I chose to apply the Brusnwikian Lens Model to a random user's Livejournal account for this assignment. According to this theory, outside observers tend to make character judgments based on a variety of environmental cues. This user is on my friends' list, but we only know each other on a "fake-name-only" basis and through various communities.
According to this model, self-directed identity claims are "symbolic statements made by occupants for their own benefit, intended to reinforce their self-views (Gosling et al. 2002)." In this particular instance, the user chose to include an innocuous quote from The Little Hours, which has limited significance to the reader, but (presumably) means something to them on a personal level.
Conversely, other-directed identity claims focus on conveying a desired image and making a statement to others as to how they would like to be seen. This user's subheading is "feminist popcorn," which gives the impression of the user having a quirky sense of humor. This person also included their gender (female) and social networks (college and various Livejournal communities she's involved in). Upon clicking some of the links to the groups and assessing their content, I assumed she is very politically active and concerned with civil rights issues (race and gender equality, workers' rights, and so on) but not militant; this factor is modulated by the subheading on her profile. The groups all have an offline equivalent, which leads me to believe that her activism doesn't end at the computer screen.
Interior behavioral residue consists of "physical traces of activities conducted in the immediate environment." This user allows others to leave comments on her Livejournal entries and always responds in kind, no matter how many comments accumulate. She is always very composed, open and engaging, which leads me to believe she has an outgoing personality and friendly disposition, and enjoys a good debate.
Exterior behavioral residue, on the other hand, are records of her activity outside of the space in question. She is a regular contributor to the communities mentioned previously, and she conducts herself in much the same manner as in her journal. On one of these, she had posted a picture of herself, pets, and her house; this indicates a tendency towards high self-disclosure.
Cues:
Utilization: This user provided several cues that give some insight into what kind of person she may be, some of which are mentioned above. In addition to this, the profile and Livejournal itself are very organized and utilitarian in terms of layout, which leads me to believe she prefers structure and accessibility over flashiness. Her interests are wide-ranged and succinctly stated, her entries are properly tagged - the tags themselves are all on a section of her profile so the reader can quickly access old entries - and all fields of information have been filled out.
Validity: The cues given indicate that this user is a young woman in her late-twenties, currently attends a liberal arts college in New Hampshire, is very politically and socially active, likes animals, and has a generally amiable demeanor. In terms of the Five Factor Model, she would probably rate high in openness, conscientiousness, and extraversion. Her degree of agreeableness is likely dependent on the situation, considering she has very strong opinions about certain subjects. Given the other traits, I doubt she would rate high in neuroticism, but this may be more difficult to assess in CMC than the other factors.
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
7.1: Virtual Team
The Summer of 2007, I had the opportunity to be a part of a virtual “team.” The actors of the online community were seven Organization Development Consultants (and myself) who worked for the same company. Although, their offices were all in the same building, they were rarely there due to their consultant work that took place in other parts of city; typically, they sat with the businesses they supported. Therefore, the “team” did not see one another as a team in the typical workplace sense. They did not work together, nor did the performance of one actor directly affect the performance or outcome of another. They were completely independent of one another, aside from their professional title. So, they preferred to look at one another as colleagues in an information network. Since the field of Organization Development is always changing with new research, practices, and theories, the actors of this community rely on one another for information-sharing and assistance with predominately occupation-related questions.
According to Etzioni and Etzioni a community must have two attributes: “a web of affect-laden relationships that encompasses a group of individuals—relationships that crisscross and reinforce one another…and a measure of commitment to a set of shared values, mores, meanings, and a shared historical identity.” These characteristics are prevalent in the OD consultant community. They have an underlying set of values which is derived from the Organizational Culture of both the company they work for and the group that they work in; it stresses learning, technology, ethics, and strong business acumen. Additionally, the community has a strong “bond” since any of the actors can contact one another for anything at any time. Generally, the questions that are asked are sent to a listserve or a forum; that way, the entire team can receive the question and anyone who feels they can contribute to an answer has the chance to enter their opinion.
Reciprocity and common ground is an important aspect of Social Network Analysis. The community’s information sharing processes was based solely on reciprocity. Although Haythornwaite postulated that reciprocal self-disclosure would strengthen the ties among the actors, it appears that reciprocal information-sharing has bonded the OD community together. When actors share information they have that might be pertinent to the OD profession, other actors will share information as well. Additionally, in the OD community there is no shortage of common ground. They are all Organization Development consultants who work for the same company. Although they have their individual differences, (i.e. how many years they worked for the company or in OD) the common ground, or the topic that brought them together, was Organization Development.
Also, according to Haythornwaite, the OD consultant community displays relational multiplexity, which “indicates a stronger tie between pairs because of their more multi-threaded engagement with each other.” Not only does the community discuss questions to work-related OD issues, but they talk about schools to go to for OD, books and articles to read, social events that the OD team will be attending, current issues in the business-world in general, and other generalized questions that you would ask a friend whose opinion you respected. In the article, Haythornwaite discussed media multiplexity as well, which means “the stronger the tie, the more media used.” Although all interactions in the OD community start via CMC (most people send out an e-mail through “crack”berry) the individual relationships and the magnitude of the question will determine which media they will respond with. It is not uncommon for an e-mail to be followed up with a FtF meeting or a phone call, in order to discuss the information further. The ability to use richer media shows the strength of tie between the actors in the community.
Fortunately, there is both online and offline synergy among this group. Since the team works so well in CMC, they have no qualms in FtF. The manager of the virtual team believes that it is important for the group to engage in social events, in order to maintain good relations. Therefore every Friday, the manager sets up lunch for his team, where the conversations range for work-related issues to nice vacation spots.
According to Etzioni and Etzioni a community must have two attributes: “a web of affect-laden relationships that encompasses a group of individuals—relationships that crisscross and reinforce one another…and a measure of commitment to a set of shared values, mores, meanings, and a shared historical identity.” These characteristics are prevalent in the OD consultant community. They have an underlying set of values which is derived from the Organizational Culture of both the company they work for and the group that they work in; it stresses learning, technology, ethics, and strong business acumen. Additionally, the community has a strong “bond” since any of the actors can contact one another for anything at any time. Generally, the questions that are asked are sent to a listserve or a forum; that way, the entire team can receive the question and anyone who feels they can contribute to an answer has the chance to enter their opinion.
Reciprocity and common ground is an important aspect of Social Network Analysis. The community’s information sharing processes was based solely on reciprocity. Although Haythornwaite postulated that reciprocal self-disclosure would strengthen the ties among the actors, it appears that reciprocal information-sharing has bonded the OD community together. When actors share information they have that might be pertinent to the OD profession, other actors will share information as well. Additionally, in the OD community there is no shortage of common ground. They are all Organization Development consultants who work for the same company. Although they have their individual differences, (i.e. how many years they worked for the company or in OD) the common ground, or the topic that brought them together, was Organization Development.
Also, according to Haythornwaite, the OD consultant community displays relational multiplexity, which “indicates a stronger tie between pairs because of their more multi-threaded engagement with each other.” Not only does the community discuss questions to work-related OD issues, but they talk about schools to go to for OD, books and articles to read, social events that the OD team will be attending, current issues in the business-world in general, and other generalized questions that you would ask a friend whose opinion you respected. In the article, Haythornwaite discussed media multiplexity as well, which means “the stronger the tie, the more media used.” Although all interactions in the OD community start via CMC (most people send out an e-mail through “crack”berry) the individual relationships and the magnitude of the question will determine which media they will respond with. It is not uncommon for an e-mail to be followed up with a FtF meeting or a phone call, in order to discuss the information further. The ability to use richer media shows the strength of tie between the actors in the community.
Fortunately, there is both online and offline synergy among this group. Since the team works so well in CMC, they have no qualms in FtF. The manager of the virtual team believes that it is important for the group to engage in social events, in order to maintain good relations. Therefore every Friday, the manager sets up lunch for his team, where the conversations range for work-related issues to nice vacation spots.
7.1 Gemeinshaft must have been greek
Fraternities are an obvious example of what Haythornthwaite would call a Gemeinshaft community. A Gemeinshaft community is one that is based on strong interpersonal ties, a shared focus, common language, and identity. If you are familiar with Greek communities, you know that these values are at the foundation of most brotherhoods. When one pledges a fraternity, they are charged with getting to know the brothers of the house very well. According to Gemeinschaft, brothers are “actors” and ties form between these actors. We have form edvery strong ties among ourselves. And even those brothers who live out of the house, and don’t have frequent enough contact for strong ties, maintain a sense of identity with the house. These brothers are good examples of weak ties, because they are always there, willing to help you out, but might not be around all the time. Its an amazing thing to be a part of, because when you want to get things done, whether within the house, or a larger philanthropy project involving Cornell or the Ithaca community, brothers are always ready and wiling to work together. Haythornthwaite says this, “[members] take up roles of community maintenance, spending their energy responding to others in the community, giving help without requiring an immediate pay back or even any payback” (129.) Now while no pay back is expected, reciprocity is the norm. I have no problems driving my friends up the hill, and enjoy the instances when my friends can afford me the same luxury. Because these favors run both ways, they have become social norms, and further develop ties.
The other element that separates fraternities from other kinds of communities is it’s self-selective nature. My fraternity is incredibly diverse, including brothers from all over the country, all seven schools at Cornell, and a multitude of majors alike. Despite all this diversity, we share much common ground. This common ground extends beyond just our interests, hobbies, and lifestyles, but is extended by the many traditions of the brotherhood.
SNA (Social Network Analysis) is a viewpoint that redefines the term community. Traditionally speaking, communities needed a common location to exist in. As CMC becomes more prevalent in people’s every day lives, its important to update this definition. CMC can help communities stay together, over great physical distances. Staying in touch with these brothers is facilitated by our fraternity listserv. This asynchronous email environment is a convenient way for any brother to reach out to his entire brotherhood network. This combination of FtF and CMC creates a synergy that strengthens the community, according to SNA.
So, to conclude:
My fraternity uses a combination of CMC and FtF interactions that enable us to meet, plan, and organize across distances, and bring us together in the real world to keep our ties, bonds, and brotherhood strong. We wear our letters proudly, reflection our strong sense of identity. We share inside jokes, exemplifying our language. And, we help each other whenever possible, and reciprocity is the norm. The combination of these factors explain why fraternities are perfect examples of Gemeinschaft communities, as explained by Haythornthwaite.
The other element that separates fraternities from other kinds of communities is it’s self-selective nature. My fraternity is incredibly diverse, including brothers from all over the country, all seven schools at Cornell, and a multitude of majors alike. Despite all this diversity, we share much common ground. This common ground extends beyond just our interests, hobbies, and lifestyles, but is extended by the many traditions of the brotherhood.
SNA (Social Network Analysis) is a viewpoint that redefines the term community. Traditionally speaking, communities needed a common location to exist in. As CMC becomes more prevalent in people’s every day lives, its important to update this definition. CMC can help communities stay together, over great physical distances. Staying in touch with these brothers is facilitated by our fraternity listserv. This asynchronous email environment is a convenient way for any brother to reach out to his entire brotherhood network. This combination of FtF and CMC creates a synergy that strengthens the community, according to SNA.
So, to conclude:
My fraternity uses a combination of CMC and FtF interactions that enable us to meet, plan, and organize across distances, and bring us together in the real world to keep our ties, bonds, and brotherhood strong. We wear our letters proudly, reflection our strong sense of identity. We share inside jokes, exemplifying our language. And, we help each other whenever possible, and reciprocity is the norm. The combination of these factors explain why fraternities are perfect examples of Gemeinschaft communities, as explained by Haythornthwaite.
7.1: CRUNKAPELLA – This ain’t no archsing!
www.chordials.com
What are you really going to remember when you graduate from Cornell? Are you going to wistfully long for those days when you crammed Orgo reactions into your head? Or will you dream about the time you pulled an all-nighter writing a paper for that damned Government professor? If you step back and put some perspective on things, you’ll realize that what you’ll remember about this place are your friends, the experiences you’ve shared, and the places you met them. A place in which I have met a unique set of friends is in my co-ed a-cappella group, The Chordials. (We’re the people who draw all the pretty martini glasses on campus in chalk.)
The Chordials are a unique community of singers with backgrounds as diverse as the group’s musical repertoire. We sing music from an array of genres including Rock, R&B, and spiritual music – essentially, we do not hold back when it comes to experimentation. Based on Haythornwaite’s SNA attributes, The Chordials are a group of singers that interact with other a-cappella groups on campus. We’ve had archsings and concerts with many of Cornell’s a-cappella groups including Last Call, The Hangovers, After Eight, and probably any other on campus group you can think of. The Chordials also interact with people and organizations that are looking for musicians to perform at special events, i.e. alumni associations and fraternities, as well as with the people who show up to our concerts and archsings (we could not exist without the support of our fans!).
