Social Networks and Values

The Campaign CompanyThe Campaign Company

Social Networks

•Definition•Social network research•TCC and social networks•Values and social networks•Conclusions and Further research

Social Networks – why are they important?

“If Social capital is the currency of the Big Society then social networks hold the reserves of that currency.”

RSA – Connected Communities

What are Social Networks?

“A social structure that is neither individualistic nor holistic, but fundamentally relational.”

RSA – Connected Communities Report 2010

“Social networks shape virtually shape virtually every aspect of our lives. How we feel, whom we marry, whether we fall ill, how much money we make, and whether we vote – everything hinges on what others around us are doing thinking and feeling”.

Nicholas Christakis and James Fowler – Connected 2009

“The concept of social capital is currently the focus of an explosion of interest in the research and policy community. It refers to social networks, informal structures and norms that facilitate individual and collective action. This….interest is driven by the growing evidence of how social capital impacts on economic growth, health crime and even the effectiveness of governments”

David Halpern – Institute of Government, Author of “Social Capital” 2005

“...we begin by making a distinction between two concepts that are often conflated: social networks and social capital. We do this in order to highlight a distinct property of social networks – that they can be visualised. Social network analysis can inform the optimal use of social goods (community assets which are publicly available but scarce and contested).

RSA – Connected Communities Report 2010

“Yet it remains unclear to what extent the government’s vision is underpinned by deeper thinking about motivation, which is informed by emerging knowledge of both behavioural economics (and how policy can ‘nudge’ citizens to make different choices) and the role that networks can play....to be effective, the policy framework for the twenty-first century must not only draw on the new insights that behavioural economics gives us, but also needs to be underpinned by an understanding between this and how networks influence our choices and how these change over time. Indeed, the impact of networks is potentially considerably greater than that of ‘nudge’. This makes creating good policy harder while offering huge potential for change.”

Paul Ormerod – NSquared – RSA - 2010

Why this is important to TCC?• Is a recognised field of social science research and

public policy debate• Likely to be relevant to Big Society debates• Is part of TCC’s recent work

• Community Communicators• Health champions

• Is part of TCC’s developing offer:• Values modes• Communications: world views/narratives/framing• Social network mapping

Social Network Research: Christakis and Fowler

• Humans are genetically predisposed to connect socially with one another.

• These interconnections often have positive consequences for humanity.

• Indeed, altruism is a foundational imperative of social networks.

• Nevertheless, people can suffer negative consequences from such networks.

• People influence their networks and are influenced by them in turn.

• Individuals in a network can spread emotions like happiness, misery and loneliness to other members.

• Most people meet their life partners through their social networks.

• Because of interconnectivity, the things you say and do can affect thousands of people whom you don’t even know.

• Networks exhibit numerous lifelike traits: intelligence, memory and “self-replication," as well as a useful “self-annealing” capability.

• With its ubiquitous interconnectivity, humankind is like a “super organism.”

Social Networks – Key elements and laws

• Intelligence – By themselves, ants are mindless creatures. But together, ants can create vast colonies and accomplish complex tasks. Humans working in groups may also exhibit intelligence that is superior to that of the individual members. Wikis are good examples.

• Memory – Networks remain intact and maintain their structure and culture even when individual members leave.

• “Self-replicating” – Networks can last indefinitely, even when individual members sever their connections.

• “Self-annealing” – Networks “close up around their gaps.” For example, during a fire, if one person drops out of a bucket brigade, another will quickly take his or her place.

• Christakis and Fowler set out 5 rules of social networks

• Rule 1 – We shape our network. People constantly shape and reshape their social networks.

• Rule 2 – Our network shapes us. Social networks change their members: Someone with no friends lives differently from someone with many friends.

• Rule 3 – Our friends affect us. The people in your network influence you. Humans use one another as role models.

• Rule 4 – Our friend’s friend’s affect us. Effects move from one network member to the next in a “hyperdyadic spread.” For example, feuds result when one person takes up another’s cause.

• Rule 5 – The Network has a life of its own. Networks develop lives of their own, similar to the way a swarm of insects moves purposefully without a central directing intelligence.

Social Network Research: Ormerod and the RSA

• Paul Ormerod’s research: there are three main types of network:

• Random – random connections. Does this sort of network really exist in real life? Would need critical mass for change.

