Also are we always building containers? Or are we building environments that are fertile ground for a community to emerge that sometimes benefit from being sheltered in a container?
I think there's some communities that are absolutely containers, in my head I imagine them like terrariums that you fill up with fertile ground and things that co-exist. It's the safest and easiest way to found and scale a community for a brand.
Then there are also communities that (again only in my head) exist across a giant Savannah with little pockets that are favourable for emergence to happen across a giant landscape. I think an example of this might be Notion where they have a huge number of communities across every online and offline space you can think of. My theory is that there are members who move between spaces e.g they'll watch an Influencer on Youtube and join their Discord, but they'll also be on r/notion and head out for the local San Fran Notion ambassadors meetup every month.
From their perspective I think they might see themselves as a member of the "Notion" community. Not one of the subsets.
I guess I'm thinking out loud here as I wrestle with the increasingly federated/decentralised nature of social and community. Not sure what question I have, haha.
This is getting at the “community everywhere” concept that’s been a heated debate in the space.
I would say that each of those spaces are containers. They each emerged from the original container that notion designed. Members felt the urge to create unique containers connected to the original container and so they did. And while it’s all part of the notion community, each of those containers have a unique culture that emerged due to the platform, environment, leadership, etc. but they’ve all stayed connected to the larger purpose and values of notion.
I love this. I think there's also a distinction between identification and behavior. Eg, in a Church, I may identify as a member, but the drive to participate may be that I am, say, a mom, and so my participation in that church's group for mothers is the reason I identify with the church. I may identify as a Notion user, but without my subgroup I'm not inclined to participate, so the energy of participation is dependent on a specific subset community, and without that, maybe I don't use Notion. Participation activities and identification are different behaviors/ ideas.
Wow! Love this and can't wait for part 2! As you ask, this is what stood out for me - We don’t build community.
We build containers where community has a chance to emerge." Spot on.
I obviously have not done the reading you have done around the subject but the only thing I might question in your essay is your point that we humans develop "different"communities to ants/ birds/ bees and fish. Do we actually know we do? Perhaps each of their communities are just as diverse as those we participate in but we just can't see it as we are always at that helicopter/ disconnected level? Perhaps they too are having their equivalents of Burning Man and Dinner Parties!? 🤷♀️ In fact, now I write that, I quite like that idea - little ant equivalent of music festivals 😊
I love that question! I'll have to give it more thought. On the surface, I'd say that the range of variability is less for ants and other non-human organisms due to having a less complex brain. Things like self awareness, ego, opinion, etc ups the level complexity exponentially because it transcends physical traits and gets into psychological variability. That said, I'm 100% in agreement that there's likely a great deal of nuance and variability that we just can't see.
So good Spinksy! This is something I've chewed on for years but never had (and never would have had) the words to articulate as wonderfully as you always do. So thanks as always for sharing and helping to move the field along for us all :)
I think you've talked about the concept of Sense of Community or Psychological sense of community (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sense_of_community) before. I like the concept because it gets inside the heads of each member or potential member of a community.
I think that the four elements: Membership, Influence, Integration and Fullfillment of Needs and Shared Emotional Connection are kind of like the human version of the three rules that each Starling follows that allows those amazing flocks to form.
I wonder what you think about all that? Are those elements enough to explain the rules that influence the formation of a human flock? Or are there other things that have to exist for emergence to happen?
Whew! Love this reflection Ben. “What are the rules that people must follow for a community to emerge?” This feels like one of *the* big questions.
I actually had the sense of community theory in there but replaced it with the attributes section because I didn’t think SoC covered all of the attributes that emerge.
Which brings me to my question back to you:
Is SoC the rules to follow? Or are they attributes that emerge?
My sense was that they were attributes that emerge. You can’t follow a rule that your needs are met or that you influence the community, those are things that have to emerge.
If that’s true, then what are the rules that people need to follow in order for community to emerge?
Thinking out loud:
1. Show up - people have to be present
2. Participate - people have to be willing to engage in the container
3. Care - people have to care, emotionally, about the other people in the container
Oooh I have bookmarked that article. I tend to disagree with the ordering/naming.
In my observations of pt 1 "Mambership" identification is of primary importance, and I'd add in "Identification and purpose". Identification/purpose is an umbrella for which all other aspects support... identity doesn't exist without boundaries, boundaries create emotional safety, emotional safety begets investment, investment results in shared symbolism.
In the framework of emergence, it feels (in this moment) entwined with identification. If there is no distinction of a need or purpose or separate identity, IMO, there is no emergence. If my needs are being met within a larger umbrella I have no need to create a subcommunity, or subidentity or aligned but slightly different statement of purpose.