One of the salient factors of a-cappella, I’ve found, is the support to which we give other groups. For instance, if the members of Last Call were to attend a Chordials concert (this Fall, we are featuring Crunkapella III on Nov. 16), then The Chordials will whole-heartedly support the Call Boys by attending their concert, “Save the Clocktower, Save the World”. Supporting other groups with similar interests fosters goodwill in the a-cappella community. Attending social events with other a-cappella groups is not only a form of socializing, but is also a form of networking and support. The Chordials’ attendance at The Hangovers’ afterparty for their Fall Tonic concert is an example of this.
According to Haythornwaite, an important feature of communities is social capital. As I mentioned above, The Chordials’ social network includes the a-cappella community on campus, but its strongest form of social network is within itself. The number of active members changes every year as seniors graduate and freshmen are inducted into the group, but the people stay at an intimate number of about 14. We form close relationships with each other because of frequent rehearsals (7 hours a week) and gigs on campus and around the country. The strength of this social network is due to our common ground for our love of singing – our members call anywhere from
http://cornell.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=33071835&op=4&o=all&view=all&subj=411052&id=424499
http://cornell.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=33071836&id=424499&op=4&view=all&subj=411052&prev
Reciprocity is also an integral part of this community. The Chordials is a student-founded, student-run group, with a faculty advisor that I’ve only seen once in my ~3 years of membership. Attending rehearsals and contributing one’s voice, efforts, and ideas to the group brings many returns for the individual and the group as a whole.
While these in-person rehearsals and gigs are the crux of the group’s existence, CMC plays an enormous role in the group. The Chordials’ secretary sends out each rehearsal’s minutes over the listserv, along with quips and quotes from our quirky Chordial of the day. This listserv is also used to organize meeting times for traveling, as well as to send pertinent YouTube videos to each other about Shoes or Charlie the Horse (it basically acts as another avenue for socialization). The first link I provided above is also to our homepage, where we provide fans with more information about group performances, CD sales, and individual members. Our online presence is also expanded by our Facebook group and MySpace homepage, which help to get our name out to the public.
The Chordials are a small community of musicians with a-cappella running through our veins. Haythornwaite’s SNA features and social capital give evidence for the cohesiveness of our group. While in-person interaction is important in hearing our music, CMC plays a vital role in communication and in-group socialization. But above all, more importantly than Haythornwaite’s or Etzioni’s analyses, remember that the Chords keep it crunk.
Kris's comments:
http://comm245blue.blogspot.com/2007/10/72-web-personality-sleuth.html#links
http://comm245blue.blogspot.com/2007/10/7-better-chance-social-network-analysis.html#links
72: Web Personality Sleuth
Sleuthing isn’t really fun unless it’s difficult. No one reads Sherlock Holmes hoping that the robber gets caught leaving fingerprints behind or dropping his wallet on the way out, and no one plays the Carmen Sandiego computer game to stay in one city and catch her immediately. (It could be argued that no one but me plays that game at all.) So, please believe me when I tell you I tried to find examples of the four Brunswikian Lens dimensions in mass e-mails not because that’s what I wrote about last time and I’m too lazy to think of anything else, but because I knew it would be challenging. With that caveat, I spent literally hundreds of seconds this evening poring through a vast collection of over ten e-mails from a past leader of the Waiters, whom I’ll call Muscles, and I think I can show you how he sits under the Lens.
Self-directed Identity Claim
A Self-Directed Identity Claims is exactly that—a statement to yourself about who you are. It makes you feel at home and reassures you that you are, in fact, yourself. Since e-mails are a form of communication, and mass e-mails tend to shy away from the introspective monologue, SDIC’s were hard to come by. The best I could come up with was some minor examples of inflection, some particular phrases that Muscles used identifiably often in practice, and perhaps the signature at the bottom of the e-mail. Nothing makes you feel at home more than your own name on something you’ve written.
Other-directed Identity Claim
Again, mass e-mails usually aren’t about YOUR identity. Presumably people don’t read the e-mails you send to find out who you are. So, the only times Muscles made claims about himself were when he felt like he had to establish his authority to say what had to be said. Heavier, deeper e-mails about how we were performing or why we had to buckle down and focus tended too be prefaced with an ODIC like "You guys elected me as your leader, so it's my job to say this..."
Interior Behavioral Residue
This refers to evidence of past behavior within the medium--since e-mail is a pretty sparse and recordable medium, it can either mean Muscles referring to a past message he'd sent, or me clicking through his old e-mails. So on his side, there was a lot of stacked-up residue like "once again, we have a show on Friday" or "I know I told you guys this before"; in one specific instance he apologized for an overly-harsh message he'd sent out. On my side, I could view all his e-mails as residue (or at least all his e-mails to the listserv).
Exterior Behavioral Residue
Muscles always had great stories. Since we all hang out together regularly outside practice, and ridiculous stories develop from that, one of the benefits of reading these mass e-mails was checking up on what had happened recently (if you'd missed it) or laughing at an inside joke (if you'd been there). Rarely did an e-mail go through that didn't refer to some type of crazy thing Muscles had done or witnessed. This is exterior behavioral residue--telling us about Muscles' personality in terms of how he interacted with the real world.
Five-Factor Personality
This part is either particularly difficult, or particularly easy, since I knew Muscles pretty well outside of the medium. I opted to try and describe him only from the e-mails: not very open, since he tended to discuss group goals rather than himself; extraverted, because he sent e-mails out at least three times a week; very conscientious, since he sounded focused and driven; neutral on agreeableness, since he sounded at times strict and at times less so; and particularly neurotic, since the e-mails always carried some undertone of anxiety ("remember, we have to get this done!") Not a completely fair profile of Muscles, but that's what the medium said.
Self-directed Identity Claim
A Self-Directed Identity Claims is exactly that—a statement to yourself about who you are. It makes you feel at home and reassures you that you are, in fact, yourself. Since e-mails are a form of communication, and mass e-mails tend to shy away from the introspective monologue, SDIC’s were hard to come by. The best I could come up with was some minor examples of inflection, some particular phrases that Muscles used identifiably often in practice, and perhaps the signature at the bottom of the e-mail. Nothing makes you feel at home more than your own name on something you’ve written.
Other-directed Identity Claim
Again, mass e-mails usually aren’t about YOUR identity. Presumably people don’t read the e-mails you send to find out who you are. So, the only times Muscles made claims about himself were when he felt like he had to establish his authority to say what had to be said. Heavier, deeper e-mails about how we were performing or why we had to buckle down and focus tended too be prefaced with an ODIC like "You guys elected me as your leader, so it's my job to say this..."
Interior Behavioral Residue
This refers to evidence of past behavior within the medium--since e-mail is a pretty sparse and recordable medium, it can either mean Muscles referring to a past message he'd sent, or me clicking through his old e-mails. So on his side, there was a lot of stacked-up residue like "once again, we have a show on Friday" or "I know I told you guys this before"; in one specific instance he apologized for an overly-harsh message he'd sent out. On my side, I could view all his e-mails as residue (or at least all his e-mails to the listserv).
Exterior Behavioral Residue
Muscles always had great stories. Since we all hang out together regularly outside practice, and ridiculous stories develop from that, one of the benefits of reading these mass e-mails was checking up on what had happened recently (if you'd missed it) or laughing at an inside joke (if you'd been there). Rarely did an e-mail go through that didn't refer to some type of crazy thing Muscles had done or witnessed. This is exterior behavioral residue--telling us about Muscles' personality in terms of how he interacted with the real world.
Five-Factor Personality
This part is either particularly difficult, or particularly easy, since I knew Muscles pretty well outside of the medium. I opted to try and describe him only from the e-mails: not very open, since he tended to discuss group goals rather than himself; extraverted, because he sent e-mails out at least three times a week; very conscientious, since he sounded focused and driven; neutral on agreeableness, since he sounded at times strict and at times less so; and particularly neurotic, since the e-mails always carried some undertone of anxiety ("remember, we have to get this done!") Not a completely fair profile of Muscles, but that's what the medium said.
7.2 - My Distant Friend on Myspace
For this assignment, I chose to assess a distant friend’s personality through her Myspace profile keeping the Brunswikian Lens Model in mind.
The Brunswikian Lens Model is a process by which individuals make inferences about others’ characteristics. Walther et. al states that this approach suggests that “individuals produce behaviors and generate artifacts that reflect their personalities”. In turn these artifacts are made available to observers, supporting Walther’s assertion that environmental cues function as a lens through which observers make inferences about the underlying characteristics of a target.
Gosling et. al proposed four mechanisms that linked individuals to the environments that they inhabit:
Self- directed Identity Claims: symbolic statements made by the target for his or her own benefit, intended to remind the target of his/her self-image
Other- directed Identity Claims: symbols made by the target in order to selectively self-present himself/herself
Interior Behavioral Residue: traces of the target’s activity in a particular environment (eg. Facebook newsfeed)
Exterior Behavioral Residue: traces of the target’s behavior outside of the particular environment of speculation
http://comm245blue.blogspot.com/2007/10/assignment-7-option-2.html
http://comm245blue.blogspot.com/2007/10/web-personality-sleuth.html
7 -"A Better Chance" Social Network Analysis (SNA)
A Better Chance is:
"the preeminent national resource for recruiting, identifying and developing leaders among young people of color – African-American, Latino, Asian-American and Native American – in the United States. Through a unique assessment model, A Better Chance refers academically talented students entering grades 6 through 11 to some of the nation’s finest independent and public schools to be considered for placement and financial aid. Students who are successfully placed in one of the 300+ member schools become a part of the signature College Preparatory Schools Program, and receive access to expanded educational and leadership opportunities".
In a study conducted by Haythornwaite (2007), online communities and social networks were analyzed. Through the use of a Social Network Analysis, the focus of the study was to access what was exchanged, communicated, and shared by individuals in a community. In thinking about my involvement with A Better Chance much of what Haythornwaite discusses can be used to analyze this community. The online aspect of A Better Chance comes from the use of an online log in to access resources from the national website and email listservs. As a scholar, I received numerous emails from my regional director about summer internship opportunities and leadership summits. Since becoming an alumni, I receive emails targeted towards becoming a mentor to rising scholars and how to continue my involvement with the organization. Recently, I was invited to join a Facebook group created by the A Better Chance Alumni Council. The group has made interacting with current scholars and alumni from across the country a lot easier. A Better Chance also hosts a slew of social programs, volunteer activities, and awards banquets, which allow individuals to interact with each other as well.
In Haythornwaite's study, three aspects are drawn upon to highlight the idea of "Social Capital": social network, common ground, and reciprocity.
As evident from the various mediums with which scholars and alumni can interact with each other, it is apparent that social network in the A Better Chance organization is prominent. The program as a whole fosters a sense of community that extends beyond one's direct involvement as a scholar. While there are divisions based on the type of school one attends (i.e. community school program, boarding school, or day school) and the region one resides in, overall there still exists a close relationship among program participants.
With respect to common ground, I believe that this is also present in the A Better Chance organization. Before receiving entry into the program, each individual had to take numerous exams, fill out pages upon pages of paperwork, and undergo an array of interviews. Thus, it is evident that each of the individuals affiliated with the program have a high level of commitment to educational advancement and building social networks.
Reciprocity is defined by Webster as a "mutual exchange of privileges". I believe that the structure of the A Better Chance Program speaks to this concept as well. Upon first becoming affiliated with the organization as a scholar, one gets exposed to an array of opportunities, whether academically geared or focused on leadership initiatives that are provided to them free of cost. Once, an individual becomes a alumni they often contribute financial resources to contribute to foster the continuation of the program. In addition, many offer their time and energy by serving as mentors, interviewers, or orientation leaders.
"the preeminent national resource for recruiting, identifying and developing leaders among young people of color – African-American, Latino, Asian-American and Native American – in the United States. Through a unique assessment model, A Better Chance refers academically talented students entering grades 6 through 11 to some of the nation’s finest independent and public schools to be considered for placement and financial aid. Students who are successfully placed in one of the 300+ member schools become a part of the signature College Preparatory Schools Program, and receive access to expanded educational and leadership opportunities".In a study conducted by Haythornwaite (2007), online communities and social networks were analyzed. Through the use of a Social Network Analysis, the focus of the study was to access what was exchanged, communicated, and shared by individuals in a community. In thinking about my involvement with A Better Chance much of what Haythornwaite discusses can be used to analyze this community. The online aspect of A Better Chance comes from the use of an online log in to access resources from the national website and email listservs. As a scholar, I received numerous emails from my regional director about summer internship opportunities and leadership summits. Since becoming an alumni, I receive emails targeted towards becoming a mentor to rising scholars and how to continue my involvement with the organization. Recently, I was invited to join a Facebook group created by the A Better Chance Alumni Council. The group has made interacting with current scholars and alumni from across the country a lot easier. A Better Chance also hosts a slew of social programs, volunteer activities, and awards banquets, which allow individuals to interact with each other as well.
