Social Capital Evolves Online

A Picnic for a Million:
The New Social Capital
Lindsey Fair
March 3, 2011

MBAD 500 – Business and Community Development
Dr. Gertrude MacIntyre
Cape Breton University – Shannon School of Business

Social capital is not a new term. It is not a new theory, nor is it a new aspect of Community Economic

Development (CED). But social capital as we have known it, as it has been explained for many

decades, is evolving. The fathers of social capital theory Robert Putnam1, Pierre Bordieu2 and James

Coleman3 have spent decades showing where and how social capital exists. They have explained the

impact social capital can have, and furthermore the negative impacts of a community with low social

capital. They, along with others, have taught us how to measure social capital and how to analyze the

impact. And most recently they have talked in depth about the decline of social capital.4 However,

instead of looking at all social capital as declining, it's time to develop a new definition for it.

Traditional social capital has declined, but it doesn't mean that social capital itself is gone. Social

capital is alive and well, it just looks different.

Putnam defines social capital as “the connections among individuals, social networks and the norms

of reciprocity and trustworthiness that arise from them” and “that enable participants to act more

effectively to pursue shared objectives”.5 Coleman agrees with Putnam in that social networks are the

infrastructure of social capital6, and defines it as “a variety of entities with two characteristics in

common: they all consist of some aspect of a social structure and they facilitate certain action of

individuals who are within the structure”.7 Along the same lines Bourdieu defines social capital as the

“aggregate of the actual or potential resources which are linked to the possession of a durable network of

more or less institutionalized relationships of mutual acquaintance and recognition.”8 These definitions

have not changed; the new social capital is still the connections between people with structures in

place based on trust and shared objectives. But how we go about creating these connections, where

they are based, what we do with them and the impact of our new connections is drastically different

than what it used to be.

A Picnic for a Million: The New Social Capital (Lindsey Fair 2011) 2

Communities used to rely on local groups, the front porch and a morning cup of tea together as the

main source for social capital.9 And as, Putnam explains in great detail in Bowling Alone10 is that this

type of social capital is dying. People no longer join local clubs, they no longer share cups of tea

together, they don't even have picnics together, or at least not very often. Putnam used Tocquevilles'

comment in the 1830's as a reference point in his research when Tocquevilles' said “Americans of all

ages, all stations in life, and all types of disposition are forever forming associations.”11 Even with the

decline presented by Putnam, Tocquevilles is right, people are forever forming and joining

associations, even still today. The associations have just changed. Brian Solis explains how the

traditional methods of creating social capital blend with the new and changed social capital. “Digital

capitalization is laying a foundation for expanding the need to cultivate and participate, not only in the

real world, but also in the online networks and communities that can benefit us personally and

professionally.”12 We don't have time to meet on the porch, or even make a phone call for that

matter. Instead we “shoot off a text message...(the Internet and SNS) are uniquely suited to the

overworked and overscheduled life it makes possible.”13 Now our associations are online, they utilize

social networking sites(SNS) such as FaceBook and Twitter to create new communities; and these new

communities are no longer geographically constrained as they once were.

There are many arguments that the Internet and SNS can not create real social capital. That “no online

experience, no matter how creatively crafted or innovative, can fully replace the chatter on those

front porches...”14 However, for every one of those arguments there is at least one argument that SNS

do create social capital. Even one of today's most well‐known critics of online community building,

and probably the most recently published on the topic, Sherry Turkle, doesn't deny that “..(SNS)

expand their reach in a continually growing community of acquaintance. No matter how esoteric their

interests, they are surrounded by enthusiasts, potentially drawn from all over the world.” 15

Although this paper isn't meant to discuss the merits of social capital through SNS, it is important that

we address the issues related to it. It is important to emphasize how the principles of CED and social

capital have remained intact. In particular it is important to discuss trust, education, democracy,

inclusion, governance and capacity building. These discussions will strive to lead to a consensus of the

new social capital.

Trust

There are three identified examples of trust on SNS: triangulation, confessions and dating. Each

example highlights how trust exists and the benefits of trust derived from SNS versus traditional

examples of trust.

Triangulation as described in the State of Community Management is a “technique to influence a

person through influencing their closest peers rather than directly.”16 This is the foundation of how

social networking works. Networks and trust circles are quickly and easily formed because each new

person is 'endorsed or recommended' by a trusted friend, therefore individuals instantly trust new

contacts without ever having met them. “Typically (it is) more effective at creating lasting change

than a more direct approach and also useful in situations where passions are running high.“17

Traditionally trust was a long process sometimes developed over years and only through shared

experiences. Development of trust can now happen almost instantly, in real‐time, through

triangulation.