It is when the experience of a broader identity is not defined enough for a specific purpose that subcommunities emerge. There is a difference in identification and purpose/problem solving that is a force function for emergence. I'm not just a "Swiftie" I'm a swiftie who lives in Eau Claire, WI. I'm not just a CEO, I'm a female CEO of a company with $20M+ in revenues, with unique challenges that differ from both male CEOs and CEOs of companies at $2m+ or $100M+ in revenue. Specificity drives emergence.
I really enjoyed this piece, and can´t wait for the next part! One thing that made me think - are we building containers? Or maybe better, gardens? Parks?
Excellent text! I love that you used the word "magical" to describe that sense of community. I'm researching group synergy and collaboration, particularly in co-creation and immersive learning experiences, where I see this happening the most. It's that feeling of building and being part of something. It's the act of doing that happens when we are actively engaged in the project or idea.
I believe there is something vibrant about being engaged. Emergence paves the way for engagement if designed in a way that doesn't block this natural tendency but instead helps bring a bit of order to the chaotic movement. This might be essential for keeping the community's flame alive.
David.. I have been CENTRAL to my work, as a consultant, designer and biomimic. EMERGENCE. and deeper still the "principle of allurement" that draws .. these "dumb parts' together. the evolutionary impulse. In my experience of trying to "build" communities" I also... hit upon this sudden realisation... (learning from..when a flower doe snot bloom, we dont fix the flower, we simply change its environment) . And so I now focus on the "environment" or conditions in which we have REAL communities..and not pseudo. The OTHER big insight I had from working with tribals communities.. is a TRIBE if different from a COMMUNITY. TRibes have a Shares SINGLE purpose. where are communities foster/allow multiple PURPOSES. As essential element in emergence "design"...divergence. I would love to share and discuss more.
What stood out for you from this post? Did anything shift?
- My biggest shift was feeling like I have found my people. Swarm behavior has long been a fascination of mine, especially starlings. This intersects with the recent debunking of the "alpha deer" theory where scientists discovered that the "alpha" was actually aggregating signals from community to make a decision. I am super curious about community leadership in the framework not of "visionaries" but rather those who are able to see cues across a group to lead it in a new direction (or subgroup) and the role of those who are both listeners and action takers.
What didn’t add up? What holes can you poke? (I love friendly debates!)
- It wasn't that it "didn't add up," but rather, it feels like there's a missing discussion on identity, identification, and how our brain's compulsion to problem solve is, in addition to our wiring to create community, a key ingredient in creating community identity. We are not only naturally inclined to connect we are also naturally inclined to create solutions to perceived problems, and often community is a solution/ it emerges because it fulfills a specific need.
What questions do you have about emergence and how it applies to community building? (I’ll make sure to cover your questions in parts II and III.)
- Off the cuff, I'm very curious about the "call" to community. If humans are open biological systems, what are the triggers to create community, and what invitation architecture inspires the emergence of community? Also as an aside, I often think of both humans and communities from a systems thinking viewpoint; I'm incredibly curious about what types of language/interaction and architecture is possible for communities that creates a generative/regenerative experience for members rather than a complex system of "rules" . I don't quite have the language to express this, but I have seen that we can institute RULES or we can architect a container where individuals behave according to thoughtful incentives and then the "rules" are less necessary because the behavior is a natural outcome of the incentives/ system architecture that was already in place.
What’s your favorite story of community emergence?
- ATM I'm particularly obsessed with branding/ tribal signaling. The Stanley Cup phenomenon is fascinating to me... a bunch of moms helped an historic company go from $70M to $700+M in record time through influence/ community
Can you think of any examples of community where emergence wasn’t present? IS MY ENTIRE THESIS FLAWED?!
- good so far
Would you rather be a bird, a fish, or a bee? Why?
- Self oriented: none thanks. For a day? A bee. They see things I don't.
What do you notice about your own yearning for connection and community?
- I remember a podcast, I think of yours, that discussed the idea that many community managers come to their role because they experience loneliness, and creating community is an action that is curative. I find myself in a strange position of experiencing loneliness despite having a vast network. "Friend fatigue" can be just as isolating as true isolation. In my mind, community and loneliness are complex topics and complex biological needs and I want to dive deep into ALL of it, more than most people I know, and from that comes a yearning for another community.
Also are we always building containers? Or are we building environments that are fertile ground for a community to emerge that sometimes benefit from being sheltered in a container?
I think there's some communities that are absolutely containers, in my head I imagine them like terrariums that you fill up with fertile ground and things that co-exist. It's the safest and easiest way to found and scale a community for a brand.