In Haythornwaite's study, three aspects are drawn upon to highlight the idea of "Social Capital": social network, common ground, and reciprocity.
As evident from the various mediums with which scholars and alumni can interact with each other, it is apparent that social network in the A Better Chance organization is prominent. The program as a whole fosters a sense of community that extends beyond one's direct involvement as a scholar. While there are divisions based on the type of school one attends (i.e. community school program, boarding school, or day school) and the region one resides in, overall there still exists a close relationship among program participants.
With respect to common ground, I believe that this is also present in the A Better Chance organization. Before receiving entry into the program, each individual had to take numerous exams, fill out pages upon pages of paperwork, and undergo an array of interviews. Thus, it is evident that each of the individuals affiliated with the program have a high level of commitment to educational advancement and building social networks.
Reciprocity is defined by Webster as a "mutual exchange of privileges". I believe that the structure of the A Better Chance Program speaks to this concept as well. Upon first becoming affiliated with the organization as a scholar, one gets exposed to an array of opportunities, whether academically geared or focused on leadership initiatives that are provided to them free of cost. Once, an individual becomes a alumni they often contribute financial resources to contribute to foster the continuation of the program. In addition, many offer their time and energy by serving as mentors, interviewers, or orientation leaders.
“I know what you did on Facebook” Assignment 7.2
According to the Brunswik’s lens model, observers utilize available environmental cues as a lens to make judgments. When a particular cue accurately reflects a target’s personality that cue is said to have cue validity. When a particular cue is utilized it is called cue utilization. The co-occurrence of both cue validity and cue utilization leads to functional achievement, which allows an observer to make an accurate judgment about a target. Using this approach, I assessed the personality (according to the Five Factor Model) of an acquaintance named “Jimmy” who I have had limited conversations with consisting only of the words hello and goodbye, by focusing on the following four mechanisms that link Jimmy to the Facebook environment.
Comment 1
Comm 245 Blue: 72: Web Personality Sleuth
Comment 2
Comm 245 Blue: Assignment 7.2
A7.1 /g What's up?
Massively Multiplayer Online (MMO) games have leaped in popularity since the days of Everquest. What was once a very hardcore niche of gaming is now a very accessible, sometimes freely, and an open gaming environment. World of Warcraft in particular has gone to many lengths to make the game fun and easy such that almost anyone can play and reach the highest level in a relatively short amount of time. Within the game, players are free to form what are known as guilds, a collective of players that have their own chat channel (accessible by typing /g), tabard, name, and soon, banking space, among other benefits. I have played the game lightly over the course of a few years now and have been in numerous guilds. For the purposes of this assignment I will focus on my current guild and use it for my social network analysis.
It is interesting to consider whether this collective of video game players can be considered a community, or Gemeinschaft, as found in the Haythornwaite article or more pessimistically a society or pseudo community; a Gesellschaft. It is not only interesting, but important to analyze as it can help make clear whether or not it is healthy to spend time in a game as opposed to interacting with people in real life. This has been a hotly debated topic following numerous news articles of people devoting very large amounts of time to these “games”. SNA can help to determine what a guild really is by looking at what ties people together; the social networks within the guild, it's common ground, and its reciprocity.
A guild is made up of members (the actors) who can only be invited by a high standing member of the guild such as the leader or an officer. The actors are, by default, lightly tied together by the guild name. It is displayed prominently over a character for all others in the game to see. From their further ties are found such as being friends in real life with other members. Over time, however, many members of the guild eventually develop stronger ties as interaction frequency is quite high (for some people it is daily for hours). For others, such as myself, who rarely log on, these guild ties remain weak as my existence is not as noted due to my little interaction with the community. This is a direct function of the CMC nature of the guild. Since I do not exist in the game unless I am actively there, interaction frequency and time period are the primary bases to strengthening ties, unlike say a neighbour who would see me every day, whether planned or not.
Common ground also effects the community and is usually the driving force to creating guilds in the first place. There are many challenges in the game that require the effort of multiple people and thus this shared goal is more easily accomplished when one has a community to access. In addition, some people find common ground in being a very casual, laid back, and fun guild focused on socializing with a group of decent similarly minded people (this is usually handled by the application process to the guild). Finally within the guild we also have people closely located; not necessarily living together, but all come from Australia for example. These shared goals and focus, and common ground strengthen and enhance ties aside from the physical co-location or interaction frequency.
Finally reciprocity is very prevalent in my guild. Many times higher level players will help lower level players with quests or explain a dungeon to a new player, sometimes even going so far as to help pay in gold (the currency of the game) for items such as mounts or powerful equipment. Oftentimes people simply ask for help and many are quick to respond.
Through this analysis it seems very clear to label a guild as a community or Gemeinschaft. The guild consists of actors with strong ties, due to high interaction frequency over some set period of time with shared concerns and goals, where the actors help each other in accomplishing those goals and simply having a good time. It is important however to take a step back. My guild seems to be ideal to label a community however other guilds may not necessarily follow this pattern. Some guilds are formed by very powerful players for the sole reason of defeating the most difficult content, but not to socialize. Others devote unimaginable amounts of time to the game in order to accomplish specific goals in an almost machine like manner. While my guild could be labeled a community it is important to realize that the analysis was done on my individual guild. It would be worrisome to extend the community classification of guilds in general without a much broader analysis of many more guilds.
7.1 [REDACTED]: An insightful analysis
"How can a community exist without physical co-location?"
Who cares.
Humans have needs. Some needs require others. Some don't. We organize ourselves so as to best fulfill these needs.
If virtual communities look different than physical communities, it's only because we have a different toolset available.
All that matters is whether our communities, physical or virtual, are able to fulfill our needs. Form is irrelevant.
241 days ago I joined [REDACTED]. As a forum for both hackers and entrepreneurs, this community is entirely virtual. Hackers learn about business. Entrepreneurs connect with hackers. It's sort of like a dating site for "the gifted, the troubled, and the criminally insane."
The common ground is a mindset. This mindset is explicitly stated in a series of seventy-nine essays inked by the forum's shadowy founder. Although this works out to well over two books worth of reading material, the vast majority of participants have read every shred and scrap. The theory has something to do with capitalism, public schools, an obscure programming language, and renaissance painters. The bottom line though is this. Everyone involved has just started a business, is about to start a business, or has just sold their business.
But there's a catch. The guy at the top is not only an eccentric millionaire, but an investor as well. And twice a year he breaks out the checkbook. The forum serves as a networking tool for his firm, and twice a year he invites the best and brightest down to Cambridge for a ten-minute interview.
At the end of the interview a decision is made immediately. Either a check is written on the spot or else founder-hopefuls are sent home empty handed. The system seems to work. Of the first eight investments, four became instant dot-com millionaires after their companies were bought out by Yahoo, Google, and the like.
This is reciprocity. The readers contribute to the site by submitting articles and creating discussions. They get to know each other. Strong bonds form between them. The readers benefit. The investment firm at the top also benefits. But in exchange they fund a select few businesses from within the community each year. Competition is intense. Percentage-wise you're more likely to win a Rhodes. But that seems to be enough. If anything it only encourages founders further, who are chasing not only the monetary investment but the social signaling that accompanies.
On a day-to-day basis, interaction is entirely computer mediated. And for the vast majority of participants, this is the way it stays. Only a lucky few can ever hope to meet the site's founder and the other teams in person. That being said, even the very possibility of face-to-face interaction dictates much of the norms and culture of the site. Users don't want to say anything that will disqualify them from the possibility of funding, no matter how slim it may be. And since posts are a form of signaling, they tend toward being erudite and even insightful in nature. Much different than the general state of the Internet.
Even though this community exists almost entirely through CMC, few think of it that way. All they think about is their needs, be they monetary, social, or intellectual, and whether the others present help fulfill them. Thus, despite the quirky structural norms and social idioms that have no clear analogue in real life, the participants in [REDACTED] seem to be generally cheerful and engaged. And to me, that's just the way a community should be.
Who cares.
Humans have needs. Some needs require others. Some don't. We organize ourselves so as to best fulfill these needs.
If virtual communities look different than physical communities, it's only because we have a different toolset available.
All that matters is whether our communities, physical or virtual, are able to fulfill our needs. Form is irrelevant.
241 days ago I joined [REDACTED]. As a forum for both hackers and entrepreneurs, this community is entirely virtual. Hackers learn about business. Entrepreneurs connect with hackers. It's sort of like a dating site for "the gifted, the troubled, and the criminally insane."
The common ground is a mindset. This mindset is explicitly stated in a series of seventy-nine essays inked by the forum's shadowy founder. Although this works out to well over two books worth of reading material, the vast majority of participants have read every shred and scrap. The theory has something to do with capitalism, public schools, an obscure programming language, and renaissance painters. The bottom line though is this. Everyone involved has just started a business, is about to start a business, or has just sold their business.
But there's a catch. The guy at the top is not only an eccentric millionaire, but an investor as well. And twice a year he breaks out the checkbook. The forum serves as a networking tool for his firm, and twice a year he invites the best and brightest down to Cambridge for a ten-minute interview.
At the end of the interview a decision is made immediately. Either a check is written on the spot or else founder-hopefuls are sent home empty handed. The system seems to work. Of the first eight investments, four became instant dot-com millionaires after their companies were bought out by Yahoo, Google, and the like.
This is reciprocity. The readers contribute to the site by submitting articles and creating discussions. They get to know each other. Strong bonds form between them. The readers benefit. The investment firm at the top also benefits. But in exchange they fund a select few businesses from within the community each year. Competition is intense. Percentage-wise you're more likely to win a Rhodes. But that seems to be enough. If anything it only encourages founders further, who are chasing not only the monetary investment but the social signaling that accompanies.
On a day-to-day basis, interaction is entirely computer mediated. And for the vast majority of participants, this is the way it stays. Only a lucky few can ever hope to meet the site's founder and the other teams in person. That being said, even the very possibility of face-to-face interaction dictates much of the norms and culture of the site. Users don't want to say anything that will disqualify them from the possibility of funding, no matter how slim it may be. And since posts are a form of signaling, they tend toward being erudite and even insightful in nature. Much different than the general state of the Internet.
Even though this community exists almost entirely through CMC, few think of it that way. All they think about is their needs, be they monetary, social, or intellectual, and whether the others present help fulfill them. Thus, despite the quirky structural norms and social idioms that have no clear analogue in real life, the participants in [REDACTED] seem to be generally cheerful and engaged. And to me, that's just the way a community should be.
Assignment 7- option 1
For my network analysis, I chose to analyze an on line forum I frequent called “ihatepple.net.” (Aside: the site is not a “hate” site, it started out as an Apple bashing website, but since has dropped the goal and has become a more general forum for people interested in technology to discuss politics and technology developments.)
An analysis of the forum using SNA yields mixed results as to whether the forum is actually a community. The first question SNA asks is “who do they talk to.” The members of the forum all talk to each other through the forum software. Communication takes place among all members of the board. This establishes that the boundary of the suspected community here is the site itself.
In terms of support, users will post supporting messages to those they agree with in a discussion, but usually support ends there. The one exception would be the hosting of the actual site. One member hosts the site and software from his personal internet connection at his own expense. This could be interpreted as a donation of goods towards the “community.” Users also will offer help to one another in solving problems that are brought up on the discussion board.
The last SNA criterion is difficult to analyze in a group like this. It asks “with whom do they attend social events.” The site exists entirely in the space of the Internet; there is no offline component that encompasses the majority of the group, thus there aren’t typical “social events” that can define the community. If each “thread” is considered to be a separate discussion, somewhat similar to an “event,” then it can be said that the majority of users attends each other’s threads and participate. Whether or not this would qualify for an SNA property is debatable.
In the Haythornwaite (2007) excerpt we examined for this course, she raised another definition of a group, that of Etzioni & Etzioni (1999). This definition outlines three basic criteria that a group must exhibit to be considered a community: a social network, common ground, and reciprocity. The social network of IHA consists of a mix of strong and weak ties, as well as ties that have elements of both. Most posters come from different social circles, and have access to very different information. Despite these two attributes, the majority of ties between members also include emotional support and varying levels of self-disclosure, usually of a reciprocal nature.