As a critic of capital through SNS, Turkle argues that many social interactions online are confessions

and that compared to traditional communities, we would never share our personal confessions to our

groups or associations18 so therefore these interactions are unnatural and are not a good example of

true trust development. This is probably true of say a parent council, most people would not feel

comfortable sharing their deepest confessions at a PTA meeting. However, traditionally there have

been clubs and associations established for the sole purpose of confessions, such as Alcoholics

Anonymous, new mother support groups, etc. Therefore development of trust, using confessions as a

model, is quite apparent in both online and offline trust development. This has not changed, only now

these confessions can include a much larger base of support and provide even great anonymity in the

early stages of trust development. These safe, new environments of confession provide a large base

support and are based on the concept of reciprocity.

Lastly, dating and marriage are arguably the most accurate forms of trust development in social

capital. Although dating has most likely never been connected to social capital in business and

research, it is very relative to the discussion. The numbers definitely indicate that SNS are creating and

sustaining long‐term trust circles. 1 out of 5 people are in a committed relationship with someone

they met online, and 17% of people that married in 2010 met on a dating SNS.19 These are significant

numbers in trust development on SNS.

The new trust model in social capital is relationship based, long‐term, based on reciprocity and

confessions and is immediate through triangulation.

Education

An article by Larry Abramson discusses how schools are now using SNS to keep students enrolled.

They are using such sites as FaceBook to create classroom environments that are inclusive and

engaging.20 But it's not just formal education; on‐going, lifelong education is also happening online.

SNS like Quora and LinkedIn provide opportunities for members to post questions, discussions and

answers. People are now educating people. Online communities are learning from other online

communities. The authors in the ClueTrain Manefesto talk about how “through the Internet, people

are discovering and inventing new ways to share relevant knowledge with blinding speed.”21 The new

education models are happening online, are not bound by proximity to schools and are able to use

best‐practices from around the globe to continue to build upon past learning. It's real‐time, it's more

inclusive of students and learners with a wide variety of learning styles and it's continuous.

Democracy

There are many faces and many examples of democracy through SNS. The main concept of democracy

for CED is 'by the people for the people'.22 SNS have staff that do the day to day development of the

tools, but the communities themselves are created, developed and maintained by the communities

themselves. The pillars of SNS are that everyone is a producer, that everyone has a voice and that the

best way to balance power is through persuasive influence – and this type of democracy can now

happen rapidly.

With new media, everyone is producing; from blogs to wikis to SNS. The conversation is many to

many, not 1 to 1 as it has been in the past.23 FaceBook now has over 500 million active users24, making

it the third largest 'country' in the world. It is a mass community with a lot of power, but it's power of

and by the people.

Clay Shirky gives a very clear example of how SNS are aiding democracy. He talks about how in the

past, China suppressed news information about devastation such as earthquakes from their people.

Now with SNS they are unable to do this. The Chinese government still tries, but photos, videos and

messages are shared instantaneously via SNS.25 The people have a voice in the problem, and it also

allows for community re‐building to start instantly. Not only is this leading to better community

democracy, SNS are changing institution.

Recently, the world has seen the crisis in Egypt unfold before its' eyes through SNS. As tweeted by

Richard Florida on February 13, 2011, “The lesson of Egypt: Social media don't supplant the public

square. They push people to it. ‐ Blair Kamin”.26 SNS are not a replacement for geographical aspects of

CED, they are not a replacement of venues of democracy, instead they are making new venues

available, they are extending the voice of democracy. “These networked conversations are enabling

powerful new forms of social organization and knowledge exchange to emerge.”27 This is leading to

democracy, change and hopefully to long‐term sustainable CED. Friedman responded to the Egyptian

crisis in an article for the New York Times saying that “This sense of self‐empowerment and

authenticity – we did this for ourselves – is what makes Egypt's democracy movement such a potential

game‐changer for the whole region.”28 And the world got to see it happen and engage in the process

through SNS making the scale of democracy that much greater.

