Making Media Connections: Social Media Game Workshop Reflections

| View | Upload your own

Yesterday I conducted a workshop as part of a day of pre-conference workshops for the Making Media Connections Conference.    In the United States, I've noticed that over the past 2-3 years, there is a growing divide in participants experience/knowledge gap.   

Typically, I have two types of participants.   

(1) Already Doing It, Want To Do It Better:  The first group know the definitions of the tools and understands how social media has changed the dynamics between audience and organization.  They've done some amount of experimentation.  This may include some personal exploration like setting up their profile on social networking site or even a blog.   They are now ready to start bringing their knowledge back to the organization and begin an organizational strategy.  Some may already be doing that and want to do it better.  They are looking for aways to spread social media behind the firewall and get around resistance from others within the organization.    (Gordon Meyer has good reflection on the Community Media Workshop Blog).

(2) Need A Basic Introduction:  This group is new to social media, has not experienced directly.  They want to know what is a blog, what is RSS, etc?   Their reaction often is feeling overwhelmed.  They can't see a connection back to their organization.  Social media is a whole new language, a new culture, and whole new thing to add to their to do list.   

This split seems to run along generational lines.  Typically, group 2 is populated with the older cohort of baby boomers.   Group 1 tends to be younger, although not everyone in the group is a millennial or GenXer.

It is always difficult when you are teaching a workshop and you have a range of experience and knowledge.  And what happens is that I end up teaching two workshops at the same time - I have a "getting started workshop" that is all about personal exploration first, defining the terms, and providing some "low hanging fruit" ideas.   The other workshop is geared for people who already understand the why and what and are looking for advice and tips on move past resistance in their organization and strategy.   The key having a workshop with a mix of levels is differentiated instruction - and that happens in small groups. 

You can't do too much of full group discussion or even interactive presentation.  That's because you end up frustrating the participants who are further along and overwhelming the beginners.

This time I had two different small group exercises prepared and split up the full group into these two different sections - just getting started and those who want to brainstorm organizational strategy.    This time, I had a 25% of the workshop participants who were "just getting started" and the other 75% looking at organizational strategy.  The key to sorting them into different groups was the icebreaker (Tweet your burning question on a paper) and putting the questions into a parking lot on the wiki (I will also add some resources or an article to read first for each question at some point today.)

I sat in on the "just getting started group" and they came up a great reflection.   "Social media is like sex.  You have to experience.  You can't just read the manual."  From there we identified some started projects from this blog post "Ten Web 2.0Things You Can Do in Ten Minutes To Be A Better Nonprofit" that I have turned into handout.

The other group played the social media game.  I now have the cards organized into "adoption issues,"  "strategy," and "external communications tools."   The process is to pick someone in the group as the client and discuss these issues and come back with a report out.  I took notes on the workshop wiki.

I have been reading a book called "Brain Rules" that looks at 12 principles related to learning in an age of information and attention overload.   I've been trying to incorporate some of the ideas into instructional practice these days.   Principle #1 is "Exercise boosts brain power."  So, I incorporated having participants move around every time I felt the energy in the room drop.  It seemed to work.

When you discuss web2.0 or social media in your organization or in trainings, have you encountered these two different groups?  How do support both groups in their needs?  How do you work with those who feel that social media and web2.0 is a foreign language and too difficult for them to learn?

Comments

[david lee king]

"Social media is like sex" - good example! Recently, I've been giving a similar example of a chainsaw - same thing. You can read about it, but you really have to experience it to understand it fully.

My audiences are usually more like 80% beginners, so I usually pack my presentations full of explanations and examples - good for the majority to see that others are already doing it, and good for the other 20% too - they get new ideas (or confirmation that their idea is a good one).

[Beth Kanter]

david,

Thanks for sharing. Yesterday, I had the opposite mix. So, I guess the key is to go with the majority and be prepared.

Is your slideshow on slide share? I'd love to see it.

[david lee king]

Not on Slideshare yet (on my list of things to do!) - but most are here. Good recent examples are Managers Pay Attention and Making Time for 2.0

[Scarlett Swerdlow]

Beth - Loved the workshop yesterday. I definitely didn't mind that you had to cater to two audiences. Everyone left with a new perspective and things to do.

I spent some time reading Lynda Kelly's research on an arts social media profile. It's a good start, but I was wondering if it would be worthwhile to do a survey of our constituents' online habits and behaviors. What do you think? Do you know of other organizations that have done such a survey? Rather than reinvent the wheel, it would be great to use their survey as a template for ours. Let me know what you think.

Thanks!

[Michele Martin]

Thanks for sharing this, Beth--I plan to adapt the social media game for a conference in September and had already been thinking about this issue of having two types of groups. This is definitely helpful.