Every member of IHA shares at least some common ground due to the nature of the forum. Every user is connected to technology in some way, and it is usually the strongest way we all relate to one another. This common ground strengthens the ties in the network structure, and also gives the site a purpose: discussing technology, among other things. Members also find common ground in politics, although this is not usually forum wide.
Reciprocity is present on the forum. The IHA forum is unique in that almost all active members also serve as moderators for the board. The moderation system is done by voting, requiring a certain amount of mods to agree that a post in inappropriate in order to censor it. Members agree to shoulder this responsibility with no real “payback” expected besides greater stability and enforcement of the rules of the forum.
The community here exists entirely on the internet, thus it is greatly affected by CMC. There is no real interaction between online and offline relationships because of the basis in the net.
An analysis of the forum using SNA yields mixed results as to whether the forum is actually a community. The first question SNA asks is “who do they talk to.” The members of the forum all talk to each other through the forum software. Communication takes place among all members of the board. This establishes that the boundary of the suspected community here is the site itself.
In terms of support, users will post supporting messages to those they agree with in a discussion, but usually support ends there. The one exception would be the hosting of the actual site. One member hosts the site and software from his personal internet connection at his own expense. This could be interpreted as a donation of goods towards the “community.” Users also will offer help to one another in solving problems that are brought up on the discussion board.
The last SNA criterion is difficult to analyze in a group like this. It asks “with whom do they attend social events.” The site exists entirely in the space of the Internet; there is no offline component that encompasses the majority of the group, thus there aren’t typical “social events” that can define the community. If each “thread” is considered to be a separate discussion, somewhat similar to an “event,” then it can be said that the majority of users attends each other’s threads and participate. Whether or not this would qualify for an SNA property is debatable.
In the Haythornwaite (2007) excerpt we examined for this course, she raised another definition of a group, that of Etzioni & Etzioni (1999). This definition outlines three basic criteria that a group must exhibit to be considered a community: a social network, common ground, and reciprocity. The social network of IHA consists of a mix of strong and weak ties, as well as ties that have elements of both. Most posters come from different social circles, and have access to very different information. Despite these two attributes, the majority of ties between members also include emotional support and varying levels of self-disclosure, usually of a reciprocal nature.
Every member of IHA shares at least some common ground due to the nature of the forum. Every user is connected to technology in some way, and it is usually the strongest way we all relate to one another. This common ground strengthens the ties in the network structure, and also gives the site a purpose: discussing technology, among other things. Members also find common ground in politics, although this is not usually forum wide.
Reciprocity is present on the forum. The IHA forum is unique in that almost all active members also serve as moderators for the board. The moderation system is done by voting, requiring a certain amount of mods to agree that a post in inappropriate in order to censor it. Members agree to shoulder this responsibility with no real “payback” expected besides greater stability and enforcement of the rules of the forum.
The community here exists entirely on the internet, thus it is greatly affected by CMC. There is no real interaction between online and offline relationships because of the basis in the net.
7-2, Camp Network
A tight social network I belong to consists of friends from a summer camp I attended as a camper and counselor. The friendships from this camp were made as a camper and developed into a broad social network during time spent as a counselor. We have developed a pseudo-fraternity over the years. Our network is a “Gemeinschaft” because it is based on strong ties, commonality, reciprocity, and identity. Our community also uses CMC to stay in touch using email-lists, fantasy sports online, and Facebook groups. The strong ties that have been developed are great friendships. The weak ties include friends’ social networks at college and from home as well as camp-alumni ties. The strong ties provide day-to-day interactions and support whereas the weak ties continue to exist, but in the background of life, and will continue to be there as the relationships develop in the future.
Our common ground as counselors was anchored in that most of us attended the camp as campers together. We all care about the camp and want to keep the traditions of the camp alive. We want the camp to exist to provide other kids with the same great experiences that the camp provided for us. Another major similar characteristic is that most of us were Jewish.
With regard to language and identity, we often have a “catch phrase” of the summer and use phrases that come about from spending 7 weeks out of the year with one-another. Phrases such as “kick back”, “be safe”, “you won’t do it”, have become standard in our vocabulary and help connect us. Songs by Yes and Bruce Springsteen have become camp traditions, and many other traditions exist. We have an established identity as “brothers” similar to a fraternity and our friends from home and college know about this close network. This makes those home-friends and college-friends weak ties to our social network.
We have developed close friendships to the point where we all truly care about each other. Not only are we there to support each other during tough times, but we also promote the notion of having good times together. We are all in college and want to have the best experiences of our lives. Some of the best college weekends have been visiting camp friends and inviting friends back to Cornell to have a fun weekend. Several of us keep in touch through a fantasy football league on cbs.sportsline.com and on the message board we often post funny stories from weekends spent with each other. This helps us keep in touch online.
Online, we can also email each other about events and alumni sometimes send emails about job opportunities. This does not replace face-to-face contact as we all try to see each other and communicate face-to-face during the year, but the ftf contact is usually in a friendly/fun atmosphere such as visiting each other at colleges. Facebook groups promote our inside jokes and communications throughout the year as well. The Facebook groups make sure everybody in the group is recognized and represented. This has helped our network grow even closer, and allows us to “friend” weak ties.
Our common ground as counselors was anchored in that most of us attended the camp as campers together. We all care about the camp and want to keep the traditions of the camp alive. We want the camp to exist to provide other kids with the same great experiences that the camp provided for us. Another major similar characteristic is that most of us were Jewish.
With regard to language and identity, we often have a “catch phrase” of the summer and use phrases that come about from spending 7 weeks out of the year with one-another. Phrases such as “kick back”, “be safe”, “you won’t do it”, have become standard in our vocabulary and help connect us. Songs by Yes and Bruce Springsteen have become camp traditions, and many other traditions exist. We have an established identity as “brothers” similar to a fraternity and our friends from home and college know about this close network. This makes those home-friends and college-friends weak ties to our social network.
We have developed close friendships to the point where we all truly care about each other. Not only are we there to support each other during tough times, but we also promote the notion of having good times together. We are all in college and want to have the best experiences of our lives. Some of the best college weekends have been visiting camp friends and inviting friends back to Cornell to have a fun weekend. Several of us keep in touch through a fantasy football league on cbs.sportsline.com and on the message board we often post funny stories from weekends spent with each other. This helps us keep in touch online.
Online, we can also email each other about events and alumni sometimes send emails about job opportunities. This does not replace face-to-face contact as we all try to see each other and communicate face-to-face during the year, but the ftf contact is usually in a friendly/fun atmosphere such as visiting each other at colleges. Facebook groups promote our inside jokes and communications throughout the year as well. The Facebook groups make sure everybody in the group is recognized and represented. This has helped our network grow even closer, and allows us to “friend” weak ties.
Comments:
Comm 245 Blue: 7 -"A Better Chance" Social Network Analysis (SNA)
Comm 245 Blue: 7.1 My High School Community
7.1 My High School Community
The Philadelphia High School for Girls (aka Girls’ High) is very well known for having a strong identity and a very active alumna network. As a member of the Philadelphia High School for Girls alumna association, I am part of the facebook group called “I hate to admit it but I loved Girls’ High”. This group allows me to keep in touch with fellow high school grads, discuss recent happenings within the school, organize community service events, fundraise, and send reminders about dance shows coming up, theater performances and concerts. In this post, I will describe the Girls’ High community through Haythornthwaite’s (2007) Social Network Analysis (SNA) and analyze the importance of the social network, common ground and reciprocity in the sustaining of this group.
Etzioni and Etzioni (1999) define a community, as “…a group of individuals that crisscross and reinforce one another…” (129). Haythornthwaite states that SNA focuses on “…what is happening between people, within collectives and across boundaries, in order to find out what kind of collective exists.” (124-125) My community is very tightly connected for several reasons. First, the existence of this online group allows members to keep connected and up to date with current events. Also, most members are still very involved with school events. Further, there are several characteristics of the institution that kept school spirit alive during my years at Girls’ High and that still play a very important role today. For instance, the school’s high selective admission procedure, the several time commitments (sports teams, clubs and organizations), the strong traditions and celebrations (“songs of the seasons”, “career day”), the uniqueness of the school (last all girls public school left in the nation), the strong competition with neighboring schools and the high interaction frequency (both online and face-to-face of the members), all lead to a very cohesive organization.
Haythornthwaite discusses three very important elements of communities that can be applied to my alumna association: social networks, common ground and reciprocity.
Social networks “…are built on the foundation of actors who are connected or tied by maintenance of one or more relations.” (126). The actors are the subjects, in this case, Girls’ High alumna, who are communicating with one another through the use of face to face interaction (alumna events) and through the use of CMC (e.g. facebook group as well as list serves). The relations connect the actors and are based on the exchange of information, support (financial and moral) and advice. The ties are what maintain such relationships. In the case of the alumna community, they are very strong. This is because the network tends to be dense (high interaction frequency), the actors are very similar (all graduated from the same institution), and all have access to similar resources and information (discounts, invitations to events).
Common ground is the idea that members have similar views, share historical events, use similar language and routines. Members of the alumna association have attended the same high school, share common experiences (teachers) and memories (prom). Also we have all encountered similar situations and faced similar emotions. For instance, after graduation, most of us attended co-head colleges and had to interact with male student on a day-to-day basis, something we weren’t accustomed to. Our “common ground” allowed us to share our opinions and give each other advice. This lead to the creation of several facebook threats, groups and conversation topics on the list serves.
Reciprocity is the idea that because there is “…continued orientation to the community…” and that members “…spend their energy responding to other in the community, giving help without requiring an immediate payback or even any payback.” (129). This kind of reciprocity has helped the community sustain itself throughout the years. This reciprocity has lead us to converse and give each other advice on a wide variety of topics, ranging from the best GRE prep courses to best spring break vacation destinations. Not only has this provided each one of us with more information and resources but has also deepened our friendship level and made our network even stronger.
CMC interactions have strongly affected this community. Etzioni and Etzioni (1999) state that communities who share both types of media, face-to-face and CMC, tend to bond better and to share values more efficiently than “…communities that rely upon only one of the other mode of communication.” (131). In the case of the alumna community, this statement has been proved correct. Has we solely relied on face-to-face interaction, the group would have been active during those few months when all the members are back from school and would have surely died out in a few months. On the other hand, had we solely relied on CMC (facebook group), we would not have attended the same social events and would have thus run out of topics to discuss. By combining the two, the group has survived over the years and has been flourishing.
If you're interested:
Seach on facebook: "I hate to admit it but I loved Girls' High", "Girls' High Alumna", "Philadelphia High School for Girls"
Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philadelphia_High_School_for_Girls
MY COMMENTS:
http://comm245blue.blogspot.com/2007/10/71-virtual-team.html
http://comm245blue.blogspot.com/2007/10/crunkapella-this-aint-no-archsing.html
Etzioni and Etzioni (1999) define a community, as “…a group of individuals that crisscross and reinforce one another…” (129). Haythornthwaite states that SNA focuses on “…what is happening between people, within collectives and across boundaries, in order to find out what kind of collective exists.” (124-125) My community is very tightly connected for several reasons. First, the existence of this online group allows members to keep connected and up to date with current events. Also, most members are still very involved with school events. Further, there are several characteristics of the institution that kept school spirit alive during my years at Girls’ High and that still play a very important role today. For instance, the school’s high selective admission procedure, the several time commitments (sports teams, clubs and organizations), the strong traditions and celebrations (“songs of the seasons”, “career day”), the uniqueness of the school (last all girls public school left in the nation), the strong competition with neighboring schools and the high interaction frequency (both online and face-to-face of the members), all lead to a very cohesive organization.
Haythornthwaite discusses three very important elements of communities that can be applied to my alumna association: social networks, common ground and reciprocity.
Social networks “…are built on the foundation of actors who are connected or tied by maintenance of one or more relations.” (126). The actors are the subjects, in this case, Girls’ High alumna, who are communicating with one another through the use of face to face interaction (alumna events) and through the use of CMC (e.g. facebook group as well as list serves). The relations connect the actors and are based on the exchange of information, support (financial and moral) and advice. The ties are what maintain such relationships. In the case of the alumna community, they are very strong. This is because the network tends to be dense (high interaction frequency), the actors are very similar (all graduated from the same institution), and all have access to similar resources and information (discounts, invitations to events).
Common ground is the idea that members have similar views, share historical events, use similar language and routines. Members of the alumna association have attended the same high school, share common experiences (teachers) and memories (prom). Also we have all encountered similar situations and faced similar emotions. For instance, after graduation, most of us attended co-head colleges and had to interact with male student on a day-to-day basis, something we weren’t accustomed to. Our “common ground” allowed us to share our opinions and give each other advice. This lead to the creation of several facebook threats, groups and conversation topics on the list serves.