Then there are also communities that (again only in my head) exist across a giant Savannah with little pockets that are favourable for emergence to happen across a giant landscape. I think an example of this might be Notion where they have a huge number of communities across every online and offline space you can think of. My theory is that there are members who move between spaces e.g they'll watch an Influencer on Youtube and join their Discord, but they'll also be on r/notion and head out for the local San Fran Notion ambassadors meetup every month.
From their perspective I think they might see themselves as a member of the "Notion" community. Not one of the subsets.
I guess I'm thinking out loud here as I wrestle with the increasingly federated/decentralised nature of social and community. Not sure what question I have, haha.
Yeah great reflection here too.
This is getting at the “community everywhere” concept that’s been a heated debate in the space.
I would say that each of those spaces are containers. They each emerged from the original container that notion designed. Members felt the urge to create unique containers connected to the original container and so they did. And while it’s all part of the notion community, each of those containers have a unique culture that emerged due to the platform, environment, leadership, etc. but they’ve all stayed connected to the larger purpose and values of notion.
How does that land?
I love this. I think there's also a distinction between identification and behavior. Eg, in a Church, I may identify as a member, but the drive to participate may be that I am, say, a mom, and so my participation in that church's group for mothers is the reason I identify with the church. I may identify as a Notion user, but without my subgroup I'm not inclined to participate, so the energy of participation is dependent on a specific subset community, and without that, maybe I don't use Notion. Participation activities and identification are different behaviors/ ideas.
p.s sorry for the spam, clearly you really got me thinking 😅
This isn’t spam. It’s gold! Keep ‘‘em coming.
Wow! Love this and can't wait for part 2! As you ask, this is what stood out for me - We don’t build community.
We build containers where community has a chance to emerge." Spot on.
I obviously have not done the reading you have done around the subject but the only thing I might question in your essay is your point that we humans develop "different"communities to ants/ birds/ bees and fish. Do we actually know we do? Perhaps each of their communities are just as diverse as those we participate in but we just can't see it as we are always at that helicopter/ disconnected level? Perhaps they too are having their equivalents of Burning Man and Dinner Parties!? 🤷♀️ In fact, now I write that, I quite like that idea - little ant equivalent of music festivals 😊
I love that question! I'll have to give it more thought. On the surface, I'd say that the range of variability is less for ants and other non-human organisms due to having a less complex brain. Things like self awareness, ego, opinion, etc ups the level complexity exponentially because it transcends physical traits and gets into psychological variability. That said, I'm 100% in agreement that there's likely a great deal of nuance and variability that we just can't see.
So good Spinksy! This is something I've chewed on for years but never had (and never would have had) the words to articulate as wonderfully as you always do. So thanks as always for sharing and helping to move the field along for us all :)
I think you've talked about the concept of Sense of Community or Psychological sense of community (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sense_of_community) before. I like the concept because it gets inside the heads of each member or potential member of a community.
I think that the four elements: Membership, Influence, Integration and Fullfillment of Needs and Shared Emotional Connection are kind of like the human version of the three rules that each Starling follows that allows those amazing flocks to form.
I wonder what you think about all that? Are those elements enough to explain the rules that influence the formation of a human flock? Or are there other things that have to exist for emergence to happen?
Whew! Love this reflection Ben. “What are the rules that people must follow for a community to emerge?” This feels like one of *the* big questions.
I actually had the sense of community theory in there but replaced it with the attributes section because I didn’t think SoC covered all of the attributes that emerge.
Which brings me to my question back to you:
Is SoC the rules to follow? Or are they attributes that emerge?
My sense was that they were attributes that emerge. You can’t follow a rule that your needs are met or that you influence the community, those are things that have to emerge.
If that’s true, then what are the rules that people need to follow in order for community to emerge?
Thinking out loud:
1. Show up - people have to be present
2. Participate - people have to be willing to engage in the container
3. Care - people have to care, emotionally, about the other people in the container
Thoughts?
Oooh I have bookmarked that article. I tend to disagree with the ordering/naming.
In my observations of pt 1 "Mambership" identification is of primary importance, and I'd add in "Identification and purpose". Identification/purpose is an umbrella for which all other aspects support... identity doesn't exist without boundaries, boundaries create emotional safety, emotional safety begets investment, investment results in shared symbolism.
In the framework of emergence, it feels (in this moment) entwined with identification. If there is no distinction of a need or purpose or separate identity, IMO, there is no emergence. If my needs are being met within a larger umbrella I have no need to create a subcommunity, or subidentity or aligned but slightly different statement of purpose.
