Are all LI Groups completely polluted?
Is it me, or are all LinkedIn Groups looking like another place for people to dump their blog articles? As I looked through my group highlights yesterday I saw post after post that looked like typical article titles.
6 reasons you need to whatever...
10 ways to do something everyone already knows how to do...
If all that Groups are doing is providing another place for all of us to dump our content, what good are they? Check out this screenshot from my highlights, not a single conversation, only blatant attempts to promote content:
If all I see when I scroll recent group activity is a feed like this, why would I spend any time in the Group feature? It seems like this content should be exactly what I'd expect to see on my Home feed.
- If Group monitors are allowing or promoting this behavior are they bringing value to their membership?
- Are members that continually dump existing content into Group feeds seeing return?
- Am I just in all the wrong groups?
I know some Group Moderators do a better job than others. I know some Members do a better job than others. It just seems like the Group feature is falling into the habit of regurgitating content instead of value.
I can't say that I'm part of the solution either. While I don't dump a lot of articles into the Groups I belong to I don't exactly spark compelling conversation either. When I do spend time in Groups I find myself looking for a way to engage. I feel like I'm looking for something but I'm not exactly sure what. I'd love to help answer people's questions when I can, I just don't see a lot of them.
In our industry, digital marketing, it seems like Inbound.org is a better place for me to spend my time. They have some slick features that promote conversation, and it's working. Check out this thread, just one of many on the home view with dozens upon dozens of engagements:
First, that's a good topic for me. Something that's relevant, interesting, and worthy of my attention. Second, I see that a lot of other people feel the same way. The fact that 24 other people have already commented pulls me in. The primary driver for me to engage is the draw to see what others think. There's something about having so many others in my industry actively contributing to a thread that makes me want to learn.
I feel like that's what LinkedIn was going for with their Group feature. So, is it working as well for them as it is for Inbound.org? It doesn't seem like it to me. Am I wrong? If I'm right, who's fault is it? Should we blame the moderators, or should we blame ourselves? What about LinkedIn, what should they do to fix the feature?
Eric, thanks for sharing!
Eric, thanks for sharing!
Eric, thanks for sharing!
I think the way discussions and forums are had on LinkedIn is not something that LinkedIn corporate can influence or change all that much (though it would be great if they could). That discussion groups don't receive greater participation or deeply useful commentary, even in situations where discussion groups are actively promoted, says a lot about the default expectations of everyday LinkedIn users. Speaking anecdotally from my industry (inbound marketing), there are plenty of people who feel that freely giving away some of the best, insightful remarks on issues in the industry is itself giving away too much for free, and in some ways devalues the professional services that many discussion group participants already represent. It's a catch-22 that what people want from discussion groups, they are in turn not willing to give. The origin of this is what people actually expect from the LinkedIn experience.
this has really turned into the type of conversation that should happen in a group. interesting that it was actually a Pulse article in origin rather than a Group thread. poor application of the idea or maybe we stumbled onto something.