Reciprocity is the idea that because there is “…continued orientation to the community…” and that members “…spend their energy responding to other in the community, giving help without requiring an immediate payback or even any payback.” (129). This kind of reciprocity has helped the community sustain itself throughout the years. This reciprocity has lead us to converse and give each other advice on a wide variety of topics, ranging from the best GRE prep courses to best spring break vacation destinations. Not only has this provided each one of us with more information and resources but has also deepened our friendship level and made our network even stronger.
CMC interactions have strongly affected this community. Etzioni and Etzioni (1999) state that communities who share both types of media, face-to-face and CMC, tend to bond better and to share values more efficiently than “…communities that rely upon only one of the other mode of communication.” (131). In the case of the alumna community, this statement has been proved correct. Has we solely relied on face-to-face interaction, the group would have been active during those few months when all the members are back from school and would have surely died out in a few months. On the other hand, had we solely relied on CMC (facebook group), we would not have attended the same social events and would have thus run out of topics to discuss. By combining the two, the group has survived over the years and has been flourishing.
If you're interested:
Seach on facebook: "I hate to admit it but I loved Girls' High", "Girls' High Alumna", "Philadelphia High School for Girls"
Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philadelphia_High_School_for_Girls
MY COMMENTS:
http://comm245blue.blogspot.com/2007/10/71-virtual-team.html
http://comm245blue.blogspot.com/2007/10/crunkapella-this-aint-no-archsing.html
Feeling at Home..... Away from Home
Two years ago I left my home in Cole Harbour, Nova Scotia, Canada for my senior year of high school. I was at a school called Athol Murray College of Notre Dame in Wilcox, Saskatchewan, Canada. Wilcox is a town of approximately six hundred people including the three hundred students. I shared a room with two of my teammates and enjoyed my experience although it was awfully difficult to communicate with my friends back home. Not only was there no reception in Wilcox in order use a cell phone but there was also no internet access in my room. The only internet access that I had was in the computer lab. Needless to say asynchronous communication became my only way of communicating with my friends from home. My close friends and I created a facebook group in order to stay in touch. We found this an easy way to check up on how everyone was doing and to give each other a hard time if they had not scored in a few games, since the majority of us were hockey players. Every once in a while the jokes would get old and some guys would be in a real slump so we would offer each other advice and support, which demonstrated the reciprocity in our group. We held each other accountable to staying in touch by making comments like “where has that ghost Kody been?” poke fun at someone until they responded; we just found a way to make it fun for all of us. I was also in a much broader social network with other friends from home but the commitment of staying in touch with those people was not even comparable to the concentrated group that my closer friends had formed. Since we all either attended school together or played hockey with or against each other we shared a common ground that we could all connect with. There was not a single person in the group who was not “in the loop” or unable to understand an inside joke. As the year moved along we found ourselves just as close as we had been before we all left home so when we all got back together in the summer it was like we were never even gone.
Monday, October 22, 2007
Assignment 7 (Option 1): “Taking Catherwood Library Back”
“Are you tired of going into Catherwood and all the computers being occupied by NON ILR-ies? Are you pissed off that these infidels even found the two downstairs computers labs? NON ILR-ies are like cockroaches, they're everywhere....let's exterminate Catherwood... and take our shit back!”
The community I would like to describe is a very tight-knit community at Cornell. This is a community within the larger Cornell community. I am talking about the ILR community. The School of Industrial and Labor Relations is known for its emphasis on team-work. Most importantly, we are known for our outgoing and sociable, as well as motivated and driven personalities; ILRies are proud to represent this prestigious school.
Haythornwaite’s SNA analyzes the interactions between a community—what information is exchanged, communicated, and shared by pairs of individuals. We must look at “what kinds of relations are maintained in any particular network, what kinds of people maintain these relations and how these show the structure of personal or egocentric networks and of whole networks” (Haythornwaite). ILRies are more than just classmates; we are friends, roughing the loads of reading together. We have much social capital, for we have social network, common ground, and reciprocity. In ILR, it is common ground that everybody wants to help each other do well. ILRies are always sharing information about which classes are the easiest ones, and which professors lecture the best—we just want everybody to do well for themselves, and we are all willing to help one another. Commitment, shared values, mores, meanings, and shared historical identity are all methods of coming to a common ground point. The idea of reciprocity is that we get something in return, which goes hand in hand with the idea of common ground for this community. When we help others, we know that it will be reciprocated if and when needed. Another common ground idea is that ILRies are the best, and only we are allowed to use Catherwood Library. There are even smaller communities (depending on the extent of their emotions) who fully support the idea that we should “Take Catherwood Back” (see above for listed description). This comes from the common idea that ILRies are special, and only we are allowed to study and do homework in our library. The social network forms from the school having less than two hundred students per graduating class, and therefore, many students know other students through ILR classes as well as ILR organizations. From these three aspects, we gain social capital, and this confirms the existence of a community.
The CMC aspect of the ILRie community plays a relatively strong part in keeping the community together. Members of the community often join facebook groups called “ILR” + a class number; or “ILR: Tap into my Human Resources.” These groups are a fun way of keeping in touch and forming inside jokes about people who are not ILRies. Without these groups, the pride of the community would definitely decrease. Some ties are made stronger with the use of CMC to communicate because it makes it easier for people to communicate with each other, as we know is an important part to keeping the bonds in a community strong. The facebook group can be by invite only, therefore we have control on who we invite to join our community. ILRies also use CMC through means of ILR list-serves which inform the community about events within our community.
We ILRies are proud of who we are and what we study, and we will not let anything infiltrate our community! We will take Catherwood back!
Assignment 7 Option 1: Fraternity
One of the communities that I am involved in is, arguably, one of the closest knit types of community in existence. I am a member of a fraternity, a community where your fellow members are not only friends, but “brothers”. Whether one buys into the whole brotherly love thing or not, a fraternity can definitely be analyzed using Haythornthwaite’s ideas of community and social networks. This fraternity is best described by Haythornthwaite’s example of a Gemeinschaft community, “a collective based on strong interpersonal ties, face-to-face interaction, a shared focus and common purpose, language and identity” (Haythornthwaite, 122). Adding onto this definition, the fraternity also takes on a CMC element in its community, with list serves to active brothers and alumni, a Facebook group, and a webpage (http://www.aepibeta.org/).
There is a definite social network built of different actors, ties, relations in the fraternity. There are strong ties that exist between the active brothers. Haythornthwaite describes strong ties as when, “actors maintain many relations, particularly when those relations includes social and emotional support and intimacy or self-disclosure…operate in the same general social circles we do…and(have) frequent exchange” (Haythornthwaite, 126). Every active brother spends a lot of time with each other, frequently socialize within the same social circle, and are always there to support and aid their fellow brother in times of need (whether that be helping them find a date for formal or how to deal with a tough situation that they have encountered in their lives). There also exist weak ties in the community, an example of which would be the alumni. These are people that we have little interaction with and are in different social circles than us. Although they differ from us, they have information and resources that are different from the active brother’s, so they can prove very useful with advantages we mentioned in class, such as job opportunities.
The brothers in my fraternity have a lot of common ground. Our common ground is mainly based on the fact that we are all Jewish. We share many of the same beliefs, attitudes, and even characteristics (ex: the infamous Jewish cheapness). When joining the fraternity, we all also pledged to promote the common goals of bringing together members of the Jewish community and providing philanthropy to Jewish charities. These shared goals prove to further bring us together through common ground.
There also exists a large amount of reciprocity in the brotherhood. Members, “take up roles of community maintenance, spending their energy responding to other in the community, giving help without requiring an immediate payback or even any payback” (Haythornthwaite, 129). Every brother is there for every other brother in the fraternity no matter the situation and that is sentiment is returned to them. On top of that, there are specific positions that are in charge maintaining the community (Ex: Master or House Manager) who are not remunerated for their work, they simply do it to help the community.
There exist clear online/offline synergies in the context of my fraternity. Using a combination of both face-to-face and CMC communication, we are able to efficiently pass on information to everyone. Chapter meetings are face-to-face opportunities to bring up new issues, tell stories, and explain concerns. List serves are used to keep in contact with abroad brothers and alumni, as well as active brothers at Cornell. AIM chats are used to discuss different fraternal issues. The CMC aspects are an extension of our face-to-face communications in the community. Using this blended method, our community, “would be able to bond better and share values more effectively than communities that rely upon only one or the other mode of communication” (Etzioni and Etzioni, 1999).
I commented on:
http://comm245blue.blogspot.com/2007/10/feeling-at-home-away-from-home.html
http://comm245blue.blogspot.com/2007/10/71-gemeinshaft-must-have-been-greek.html
There is a definite social network built of different actors, ties, relations in the fraternity. There are strong ties that exist between the active brothers. Haythornthwaite describes strong ties as when, “actors maintain many relations, particularly when those relations includes social and emotional support and intimacy or self-disclosure…operate in the same general social circles we do…and(have) frequent exchange” (Haythornthwaite, 126). Every active brother spends a lot of time with each other, frequently socialize within the same social circle, and are always there to support and aid their fellow brother in times of need (whether that be helping them find a date for formal or how to deal with a tough situation that they have encountered in their lives). There also exist weak ties in the community, an example of which would be the alumni. These are people that we have little interaction with and are in different social circles than us. Although they differ from us, they have information and resources that are different from the active brother’s, so they can prove very useful with advantages we mentioned in class, such as job opportunities.
The brothers in my fraternity have a lot of common ground. Our common ground is mainly based on the fact that we are all Jewish. We share many of the same beliefs, attitudes, and even characteristics (ex: the infamous Jewish cheapness). When joining the fraternity, we all also pledged to promote the common goals of bringing together members of the Jewish community and providing philanthropy to Jewish charities. These shared goals prove to further bring us together through common ground.
There also exists a large amount of reciprocity in the brotherhood. Members, “take up roles of community maintenance, spending their energy responding to other in the community, giving help without requiring an immediate payback or even any payback” (Haythornthwaite, 129). Every brother is there for every other brother in the fraternity no matter the situation and that is sentiment is returned to them. On top of that, there are specific positions that are in charge maintaining the community (Ex: Master or House Manager) who are not remunerated for their work, they simply do it to help the community.
There exist clear online/offline synergies in the context of my fraternity. Using a combination of both face-to-face and CMC communication, we are able to efficiently pass on information to everyone. Chapter meetings are face-to-face opportunities to bring up new issues, tell stories, and explain concerns. List serves are used to keep in contact with abroad brothers and alumni, as well as active brothers at Cornell. AIM chats are used to discuss different fraternal issues. The CMC aspects are an extension of our face-to-face communications in the community. Using this blended method, our community, “would be able to bond better and share values more effectively than communities that rely upon only one or the other mode of communication” (Etzioni and Etzioni, 1999).
I commented on:
http://comm245blue.blogspot.com/2007/10/feeling-at-home-away-from-home.html
http://comm245blue.blogspot.com/2007/10/71-gemeinshaft-must-have-been-greek.html
7.2 Brunswikian Lens Model
I used the Brunswikian Lens Model to assess the personality of someone (who I’ll call R) through their Facebook profile. The Brunswikian model suggests the concepts of cue validity and cue utilization. Cue validity indicates the accuracy of a cue in describing a person. Cue utilization refers to the process of an observer using a cue for impression formation. When combined, cue utilization and cue validity enable functional achievement – that is, an accurate impression of the person in question.
R appears to put forth an accurate self-description in his Facebook profile, at least insofar as I know him personally. I can use these cues to form an impression of the type of person he is. Since both cue validity and cue utilization is present, I have attained functional achievement in assessing R’s character.
The Brunswikian Lens Model also covers interactions between the individual and the environment. In particular, cues can be classified as either identity claims or behavioral residue. Identity claims are cues issued verbally by the impression manager, whereas behavioral residue describes cues left in the environment by the impression manager’s behavior/actions. Identity claims are either self- or other-directed. Self-directed identity claims are statements you make for your own benefit. Other-directed claims are statements you make to others in order to let them know how you want to be regarded. Behavioral residue is either interior or exterior, indicating whether the “residue” cues indicate behavior performed inside or outside of the current environment, respectively.
The main self-directed identity claim featured on R’s facebook profile is the multitude of VT-tragedy related Facebook groups joined. Two of the VT victims were alumni from his high school, so he has boosted the prominence of his high school on his Facebook profile to remind himself of the community he is a part of. Most of the rest of the items are other-directed identity claims: favorite quotes, past job experience, favorite music, movies, etc. These are mostly put up for curious outsiders to examine, so that they obtain a certain impression of R. R produces quite a lot of interior behavioral residue, for he is almost always somewhere on my news feed, no matter when I happen to be perusing it. The fact that he has a lot of posts on his wall also seems to imply that he makes many wall posts (through reciprocity). Lastly, his profile also yields a lot of exterior behavioral residue, with numerous tagged photos. He also announces his intent to participate in on-campus events through the Facebook “Events” application.