It is when the experience of a broader identity is not defined enough for a specific purpose that subcommunities emerge. There is a difference in identification and purpose/problem solving that is a force function for emergence. I'm not just a "Swiftie" I'm a swiftie who lives in Eau Claire, WI. I'm not just a CEO, I'm a female CEO of a company with $20M+ in revenues, with unique challenges that differ from both male CEOs and CEOs of companies at $2m+ or $100M+ in revenue. Specificity drives emergence.
Loved being a part of the journey of this piece. It gives so much breeding ground for introspection as a community builder. ✨
So grateful for your reflections and feedback! They helped me make things a lot more clear.
I really enjoyed this piece, and can´t wait for the next part! One thing that made me think - are we building containers? Or maybe better, gardens? Parks?
Great reflection! I'm using "container" very broadly here to include all spaces where community has a chance to emerge.
And also. FIRST!
Excellent text! I love that you used the word "magical" to describe that sense of community. I'm researching group synergy and collaboration, particularly in co-creation and immersive learning experiences, where I see this happening the most. It's that feeling of building and being part of something. It's the act of doing that happens when we are actively engaged in the project or idea.
I believe there is something vibrant about being engaged. Emergence paves the way for engagement if designed in a way that doesn't block this natural tendency but instead helps bring a bit of order to the chaotic movement. This might be essential for keeping the community's flame alive.
David.. I have been CENTRAL to my work, as a consultant, designer and biomimic. EMERGENCE. and deeper still the "principle of allurement" that draws .. these "dumb parts' together. the evolutionary impulse. In my experience of trying to "build" communities" I also... hit upon this sudden realisation... (learning from..when a flower doe snot bloom, we dont fix the flower, we simply change its environment) . And so I now focus on the "environment" or conditions in which we have REAL communities..and not pseudo. The OTHER big insight I had from working with tribals communities.. is a TRIBE if different from a COMMUNITY. TRibes have a Shares SINGLE purpose. where are communities foster/allow multiple PURPOSES. As essential element in emergence "design"...divergence. I would love to share and discuss more.
I don’t have anything massively intelligent to add as I digest it, BUT I recommend watching The Beekeeper. Lots of references to the hive :)
What stood out for you from this post? Did anything shift?
- My biggest shift was feeling like I have found my people. Swarm behavior has long been a fascination of mine, especially starlings. This intersects with the recent debunking of the "alpha deer" theory where scientists discovered that the "alpha" was actually aggregating signals from community to make a decision. I am super curious about community leadership in the framework not of "visionaries" but rather those who are able to see cues across a group to lead it in a new direction (or subgroup) and the role of those who are both listeners and action takers.
What didn’t add up? What holes can you poke? (I love friendly debates!)
- It wasn't that it "didn't add up," but rather, it feels like there's a missing discussion on identity, identification, and how our brain's compulsion to problem solve is, in addition to our wiring to create community, a key ingredient in creating community identity. We are not only naturally inclined to connect we are also naturally inclined to create solutions to perceived problems, and often community is a solution/ it emerges because it fulfills a specific need.
What questions do you have about emergence and how it applies to community building? (I’ll make sure to cover your questions in parts II and III.)
- Off the cuff, I'm very curious about the "call" to community. If humans are open biological systems, what are the triggers to create community, and what invitation architecture inspires the emergence of community? Also as an aside, I often think of both humans and communities from a systems thinking viewpoint; I'm incredibly curious about what types of language/interaction and architecture is possible for communities that creates a generative/regenerative experience for members rather than a complex system of "rules" . I don't quite have the language to express this, but I have seen that we can institute RULES or we can architect a container where individuals behave according to thoughtful incentives and then the "rules" are less necessary because the behavior is a natural outcome of the incentives/ system architecture that was already in place.
What’s your favorite story of community emergence?
- ATM I'm particularly obsessed with branding/ tribal signaling. The Stanley Cup phenomenon is fascinating to me... a bunch of moms helped an historic company go from $70M to $700+M in record time through influence/ community
https://www.retaildive.com/news/stanley-quencher-tumblers-viral-success/699416/
Can you think of any examples of community where emergence wasn’t present? IS MY ENTIRE THESIS FLAWED?!
- good so far
Would you rather be a bird, a fish, or a bee? Why?
- Self oriented: none thanks. For a day? A bee. They see things I don't.
What do you notice about your own yearning for connection and community?
- I remember a podcast, I think of yours, that discussed the idea that many community managers come to their role because they experience loneliness, and creating community is an action that is curative. I find myself in a strange position of experiencing loneliness despite having a vast network. "Friend fatigue" can be just as isolating as true isolation. In my mind, community and loneliness are complex topics and complex biological needs and I want to dive deep into ALL of it, more than most people I know, and from that comes a yearning for another community.