• Scale-free – the Gladwell “hub” network of mavens, connectors and salespeople – Influencers work here

• Small-world – friend’s of friends – small number of long-range connections – probably needs critical mass

• Need initial Nudging (or perhaps steering) then networks take over

Social Network Research: RSA Connected Communities

• RSA Connected Communities Research in New Cross and Bristol 2009/2010. Main Research Findings

• A quarter of respondents could not name anyone in their social network who they thought was a) good at bringing people together or b) could help them contact someone with influence, power or responsibility to change things locally.

• One in fifty of our respondents did not know anybody in their local area that supported them or helped them to make changes in any way.

• ‘Familiar strangers’ like postmen and dustmen appear to be under-utilised community resources; in our case study more people recognise and find value in their postman than their local councillor.

• People who are relatively isolated are not making use of the connections they have.

• Our geographic sense of what is central to a community is highly misleading, and often conflicts with measures of network centrality.

• Community hubs, including pubs and sports clubs, are an important aspect of community resilience and empowerment.

• People who value neighbourliness are more likely to have large social networks.

Social Network Research: RSA Connected Communities

Policy• Any public policy intervention benefits from an

understanding of social networks.• Social network research is a relatively benign and

participatory form of research.• Creating and visualising social networks increases

social reflexivity, which may help to foster pro-social behaviour.• Understanding patterns of connectivity and the

transmission of social values and behaviours offers a new approach to policy making, in which small interventions have the potential to make a big impact through network effects.

Social Network Research: RSA Connected Communities

What does our research mean for the Big Society?

• ‘Big’ can be measured in terms of network size and shape to make the ‘Big Society’ more tangible.

• We can use social network information to help identify community organisers.

• Network information can direct strategies to promote participative behaviour and volunteering.

• One of the most constructive ways to contribute to your ‘square mile’ is by measuring the social networks it contains.

• Network perspectives can help to clarify what ‘efficiency’ means at a local level

• Lessons from Community Policy and Practice

• An exclusively geographical conception of community is unhelpful.

• Recent policy emphasis on social capital and social assets needs to be augmented through a more detailed study of social networks.

Social Networks – Key lawsConnected Communities sets out seven laws of social networks• Law 1: Six Degrees of Separation, Three Degrees of Influence – similar to Rule 4 of

Connected. Whilst everyone in six people away from everyone else. Influence only runs to three people

• Law 2: Birds of a Feather Flock Together. People tend to self-select like-minded people. This is where values has a key role

• Law 3: Location, Location, Location. This is about people’s level of connection within the network as well as how geographical ties are useful to understand. Mapping, networks, values and geography could help with oblique interventions

• Law 4: Imitation Drives Contagion. – similar to Rule 3 of Connected. Social norms are important. This tends to be visible things such as obesity rather than invisible things such as Trust

• Law 5: It’s Not What You Know, it’s Who They Know. – similar to Rule 4 of Connected. More argument for hyperdyadic spread.

• Law 6: Experimentation Gets Results. There is a lack of predictability, so experimentation and the acceptance of failure makes sense. This is also the case for oblique interventions.

• Law 7: Weak Ties Get You Working. This is bridging and linking social capital. One clear piece of evidence, is that increasing these strengthens the resilience of communities, as more people likely to be employed.

Social networks and values"Networks and Values are absolutely important to the delivery of

social policy“ Paul Ormerod RSA Lecture 16/11/2010

• However this is still in its early days with deep values confused with attitudes

• Christakis nor Connected Communities segmented their networks except through some traditional geodemographics

• TCC with its understanding of segmentation, would that self-selecting social networks are likely to be often values based . Values birds of a feather flock together

• Question – how would a values based approach fit in with social networks?

Further research

• Types of social networks. We need to understand where these operate?

• Can we use surveys in current projects to achieve this?

• Where do influencers or critical mass apply and what is the role of values here?

• Ways to impact on different social networks: a mix of values, influencers and critical mass?

• Differences between social networks and social norms?

• Understanding network inequalities from a demographic and values base

• Collaboration with others working in the field: RSA plus their Social Capital Innovation Network – launching 14 December at the RSA

values first