Based on the Five Factor Model and R’s Facebook profile only, I would consider R an open, extraverted, agreeable, and conscientious person. This is derived largely from his liking for travel, sense of humor, and selection of favorite music and movies. His profile shows no signs of any significant neuroticism.
I did notice that most of the posts on R’s wall are friendly and agreeable in nature. This may have led to the assimilation context effect, where I judged R as being more agreeable simply because his friends all seemed to be.
Comment 1
Comment 2
R appears to put forth an accurate self-description in his Facebook profile, at least insofar as I know him personally. I can use these cues to form an impression of the type of person he is. Since both cue validity and cue utilization is present, I have attained functional achievement in assessing R’s character.
The Brunswikian Lens Model also covers interactions between the individual and the environment. In particular, cues can be classified as either identity claims or behavioral residue. Identity claims are cues issued verbally by the impression manager, whereas behavioral residue describes cues left in the environment by the impression manager’s behavior/actions. Identity claims are either self- or other-directed. Self-directed identity claims are statements you make for your own benefit. Other-directed claims are statements you make to others in order to let them know how you want to be regarded. Behavioral residue is either interior or exterior, indicating whether the “residue” cues indicate behavior performed inside or outside of the current environment, respectively.
The main self-directed identity claim featured on R’s facebook profile is the multitude of VT-tragedy related Facebook groups joined. Two of the VT victims were alumni from his high school, so he has boosted the prominence of his high school on his Facebook profile to remind himself of the community he is a part of. Most of the rest of the items are other-directed identity claims: favorite quotes, past job experience, favorite music, movies, etc. These are mostly put up for curious outsiders to examine, so that they obtain a certain impression of R. R produces quite a lot of interior behavioral residue, for he is almost always somewhere on my news feed, no matter when I happen to be perusing it. The fact that he has a lot of posts on his wall also seems to imply that he makes many wall posts (through reciprocity). Lastly, his profile also yields a lot of exterior behavioral residue, with numerous tagged photos. He also announces his intent to participate in on-campus events through the Facebook “Events” application.
Based on the Five Factor Model and R’s Facebook profile only, I would consider R an open, extraverted, agreeable, and conscientious person. This is derived largely from his liking for travel, sense of humor, and selection of favorite music and movies. His profile shows no signs of any significant neuroticism.
I did notice that most of the posts on R’s wall are friendly and agreeable in nature. This may have led to the assimilation context effect, where I judged R as being more agreeable simply because his friends all seemed to be.
Comment 1
Comment 2
7/1: Threads - Maintaining Communities Despite the Distance
This blog is all about using the social network analysis point of view to examine a community I’ve established with some of my oldest friends from home. It all started this summer when we found ourselves working at boring, cubicle-prone, 9-5 desk jobs. In order to entertain/distract ourselves from the daily grind, we began an asynchronous Facebook thread to which we would all report throughout our days. We kept our thread alive all summer, and I have found it to forge an even stronger community bond now that we are all at school in different places.
This particular theory examines what is exchanged, communicated and shared by the individuals in a given community. So, what is exchanged, communicated and shared in our mini-community? Stories, advice, questions, anecdotes, news, gossip and more. Some of us – being that 2 of 10 attend the University of Delaware, 2 attend Syracuse University, and 3 attend our very own Cornell – attend social events together as well. While it is a more a forum for long-distance discussion and support, our thread functions as a plan-making mechanism for friends who make real-life dates together as well.
Our social network is kept alive by both common ground and reciprocity. Our common ground is based upon the fact that we’ve all grown up in much the same way, and, as such, behave similarly and understand one another. Having all come from the same town, we share meanings, like certain commonly understood abbreviations or nicknames. In addition, we share a sort of historical identity in the sense that we share knowledge about our backgrounds, community members, and the norms with which we’ve grown up.
Reciprocity can be explained well by a quote from Haythornwaite, which described these community relationships as ones that “crisscross and reinforce one another” (p. 129). When one person writes to the thread with a problem, another will answer, and still others will share their input. We then might begin responding to other respondents and sharing our own stories at the same time. We all care for each other’s feelings and wellbeing, and our network of relationships serves to benefit all of the thread members. Thanks to the common ground and reciprocity of our thread, we experience social capital – or valuable gains obtained from these particular connections. Whether in the form of information, advice, or comic relief, our little community provides all of us with something unique and special.
The CMC nature of our thread does not seem to affect our relationships at all. Considering our synergies both online and offline, I have noticed no detrimental effects of transferring our communications from FtF to CMC. Our communication is highly warranted, as it seems to be immune from any outside manipulation. Thanks to Facebook’s rules and regulations, thread comments cannot be edited or removed by anyone but the writer herself. They cannot be hidden/disguised as being from anyone else, and all of our identities are protected by private passwords we’ve previously chosen. Similar to assessment signals, this mode of communication is tough to manipulate.
Bored, and wondering what an example of our thread might look like? If you’re in the mood for a laugh, here’s a peek into the typical weirdness that is my group of friends…
Sara Pullman
Today at 8:59pm
Reply
attention friends : george nomikos asked BOTH emily and i to his date party this thursday night. since we actually kind of had fun last time, we said yes. we are going to the SAE date party with george nomikos. together. he told us to look cute so he could pimp us out. i laughed really hard.
Alyssa Paer
Today at 9:00pm
Reply
........ i hope he takes really cool pics with you guys with his fedora and adds really ghetto captions and does the one finger point to the camera. someone get him a pimp stick. what about the war that you didnt even know you got yourself into serah?
This particular theory examines what is exchanged, communicated and shared by the individuals in a given community. So, what is exchanged, communicated and shared in our mini-community? Stories, advice, questions, anecdotes, news, gossip and more. Some of us – being that 2 of 10 attend the University of Delaware, 2 attend Syracuse University, and 3 attend our very own Cornell – attend social events together as well. While it is a more a forum for long-distance discussion and support, our thread functions as a plan-making mechanism for friends who make real-life dates together as well.
Our social network is kept alive by both common ground and reciprocity. Our common ground is based upon the fact that we’ve all grown up in much the same way, and, as such, behave similarly and understand one another. Having all come from the same town, we share meanings, like certain commonly understood abbreviations or nicknames. In addition, we share a sort of historical identity in the sense that we share knowledge about our backgrounds, community members, and the norms with which we’ve grown up.
Reciprocity can be explained well by a quote from Haythornwaite, which described these community relationships as ones that “crisscross and reinforce one another” (p. 129). When one person writes to the thread with a problem, another will answer, and still others will share their input. We then might begin responding to other respondents and sharing our own stories at the same time. We all care for each other’s feelings and wellbeing, and our network of relationships serves to benefit all of the thread members. Thanks to the common ground and reciprocity of our thread, we experience social capital – or valuable gains obtained from these particular connections. Whether in the form of information, advice, or comic relief, our little community provides all of us with something unique and special.
The CMC nature of our thread does not seem to affect our relationships at all. Considering our synergies both online and offline, I have noticed no detrimental effects of transferring our communications from FtF to CMC. Our communication is highly warranted, as it seems to be immune from any outside manipulation. Thanks to Facebook’s rules and regulations, thread comments cannot be edited or removed by anyone but the writer herself. They cannot be hidden/disguised as being from anyone else, and all of our identities are protected by private passwords we’ve previously chosen. Similar to assessment signals, this mode of communication is tough to manipulate.
Bored, and wondering what an example of our thread might look like? If you’re in the mood for a laugh, here’s a peek into the typical weirdness that is my group of friends…
Sara Pullman
Today at 8:59pm
Reply
attention friends : george nomikos asked BOTH emily and i to his date party this thursday night. since we actually kind of had fun last time, we said yes. we are going to the SAE date party with george nomikos. together. he told us to look cute so he could pimp us out. i laughed really hard.
Alyssa Paer
Today at 9:00pm
Reply
........ i hope he takes really cool pics with you guys with his fedora and adds really ghetto captions and does the one finger point to the camera. someone get him a pimp stick. what about the war that you didnt even know you got yourself into serah?
7: Get to Know Kristin!
The Brunswikian Lens Model is a way in which “individuals make inferences about the characteristics of others” (Walther). It is said that when an individual has cues with a high level of validity (cues that truly reflect one’s personality) and actually utilizes these cues (exploitation of valid cues), and individual can reach functional achievement and therefore be accurately judged by other outside individuals. I decided to analyze one of my acquaintances on Facebook, “Kristin”, a girl whom which I am not extremely familiar with. Following are the four individual—environmental links that all helped me to assess information about Kristin’s personality and style of life.
A self-directed identity claim is an inwardly defined claim that one makes about themselves. Kristin is married to a girl on Facebook who attends a university other than her own. I believe that this union could be considered an inside joke between Kristin and her “wife” because Kristin has additionally indicated that she is a “female” interested in “men”. This marriage is simply a constant reminder of her strong friendship with her “wife” and is purely self-directed because I believe that not many of her Facebook friends put much thought into her inside joke with her friend from home.
An other-directed identity claim is a claim an individual makes about him or herself and purposefully, publicly displays on CMC so that others can view it. An example of an other directed identity claim are some of the applications Kristin has added to her Facebook homepage. For example, Kristin has a “Movies” application displayed in her profile. She seems to be an active user of this application because she has rated over 75 movies and shared her favorite movies with her other friends who have this application added. This application is purely directed towards her other Facebook friends and gives them some additional information about Kristin in which they can hopefully relate to.
Interior residue is proof of one’s behaviors or actions interior to a specific space. On Kristin’s Facebook, an example of interior residue would be her news-feed. I cannot assess information directly from Kristin’s news-feed but I can assess information about Kristin that shows up on my Facebook news-feed. Kristin shows up repeatedly on my news-feed, which is exactly how I came across the idea of analyzing her profile for this assignment. The fact that she comes up on my news-feed on almost a daily basis is proof of two specific things about Kristin’s Facebook usage: 1.) She is an active user of Facebook (writing on other’s walls, adding applications, editing her user information to reflect her life, etc. daily) and 2.) She is very open and public about these behaviors. I believe that many Cornell Facebook users are quite “private” with their Facebook use. For example, they make their profiles available only to their friends, they remove themselves from other’s news-feed and delete their own mini-feed by editing their privacy options. Kristin doesn’t manage her Facebook in this manner. Either she wants all her friends on Facebook to have proof of whom she’s friends with or who writes on her wall or she is oblivious to how evident her actions on Facebook are.
Exterior residue is evidence of things one does outside of an online space, for example photos reflecting one’s activities and life outside of Facebook. Kristin has many photo albums (14 to be exact) of her and her friends out partying. Therefore, I feel it is safe to assess that when Kristin isn’t studying for prelims or engaging in the basic necessities activities (i.e., sleeping, eating), she spends much of her time hanging out with her friends and being social.
I do not believe that I have reached complete functional achievement of Kristin’s personality because I have only completely analyzed her profile this once. Additionally, I do not know her well enough off-line to verify my observations made through her identity claims and behavioral residue. However, I do believe that by analyzing her Facebook profile, I have a relatively accurate, basic idea of her personality.
A self-directed identity claim is an inwardly defined claim that one makes about themselves. Kristin is married to a girl on Facebook who attends a university other than her own. I believe that this union could be considered an inside joke between Kristin and her “wife” because Kristin has additionally indicated that she is a “female” interested in “men”. This marriage is simply a constant reminder of her strong friendship with her “wife” and is purely self-directed because I believe that not many of her Facebook friends put much thought into her inside joke with her friend from home.
An other-directed identity claim is a claim an individual makes about him or herself and purposefully, publicly displays on CMC so that others can view it. An example of an other directed identity claim are some of the applications Kristin has added to her Facebook homepage. For example, Kristin has a “Movies” application displayed in her profile. She seems to be an active user of this application because she has rated over 75 movies and shared her favorite movies with her other friends who have this application added. This application is purely directed towards her other Facebook friends and gives them some additional information about Kristin in which they can hopefully relate to.
Interior residue is proof of one’s behaviors or actions interior to a specific space. On Kristin’s Facebook, an example of interior residue would be her news-feed. I cannot assess information directly from Kristin’s news-feed but I can assess information about Kristin that shows up on my Facebook news-feed. Kristin shows up repeatedly on my news-feed, which is exactly how I came across the idea of analyzing her profile for this assignment. The fact that she comes up on my news-feed on almost a daily basis is proof of two specific things about Kristin’s Facebook usage: 1.) She is an active user of Facebook (writing on other’s walls, adding applications, editing her user information to reflect her life, etc. daily) and 2.) She is very open and public about these behaviors. I believe that many Cornell Facebook users are quite “private” with their Facebook use. For example, they make their profiles available only to their friends, they remove themselves from other’s news-feed and delete their own mini-feed by editing their privacy options. Kristin doesn’t manage her Facebook in this manner. Either she wants all her friends on Facebook to have proof of whom she’s friends with or who writes on her wall or she is oblivious to how evident her actions on Facebook are.
