy. Life is good!

User Engagement vs. User Investment

A few weeks ago I had a conversation with Fred Wilson and his partners at Union Square Ventures, Brad and Albert.  The conversation centered around how you know if a networking/sharing/social media type business is doing well, and is something to consider investing in.   Fred’s opinion was engagement is a key measurement in determining the success of a network business or site.

Fred reiterates this in his post last week; How We Measure Success:

We believe very large networks of engaged users will ultimately create significant financial value for everyone involved.

At the time I agreed with Fred.  However, since that meeting, I’ve been plagued with a gnawing feeling that engagement  just wasn’t right.   It hit me yesterday what I’ve been feeling.

User engagement isn’t the true measure of a productive site or network, it’s investment.

I  may be splitting hairs, but I think there is a real difference here.  Engagement is too soft.  People can engage with little expectation of return.  It can be fleeting, as the engagement isn’t necessarily rooted in anything substantial.  Investment on the other hand carries a much greater commitment.  When users invest they are expecting to get something in return.  When people are invested they take ownership.  Investment is sticky.

It’s not that I don’t think engagement isn’t a good measure of the value of a network based business, because it is.  User engagement can be easily measured and quickly evaluated.  All you have to do is look at to things like comments, shared content, posts etc. to see if users are engaged.  The fact that engagement can be easily measured makes it a good metric.

However, for a business based on a network to last, it has to be sticky.   It needs the users to stick around.  Engagement doesn’t necessarily mean sticky.  Users can swoop in for awhile, be engaged on a topic, or a fun project, or network site etc then be gone.   Engagement is too susceptible to trends and fads.  To make engagement sticky requires user investment.

Investment adds another layer to the user experience.  When people become invested they see long-term value.  They expect a return for their efforts.  They see and embrace a specific utility. When people become invested in something they are far more committed to it.  Invested users take ownership.

Investment is a little more difficult to measure.  How do you tell the difference between someone who is engaged vs someone who is invested?  For me personally the best example is Facebook vs. Twitter. I’m invested in Twitter.  I use it to promote my blog.  I use it to get information.  I rely on Twitter and expect a return.  If it stops providing that return, I will stop using it.  With Facebook, I’m engaged.  I, maybe, check it out once a day.  If it were to go away, it wouldn’t kill me.  It’s nice to stay in touch with my friends, but there are a lot of other ways I do that and if I never knew what 90% of my old highschool friends were doing, it wouldn’t kill me.

I’m engaged in Facebook, but invested in Twitter.   Therefore, I am a much more valueable user to Twitter than I am to Facebook.

In both Twitter and Facebooks case they have done a good job in building network sites that give people a reason to invest and that’s why they’ve been successful.

People invest in networks that provide value, that have specific utility and a way to measure return.   The more measurable utility or value a network has, the more users invest in it.  When users invest they make it their own, they embed it into their lives, both business and personal, they  share it with others, evangelizing it’s value.  When networks create a reason for people to invest, they become sticky.  When networks become sticky, they grow and they last.

Engagement is important.  It can lead to user investment.  But, after thinking about it for awhile, I disagree with Fred.  Network based businesses have more than engaged users, they have to have  invested users.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Union Square Ventures Proving-Online Presence IS the Asset of the Future

Twitter and Foursquare investor Union Square Ventures is hiring two associates and by doing so are proving the point that an online presence is the most valuable asset we can own. I’ve been making this point a lot over the last year. Our online presence will become the most valuable asset we own, even more valuable than our home.

To find candidates USV blogged about the openings on their website and Fred Wilson a partner in the firm posted about them on his blog. No recruiter, no Monster.com postings, no 3rd party sourcing. Just two blog posts. USV and Fred have built a huge following. They already had an audience.

I have no visibility into how many applications were submitted, but if the number of comments is any indication, it’s over 100.

What really makes this interesting is that USV asked candidates for just 3 things: a link to their LinkedIn profile, a way to be contacted and a cover letter. They asked the cover letter contain nothing more than links to the candidates online presence. That’s it. No resume required.

USV is using online presence as the key criteria to identify the ideal candidates for their next associates. I love this idea. It’s a heck of a filter. Anyone who hasn’t taken the time to build their online presence is automatically filtered out. No need to reply. Harsh, but it’s where things are going.

What I like about this approach is it focuses on what what the candidates do, not what they say. It’s hard to B.S. your way around an empty Twitter and Facebook profile. You can’t “hide” the fact that you don’t have a blog or haven’t posted in 6 months. By focusing on applicants online presence, USV will have amazing insight into how candidates, think, write, interact, engage, and collaborate. An online presence is a living resume that doesn’t lie.

I think USV is going about this the right way. You can learn a lot about someone by following, reading and engaging with their online presence. An online presence isn’t a polished document with an agenda like a resume and that is exactly the problem with resumes. They hide as much as they share. Watching and engaging with someones online presence is the closest thing to be a fly on the wall. You get to see the real person.