Today's communities are using persuasive influence, a theory based on the ability to build support for

an initiative without using authority to do so, rather based on those that have opted‐in to

participate.29 As presented by Dr. McIntyre, communities with high social capital need less policing

leading to a higher degree of democracy.30 Currently most SNS members police themselves and each

other. There are very few instances of outside policing. The people are working together to create not

only a community, but the governance and structure of a successful community as well. Recently 4

homeless people were given a prepaid cell phone, a month of unlimited text messaging and a SNS

account on Twitter.31 It gave these 4 people a voice. But it also gave them a community, and it gave the

community a chance to share their voice on homeless issues. They are working together now to create

democracy for these people, without ever having met them.

Community and Capacity Building

Communities are referred to in some cultures as Tribes. Seth Godin discusses the modern tribe in

length. The term tribes is also useful in the discussion about community building. Tribes are about

connecting people and ideas.32 “In a Web 2.0 world, social media allows modern tribes to form in an

instant, and because we are driven to be tribal and to learn from our tribes, tribes appear around

almost any topic your imagination can conjure up.” says the authors from the Hyper‐Social

Organization.33

SNS give introverted people and introverted, rural communities a place to find community without

having to change their personality. Godin agrees “the Internet ... people on the fringes can find each

other, connect and go somewhere.”34 For communities that have diminishing social capital, Dr.

Alexandra Samuel says that SNS “can help squeeze the latent social capital out of a given community,

making it socially useful.”35 She also provides examples of existing social capital in a community that

only exists because of the web such as a “spontaneous effort to collect clothes for homeless people to

a self‐organizing league of Green Lanterns protecting virtual refugees.” Turkle recognizes that “the

global reach of connectivity can make the most isolated outpost into a centre of learning and

economic activity.” Even though her book is primarily about the challenges of a connected world, she

concurs that it has changed how we operate. She continues to support the idea of community building

through SNS “this allows otherwise unable connections to continue and strengthen”.36

SNS have lowered transaction and collaboration costs and enhanced people's capability to

collaborate.37 They are designed to make community building easy. The new community development

is happening globally based on sociographics and psychographics, whereas traditionally it was based

on demographics and geographics. These new communities start with a common purpose and then

find the people, instead of the reverse. These communities evolve – constantly. These new

communities are global tribes.

Governance

If we look at the elements of good governance: participation, transparency, de‐centralization of

power and accountability; SNS are great examples of good community governance. The power is held

completely with the people and with the communities. By nature of how the communities

communicate, information and learning is transparent not only for their own communities but often

for other communities as well. They are accountable to the world and are challenged each day, each

minute about their beliefs and actions. They are accountable to each other. And they wouldn't exist

without participation.


The change in social capital hasn't happened overnight, it has taken almost a decade to get to where

we are now. We are just now reaching the “billion hour buzz” as explained by Etzione38. The world of

social networking is in its’ infancy, but it has been around long enough now for the impacts of CED to

be realized. The conversation has reached the buzz point, both in hours, and in reach. The number of

people participating in the conversation is greater than it ever has been. There are still many

questions that need to be answered around the new social capital, but at least the conversation is

happening and it's happening at rapid speed. As Samuel said “..if there's one thing social media does

well, it's to make those networks wider and denser: more people are more connected than ever

before.”39

There are still many questions about social capital and online CED to be answered such as what the

empirical evidence is and what are the best practices for measurement? How sustainable are these

communities? How will mobile technology impact, evolve and once again change the development of

social capital? Will this new social capital, eventually replace the traditional social capital or will the

two become more entwined? However, we are starting to understand where social capital is going.

The new social capital as described by The Community Roundtable is very real “The definition of social

capital is the active connections between people that make cooperation possible.”40 The new social

capital derived on the Internet “tends to refer more generally to the strength and density of your

social networks.”41 But it is time to start realizing that the new social capital still includes the

connections between people with structures in place based on trust and shared objectives. But how

we go about creating those connections, how we develop trust and our overall objectives of social

capital, have all changed. These relationships are now developed, evolved and globalized using SNS.

The communities are open for increasing social capital 24 hours, 7 days a week. Trust is created

through endorsements of future friends, groups, events, ideas, projects and even our own shared

thoughts. And our objectives have globalized. We no longer look to only impact our physical proximity,

but now globally as well.