Exterior residue is evidence of things one does outside of an online space, for example photos reflecting one’s activities and life outside of Facebook. Kristin has many photo albums (14 to be exact) of her and her friends out partying. Therefore, I feel it is safe to assess that when Kristin isn’t studying for prelims or engaging in the basic necessities activities (i.e., sleeping, eating), she spends much of her time hanging out with her friends and being social.
I do not believe that I have reached complete functional achievement of Kristin’s personality because I have only completely analyzed her profile this once. Additionally, I do not know her well enough off-line to verify my observations made through her identity claims and behavioral residue. However, I do believe that by analyzing her Facebook profile, I have a relatively accurate, basic idea of her personality.
Assignment 7
This semester, I am taking an entrepreneurship course in the College of Engineering. As part of the course, we are assigned group members, and within these groups, we come up with a business idea and create a business plan. In order to easily keep in touch with everyone, I created a ‘group’ in my contact list in Gmail. This list contains all the names and respective
emails of my group members. This group contact list allows me to easily email everyone at once, instead of having to enter each member’s email separately. This created stronger ties among each of the group members. When I need to contact everyone, I simply email my group, and then my group members can easily “Reply to All” in order to reply back to everyone else in the group and keep the online “conversation” going.
emails of my group members. This group contact list allows me to easily email everyone at once, instead of having to enter each member’s email separately. This created stronger ties among each of the group members. When I need to contact everyone, I simply email my group, and then my group members can easily “Reply to All” in order to reply back to everyone else in the group and keep the online “conversation” going. We have a common, shared purpose to email each other—the course work. We are all in the same course, and need to meet at least once a week, face to face, to work on our presentation. So, we share a common language and identity—we are in the same course, and are all engineers. However, we are all different majors within the College of Engineering.
CMC allows our group to communicate and work on our project when we are not meeting face to face. CMC brings our group closer together, because we can communicate with each other even when we are not meeting face to face. In fact, this community as it exists in Gmail would not exist without CMC. CMC allows us to share documents with each other and use our time when we are not in meetings effectively. The online community allows us to easily get in contact with each other and schedule our meetings.
7 - My community
When I logged into the blog to write my post, I immediately noticed Alisha's post about the Big Red Marching Band. This is because I am a member as well (what are the chances of two bandies in the same blog?), so I figured it would be a perfect community to discuss. However, I do not want to post the same thing or add to a post that already does a very good job at describing its relationship to Haythornwaite and Social Network Analysis, so I've decided to go a similar (but sometimes different in terms of theory) route and discuss my membership in the Big Red Pep Band.
The Big Red Pep Band is, like the marching band, a student-run musical ensemble which devotes itself to playing at basically every sporting even besides varsity football (most famously, we play regularly at hockey games). One important thing to note is the carry-over from BRMB members to the pep band. Due to the fact that the pep band's season starts later than marching band, many of the marching band members decide to do both and join pep band from word of mouth. This is not to say that new members aren't welcome and don't join. They do (this plays into common ground which will be discussed later), but there exists a likelihood that new members who are not in marching band might be slightly more confused at first. Also, contrary to marching band, the members do not engage in several social activities a year. This could be because there are more events per year in pep band, so the social aspect seems almost implicit, but I think a large part of this is due to the fact that there are so many dual band members.
Another interesting thing to mention is the lack of online presence, especially in contrast to the marching band. There is a facebook group, but it is not regularly maintained. A site existed several years ago, but has since ceased to function. Like marching band there is a listserv, but the pep band does not have listservs for each section. This may be because pep band is typically smaller and has a limit to those who can attend some events (hockey is capped at 51 members at home games, and 25-41 at away games). Haythornwaite's idea of a social network is created early through a different community and the relationships carry over into a new community.
This also plays into another aspect of Haythornwaite's theory: common ground. Clearly, many of the members share common ground as being members of another existing community. There is also usually an added interest in the sports we perform at, and mostly in creating what is known as the "Lynah atmosphere" at hockey games. Aside from this, there is the simple common ground of playing an instrument, and a desire to learn and perform music.
Lastly, reciprocity also exists in the pep band. Aside from electing student officers (the manager and two conductors per semester, for example), the band also demonstrates this amongst the community. In simple terms, the band gives an atmosphere to a game (whether it's at hockey, lacrosse, or some other sport), and the community responds either by applauding or approaching us to give compliments. In some instances, the teams have shown their gratitude after a big win (the lacrosse team was notable for this last year) by saluting us directly. This all gives many of the members a sense of accomplishment and pride in return for providing entertainment and spirit.
The Big Red Pep Band is, like the marching band, a student-run musical ensemble which devotes itself to playing at basically every sporting even besides varsity football (most famously, we play regularly at hockey games). One important thing to note is the carry-over from BRMB members to the pep band. Due to the fact that the pep band's season starts later than marching band, many of the marching band members decide to do both and join pep band from word of mouth. This is not to say that new members aren't welcome and don't join. They do (this plays into common ground which will be discussed later), but there exists a likelihood that new members who are not in marching band might be slightly more confused at first. Also, contrary to marching band, the members do not engage in several social activities a year. This could be because there are more events per year in pep band, so the social aspect seems almost implicit, but I think a large part of this is due to the fact that there are so many dual band members.
Another interesting thing to mention is the lack of online presence, especially in contrast to the marching band. There is a facebook group, but it is not regularly maintained. A site existed several years ago, but has since ceased to function. Like marching band there is a listserv, but the pep band does not have listservs for each section. This may be because pep band is typically smaller and has a limit to those who can attend some events (hockey is capped at 51 members at home games, and 25-41 at away games). Haythornwaite's idea of a social network is created early through a different community and the relationships carry over into a new community.
This also plays into another aspect of Haythornwaite's theory: common ground. Clearly, many of the members share common ground as being members of another existing community. There is also usually an added interest in the sports we perform at, and mostly in creating what is known as the "Lynah atmosphere" at hockey games. Aside from this, there is the simple common ground of playing an instrument, and a desire to learn and perform music.
Lastly, reciprocity also exists in the pep band. Aside from electing student officers (the manager and two conductors per semester, for example), the band also demonstrates this amongst the community. In simple terms, the band gives an atmosphere to a game (whether it's at hockey, lacrosse, or some other sport), and the community responds either by applauding or approaching us to give compliments. In some instances, the teams have shown their gratitude after a big win (the lacrosse team was notable for this last year) by saluting us directly. This all gives many of the members a sense of accomplishment and pride in return for providing entertainment and spirit.
Assignment 7, Option 1: TEAM
Aside from being a student, my other main social network at Cornell would be with the Varsity Ice Hockey team. Reflecting on Haythomwaite’s (2007) study discussed properties of social network analyses (SNA), common ground and reciprocity.
Our social network is very rich: where contact with each other is highly frequent, everyone knows their roles on the TEAM, seeks improvement and is driven to win. We have obligations with the team almost every day (with a day off a week) that entails on and off ice practices, meetings, extra workouts for people who want to do more, events, community outings, etc. Alumni and past players, and or coaches also still play a party of this community. This social network is obviously, primarily face-to-face based but it also has multiple online communities as well. For instance, many of our alumni are contacted through CMCs as a source to keep in touch, as well as our TEAM site (http://www.cornellbigred.com/News/whockey/2007/10/21/2007%20game%202%20vermont.asp?path=whockey ), listserv within the TEAM, and of course a Facebook group: http://cornell.facebook.com/group.php?gid=2200231068 (which actually has not been updated for 2 years).
As a TEAM our common ground is the TEAM and the goals we have set as a unit. We even have our goals, and attributes painted on our dressing room walls to reiterate the importance of them. Collectively, we also have to pass the same standards to be able to play and are personally accountable for being on time for anything that is TEAM related. In more depth, within this social network (focusing just on the TEAM this year) players are grouped into categories: coaches, staff, forwards, defense, goalies, and “speciality teams” (Penalty Kill and Power Play): where these groups can identify with one another more closely since they also play the same position and understand the roles of that position in more detail than people who do not play the same position.
Reciprocity is a key factor with any sport. Sports deal with a lot of “reading and reacting”: everyone has their roles on the team, as previously stated, however, things do not always play out as practiced. This is when reciprocity will come into play where it is known that if player X was not the first man into the zone when they are “supposed to be” then player Y will take on that role – in which player X will presumably take on the role of player Y. Also, being a part of a TEAM is like being a part of a family where if people do something nice or good to you – that act will tend to be reciprocated. This also ties in with alumni, coaches, and other staff on the TEAM. We get a bunch of alumni support and through the years of doing “Phone-a-thons”, even recent alumni are donating to help the upcoming TEAM, just as the elder alumni.
As I had previously stated, this social network has both online and offline synergies which help tie in the “extended”, not just the immediate,TEAM together through listservs, emails, groups, and such. Let’s go Red!
Our social network is very rich: where contact with each other is highly frequent, everyone knows their roles on the TEAM, seeks improvement and is driven to win. We have obligations with the team almost every day (with a day off a week) that entails on and off ice practices, meetings, extra workouts for people who want to do more, events, community outings, etc. Alumni and past players, and or coaches also still play a party of this community. This social network is obviously, primarily face-to-face based but it also has multiple online communities as well. For instance, many of our alumni are contacted through CMCs as a source to keep in touch, as well as our TEAM site (http://www.cornellbigred.com/News/whockey/2007/10/21/2007%20game%202%20vermont.asp?path=whockey ), listserv within the TEAM, and of course a Facebook group: http://cornell.facebook.com/group.php?gid=2200231068 (which actually has not been updated for 2 years).
As a TEAM our common ground is the TEAM and the goals we have set as a unit. We even have our goals, and attributes painted on our dressing room walls to reiterate the importance of them. Collectively, we also have to pass the same standards to be able to play and are personally accountable for being on time for anything that is TEAM related. In more depth, within this social network (focusing just on the TEAM this year) players are grouped into categories: coaches, staff, forwards, defense, goalies, and “speciality teams” (Penalty Kill and Power Play): where these groups can identify with one another more closely since they also play the same position and understand the roles of that position in more detail than people who do not play the same position.
Reciprocity is a key factor with any sport. Sports deal with a lot of “reading and reacting”: everyone has their roles on the team, as previously stated, however, things do not always play out as practiced. This is when reciprocity will come into play where it is known that if player X was not the first man into the zone when they are “supposed to be” then player Y will take on that role – in which player X will presumably take on the role of player Y. Also, being a part of a TEAM is like being a part of a family where if people do something nice or good to you – that act will tend to be reciprocated. This also ties in with alumni, coaches, and other staff on the TEAM. We get a bunch of alumni support and through the years of doing “Phone-a-thons”, even recent alumni are donating to help the upcoming TEAM, just as the elder alumni.
As I had previously stated, this social network has both online and offline synergies which help tie in the “extended”, not just the immediate,TEAM together through listservs, emails, groups, and such. Let’s go Red!
7 Social Networks for Soccer Players...
Soccer brings people together. After all, it is called "joga bonita" or "the beautiful game" for many reasons. I play for the Cornell Women's Club Soccer team, a group of twenty-three individuals brought together by our love of this beautiful game. Haythornthwaite's social network analysis examines the relationships of communities and the individuals that make them up. The soccer team's community has many social network analysis properties. Haythornthwaite would consider the team in a "Gemeinschaft" or "community view" because the team makes up a very utopic community. We exist in a successul community that is made of of strong interpersonal ties since we see each other so often and have the chance to become close with one another on many different levels. We share lots of face to face interaction through practices, games, road trips and relaxing with one another. The team unites to have one common purpose in having a successful season (so far so good, even though we lost in the Regional final this past weekend). Basically, everyone on the team is connected at all times, providing a very utopic, strong community.
However, even though everyone on the team is friends, there tends to be a mixture of strong and weak ties. While we see each other often, most of us have other "main" groups of friends outside of the team, providing connections to unique resources and vast social networks. While this "strength of weak ties" idea relates to some groups of girls within the team, there certainly are other vert strong ties that we all have to people on the team. There are girls that I am extremely close with, yet we do not have the same friends outside of soccer. This interchangeability of strong and weak ties is interesting because even though Haythornthwaite would consider my close friendships a "strong" tie, she would also consider these relationships "weak" in that each of us has separate social networks outside of the team.