If you don’t have an online presence, you’re not going to a job with one of the most prestigious venture capital firms in the country and that is too bad, because you could be a wonderful fit for them. If you are one of the lucky ones who is hired, your online presence catapulted you into the exciting and lucrative world of venture capital and that is worth something.

How much is an online presence worth? In this case it’s worth 2 years at Union Square Ventures; investors in Twitter, FourSquare, Disqus and more of the Internets hottest properties. That’s worth a lot.

USV will not be the last company to hire this way. More and more companies will use an online presence in their hiring decisions.

An online presence will be the most valuable asset you will own. Start investing!

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Bring Back Apprenticeship

About a month ago, I had dinner with Fred Wilson of Union Square Ventures. During dinner Fred shared with me how he got into Venture Capital. He started in 1986 with Euclid Partners. He knew a lot about computers and the computer industry, they didn’t. So they brought him on. Fred worked 10 years with that firm, 10 years! He worked on a lot of good deals and made them a lot of money. What I found most interesting about his story, is Fred never became a partner with the firm. Fred didn’t benefit from any of the exists, he was strictly an employee. What Fred did get from his 10 year investment was the education of a lifetime. He got an apprenticeship. A very valuable one.

Fred is now Sr. Partner and founder of Union Square Ventures (His second Firm, as he founded Flatiron Ventures in 1996.) Union Square has an impressive portfolio that includes Twitter, FourSquare, Disqus and Outside.in. Fred has also had some impressive exists, including Geocities. If you follow Fred on Twitter you know he has over 30,000 followers. His blog has over 50,000 subscribers and he blogs often about his experiences at Euclid and how they have helped him today. Fred has been quoted or referenced in a number of mainstream media including; Time Magazine, Newsweek and the New York Times. Fred has become somewhat of a celebrity in the VC and Social Media world. Yet, all this didn’t just happen because Fred put up a V.C. shingle. It happened because of his apprenticeship.

Apprenticeship seems to have gone the way of the dinosaur. A right of passage for many skilled laborer positions, the apprenticeship was the way many became experts in their craft. They would spend years studying under Masters and come out the other side Journeymen and then become Masters themselves. I love this practice. We need more of it. I would love to see apprenticeships for Venture Capital. I think many of the finance professions would benefit including, hedge-fund management, Private Equity firms and others. I would like to see technology apprenticeship for certain verticals, like medical, bio-tech, and communications. As our world becomes more and more complex, and more and more specialized, apprenticeships can add tremendous value.

Apprenticeships do more than teach a craft. They provide real world experience to the ups and downs of an industry. They allow industry secrets and nuances to be passed on. They create life lessons for the apprentice. They establish relationships. Principles, values and experiences are kept alive, as each generation gives to the next. Apprenticeships create entree into complex worlds.

Unfortunately, few seem to have the patience for an apprenticeship. The experienced don’t have the time to mentor and teach. The up and comers are too impatient and short sighted to “pay their dues.” I can’t imagine too many young people who would be willing to work for ten years for salary only, as Fred did, without becoming a partner. It’s unfortunate. There is a lot to be gained by both parties.

Becoming great at something takes time. It takes failure. It takes experience. It takes mentors. It takes support. It takes mistakes. Apprenticeship allows all this to happen and more. An apprenticeship is an investment on both sides and if done well, it’s one with huge returns for everyone. The apprenticeship needs a second wind. It needs new life. Like investment in companies, investment in people has just as big returns, and sometimes even bigger.

Fred’s first start-up investment was Fred Wilson Inc. He invested the first 10 years of his career in that property. I would say it is one of his best investments to date.

Are there some great apprentice programs you know about? I would love to hear about them. Share in the comments and I will update this post and help spread the word.

If you’re a VC reading this and have an apprenticeship program, I know a highly skilled Sr. Executive Sales Leader willing to make a change. :)

CORRECTION: Fred did eventually become partner, but left before a big payday.

Keep Up With Me:


Categories

  • Asset of The Future (23)
  • Business Performance (112)
  • Career Development (32)
  • Customer Service (37)
  • Economy (10)
  • Enterprise 2.0 (22)
  • Entrepreneur (14)
  • Hiring/Firing (20)
  • Leadership (94)
  • Marketing (17)
  • My Reading Quotes (8)
  • Personal Brand (26)
  • Personal Development (68)
  • Politics (10)
  • Random (46)
  • Sales Process (68)
  • Skiing (4)
  • Strategy (2)
  • Sunday Morning Blog (18)
  • TalkShoe Events (5)
  • Technology and Products (6)
  • The Chase (100)
  • Uncategorized (46)
  • Web 2.0/Social Networking (72)
  • What I Think! (127)