Being on a team that has a unified goal proves Haythornthwaite's common ground principle in my community. The Gemeinschaft" view itself specifically states that shared focus and a common purpose are necessary in order to have a community view. The word "team" denotes that a shared goal is present in the first place. We all look to work as hard as possible everyday in practice in order to win as many games as possible. This past weekend, during the Region 1 tournament in Philadelphia, our common ground was the goal of winning the tournament. While we reached the finals and lost in penalty kicks, everyone still felt extremely happy about how we played. Since we all have a common interest in the success of the team, it was easy to develop friendships with these girls because we feel similar to one another. There is a shared commitment involved in creating a successful community.
Because most of the ties I have developed with the girls on the team have been strong, there is an innate sense of reciprocity since we are all there for one another on a daily basis. We stick up for each other when someone on another team decides to hurt one of our players or backtalk to us. We are there to support one another. Reciprocity also comes in the form of how each person shows their dedication for the team. Now that we have entered the most important part of our season, playing time may no longer be equal. Those who show the most dedication and effort will be reciprocated with the most playing time.
CMC does play a large role in the soccer team. We have a website, where we each have pictures and information about us, as well as team photos, schedules, and lots of other interesting informaiton (check it out! http://www.rso.cornell.edu/cornellfc/ ). We email on a daily basis to communicate about schedule changes, practice information, who is driving to games, and any other information such as social events. We also have a group on Facebook. So CMC plays an integral role in how the team communicates on a daily basis. Etzioni and Etzioni say that, "communities that combine both face to face and CMC systems would be able to bond better and share values more effectively than communities that rely upon only one or the other mode of communication." It is evident that CMC in addition to face to face interaction gives the team a better sense of community. It is also said that communities with strong ties tend to use more media to communicate, proving that CMC only helps to enhance community relationships rather than downplay them. This is definitely true in terms of the Cornell Women's Club Soccer Team. Ahh...what a "joga bonita"!
http://comm245blue.blogspot.com/2007/10/71-gemeinshaft-must-have-been-greek.html
http://comm245blue.blogspot.com/2007/10/assignment-7-option-1-taking-catherwood.html
However, even though everyone on the team is friends, there tends to be a mixture of strong and weak ties. While we see each other often, most of us have other "main" groups of friends outside of the team, providing connections to unique resources and vast social networks. While this "strength of weak ties" idea relates to some groups of girls within the team, there certainly are other vert strong ties that we all have to people on the team. There are girls that I am extremely close with, yet we do not have the same friends outside of soccer. This interchangeability of strong and weak ties is interesting because even though Haythornthwaite would consider my close friendships a "strong" tie, she would also consider these relationships "weak" in that each of us has separate social networks outside of the team.
Being on a team that has a unified goal proves Haythornthwaite's common ground principle in my community. The Gemeinschaft" view itself specifically states that shared focus and a common purpose are necessary in order to have a community view. The word "team" denotes that a shared goal is present in the first place. We all look to work as hard as possible everyday in practice in order to win as many games as possible. This past weekend, during the Region 1 tournament in Philadelphia, our common ground was the goal of winning the tournament. While we reached the finals and lost in penalty kicks, everyone still felt extremely happy about how we played. Since we all have a common interest in the success of the team, it was easy to develop friendships with these girls because we feel similar to one another. There is a shared commitment involved in creating a successful community.
Because most of the ties I have developed with the girls on the team have been strong, there is an innate sense of reciprocity since we are all there for one another on a daily basis. We stick up for each other when someone on another team decides to hurt one of our players or backtalk to us. We are there to support one another. Reciprocity also comes in the form of how each person shows their dedication for the team. Now that we have entered the most important part of our season, playing time may no longer be equal. Those who show the most dedication and effort will be reciprocated with the most playing time.
CMC does play a large role in the soccer team. We have a website, where we each have pictures and information about us, as well as team photos, schedules, and lots of other interesting informaiton (check it out! http://www.rso.cornell.edu/cornellfc/ ). We email on a daily basis to communicate about schedule changes, practice information, who is driving to games, and any other information such as social events. We also have a group on Facebook. So CMC plays an integral role in how the team communicates on a daily basis. Etzioni and Etzioni say that, "communities that combine both face to face and CMC systems would be able to bond better and share values more effectively than communities that rely upon only one or the other mode of communication." It is evident that CMC in addition to face to face interaction gives the team a better sense of community. It is also said that communities with strong ties tend to use more media to communicate, proving that CMC only helps to enhance community relationships rather than downplay them. This is definitely true in terms of the Cornell Women's Club Soccer Team. Ahh...what a "joga bonita"!
http://comm245blue.blogspot.com/2007/10/71-gemeinshaft-must-have-been-greek.html
http://comm245blue.blogspot.com/2007/10/assignment-7-option-1-taking-catherwood.html
7 Me and my TB?
No, not tuberculosis.
I work at the Statler, both in the kitchen and at the TB (Taverna Banfi). I work over 40 hours a week and have made some very strong ties with many of the people who are like a second family to me. Some ties are stronger than others, but I feel like a welcome member of the Statler Family (the community I will be discussing).
I will examine the situation specifically based on my experiences and observations of four aspects of an SNA approach:
Social Network properties
Common Ground
Reciprocity
SNA PROPERTIES
The SNA properties focus on the interactions based within the community, i.e. with whom do people communicate and with whom do they associate. It also looks at the value of strong and (maybe more importantly) weak ties.
I find that my strong ties in the community are with those whom I respect and whose opinions I value. I feel that I can open up to management about issues and share my feelings. I have had an issue with not being tipped out properly and one of managers and a full-time staffer both gave me similar, successful advice on how to handle the situation. Some may argue that this may seem to fly in the face of the "strength of weak ties"; however, I find the strength of weak ties comes from a social capital perspective. This situation was more of a personal issue and the strong ties were necessary for full disclosure and my comfort.
I have also discovered the strength of my weak ties. The weak ties have also helped me to network and find a summer internship. I also have learned about the collaborative degree program with the CIA through students actually from the CIA. I am a foodie and I love to cook. My passion and the weak ties I form now are possible contacts in the future for advice, housing, internships, and careers. I can also attain knowledge now about best and worst practices. Networking is key in the Hotel School, as I have heard many times over.
I have found that the Statler is a community because of the interaction aspect above pairwise communication. We are a family. Everyone learns everyones names and offers advice and learning opportunities. We are all there for guest satisfaction and to do our best to learn and excel at what we do. Everyone helps everyone achieve their goals.
Mr. Adie, the GM of the hotel, knew me by name my second week on the job. His smile and encouragement and concern for me overworking are all examples of the ties from the very top to the entry-level jobs. As I said, he recognizes that if I am happy, then I will give better service which will, in turn make the hotel do better. This reflects well on him and we all benefit. (Thank you Organizational Behavior).
COMMON GROUND
We in the restaurant share a common ground in our passion for foodservice. In order to work in the high stress restaurant environment, everyone must enjoy what they do. We fall into two categories: students and full timers. The full timers love teaching students new aspects of guest service (at TB) or culinary theory (in the kitchen). The students, in turn, are eager helpers and ready and excited to learn.
We share a common workspace and a common interest. We are all commmited to excellence and guest satisfaction. Also, conversely, we do not always share the same values. Some values are similar, but we have learned to respect each other as individuals within the community context. At the end of the day, we are all actors and indviduals and have learned to accept that.
RECIPROCITY
As I stated earlier, two main types of employees are at the Statler, the full time staff and the students. We students are eager to help the full time staff perform their job well. In turn, the full time staff help teach the students new concepts and terms, while utilizing their help to get jobs done faster. Some stubents are on practicums and externships, while some are working part time; however, all are eager to help and learn.
Managers recognize that happy employees equal happier guests. Happier guests, in turn, make the managers jobs easier nad increase the return rate and revenue at the hotel. This in turn makes managers happier. This cycle of love at the Statler is a prime example of everyone's reciprocity within the community.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
I feel that my work environment represents an amazing social network and community. It has weak and strong ties, common ground reciprocity, social capital (in networking opportunities for careers and internships), human capital (culinary and foodservice skills and knowledge).
Haythornwaite would look at who interacts with whom and who hangs out with whom. I feel a part of a larger family at the Statler. If I needed help or a shoulder oto cry on, I could go to almost anyone and they would listen and offer support. Parties are open to anyone. Everyone will pass you in the hall with a smile and a greeting, despite only seeing you once before. We all hang out outside of work. I guess its just a Hotelie state of mind that has overflown into the Statler workplace.
On that note, I don't really give my money to anyone, so that aspect doesn't really apply. I also neither care to whom anyone else gives their money. That aspect just isn't applicable.
I have a little more to say, but I have gone on long enough already. Sorry about the verbosity.
I work at the Statler, both in the kitchen and at the TB (Taverna Banfi). I work over 40 hours a week and have made some very strong ties with many of the people who are like a second family to me. Some ties are stronger than others, but I feel like a welcome member of the Statler Family (the community I will be discussing).
I will examine the situation specifically based on my experiences and observations of four aspects of an SNA approach:
Social Network properties
Common Ground
Reciprocity
SNA PROPERTIES
The SNA properties focus on the interactions based within the community, i.e. with whom do people communicate and with whom do they associate. It also looks at the value of strong and (maybe more importantly) weak ties.
I find that my strong ties in the community are with those whom I respect and whose opinions I value. I feel that I can open up to management about issues and share my feelings. I have had an issue with not being tipped out properly and one of managers and a full-time staffer both gave me similar, successful advice on how to handle the situation. Some may argue that this may seem to fly in the face of the "strength of weak ties"; however, I find the strength of weak ties comes from a social capital perspective. This situation was more of a personal issue and the strong ties were necessary for full disclosure and my comfort.
I have also discovered the strength of my weak ties. The weak ties have also helped me to network and find a summer internship. I also have learned about the collaborative degree program with the CIA through students actually from the CIA. I am a foodie and I love to cook. My passion and the weak ties I form now are possible contacts in the future for advice, housing, internships, and careers. I can also attain knowledge now about best and worst practices. Networking is key in the Hotel School, as I have heard many times over.
I have found that the Statler is a community because of the interaction aspect above pairwise communication. We are a family. Everyone learns everyones names and offers advice and learning opportunities. We are all there for guest satisfaction and to do our best to learn and excel at what we do. Everyone helps everyone achieve their goals.
Mr. Adie, the GM of the hotel, knew me by name my second week on the job. His smile and encouragement and concern for me overworking are all examples of the ties from the very top to the entry-level jobs. As I said, he recognizes that if I am happy, then I will give better service which will, in turn make the hotel do better. This reflects well on him and we all benefit. (Thank you Organizational Behavior).
COMMON GROUND
We in the restaurant share a common ground in our passion for foodservice. In order to work in the high stress restaurant environment, everyone must enjoy what they do. We fall into two categories: students and full timers. The full timers love teaching students new aspects of guest service (at TB) or culinary theory (in the kitchen). The students, in turn, are eager helpers and ready and excited to learn.
We share a common workspace and a common interest. We are all commmited to excellence and guest satisfaction. Also, conversely, we do not always share the same values. Some values are similar, but we have learned to respect each other as individuals within the community context. At the end of the day, we are all actors and indviduals and have learned to accept that.
RECIPROCITY
As I stated earlier, two main types of employees are at the Statler, the full time staff and the students. We students are eager to help the full time staff perform their job well. In turn, the full time staff help teach the students new concepts and terms, while utilizing their help to get jobs done faster. Some stubents are on practicums and externships, while some are working part time; however, all are eager to help and learn.
Managers recognize that happy employees equal happier guests. Happier guests, in turn, make the managers jobs easier nad increase the return rate and revenue at the hotel. This in turn makes managers happier. This cycle of love at the Statler is a prime example of everyone's reciprocity within the community.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
I feel that my work environment represents an amazing social network and community. It has weak and strong ties, common ground reciprocity, social capital (in networking opportunities for careers and internships), human capital (culinary and foodservice skills and knowledge).
Haythornwaite would look at who interacts with whom and who hangs out with whom. I feel a part of a larger family at the Statler. If I needed help or a shoulder oto cry on, I could go to almost anyone and they would listen and offer support. Parties are open to anyone. Everyone will pass you in the hall with a smile and a greeting, despite only seeing you once before. We all hang out outside of work. I guess its just a Hotelie state of mind that has overflown into the Statler workplace.
On that note, I don't really give my money to anyone, so that aspect doesn't really apply. I also neither care to whom anyone else gives their money. That aspect just isn't applicable.
I have a little more to say, but I have gone on long enough already. Sorry about the verbosity.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)