As Dr. Gertrude MacIntyre presented, the CED evaluation approach starts with a process. It is ongoing,

leads to products and projects, is long‐term and builds on learning.42 There is evidence of all of these

throughout SNS. We have surpassed the billion‐hour buzz; many communities have received aid due

to SNS, it is evolving before us and SNS are providing a multitude of learning opportunities for

communities worldwide. Turkle says that communities are built on physical proximity, shared

concerns, real consequences and common responsibilities.43 Minus physical proximity, SNS provide

the other three. They provide a trusting environment for everyone participating. And by not being

bound by proximity, it leads to stronger democracy and inclusion. Social capital is alive and well, it's

new and different, it's online. This allows the picnics to be larger, instead of just a few local friends; the

world is now hosting picnics for a million.


1
Robert Putnam, “Bowling Alone: America's Declining Social Capital”, Journal of Democracy Volume 6, Number 1 (January
1995): 65‐78
2
Pierre Bourdieu, Outline of a Theory of Practice (Cambridge Studies in Social and Cultural Anthropology No. 16, 1977)
3
James Coleman, Foundations of Social Theory (Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1990)
4
Robert Putnam, The Collapse and Revival of American Community, (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2000)
5
Putnam 2000, 19 and Putnam 1995, 664‐665
6
Lynn Mandarano, “Social Network Analysis of Social Capital in Collaborative Planning”, Society and Natural Resources
Volume 22, Issue 3 (March 2009):245 ‐ 260
7
Coleman, S98
8
Bourdieu, P. 1986. The Forms of Capital. Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education. Connecticut:
Greenwood Press.
9
Yvonne DiVita, Back to the Future: How Social Networking is Recreating the Neighbourhood, 2009
10
Putnam 2000
11
Putnam 1995
12
Brian Solis , Social Capital: The Currency of the Social Economy, 2010 http://www.briansolis.com/2010/03/social‐capital‐
the‐currency‐of‐digital‐citizens/
13
Sherry Turkle, Alone Together: Why we expect more from Technology and less from each other (Basic Books, 2011)
14
DiVita
15
Levine, Locke, Searls & Weinberger The ClueTrain Manifesto, http://www.cluetrain.com/book/index.html 2001
16
State of Community Management Report, http://community-roundtable.com/socm-2010/, 2010
17
State of Community Management Report, http://community-roundtable.com/socm-2010/, 2010
18
Turkle,  239
19
Match.com and Chadwick Martin Bailey ‐ Recent Trends: Online Dating
http://cp.match.com/cppp/media/CMB_Study.pdf, 2010
20
Larry Abramson Can Social Networking Keep Students in School? February 9, 2011
21
Levine, Locke, Searls & Weinberger
22
Abraham Lincoln
23
Clay Shirky, Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organizing Without Organizations (Penguin USA, 2008)
24
http://www.facebook.com/press/info.php?statistics
25
Shirky
26
Richard Florida
27
Levine, Locke, Searls & Weinberger #9 of 95 Theses
28
Thomas Friedman, “They Did It” New York Times, February 12, 2011
29
State of Community Management
30
Gertrude MacIntyre Ph.D. Class Discussion February 2011
31
Corey Kilgannon, “A Life on the Streets, Captured on Twitter” New York Times, February 24, 2011
32
Seth Godin, Tribes: We Need You to Lead Us (Portfolio Hardcover, 2008)
33
François Gossieaux, Ed Moran The Hyper‐Social Organization (McGraw‐Hill , 2010)
34
Seth Godin, Tribes, TedTalks February 2009, http://blog.ted.com/2009/05/12/you_asked_seth/
35
Alexandra Samuel, Ph.D., Defining the impact of social media on social capital,  2010
36
Turkle, 152, 155
37
Mark Vanderbeeken Reflections on LIFT Conference 2011
http://www.core77.com/blog/education/reflections_on_lift_conference_2011_18646.asp
38
Etzione
39
Samuel
40
The Community Roundtable http://www.slideshare.net/marknadsstod/getting‐real‐about‐enterprise‐20
41
Nathaniel Whittemore, “Why Social Capital is Coming the Decade's Most Important Buzzword”, February 6, 2011 in Social
Capital Blog
42
MacIntyre
43
Turkle, 152, 155


Bibliography

Abramson, Larry. Can Social Networking Keep Students in School? NPR.org, February 9, 2011.

Antoci, Angelo and Fabio Sabatini, Mauro Sodini. Bowling alone but tweeting together:  the evolution
of human interaction in the social networking era 2010.

Bailey, Chadwick Martin and  Match.com Recent Trends: Online Dating
http://cp.match.com/cppp/media/CMB_Study.pdf, 2010.

Bourdieu, Pierre. 1986. The Forms of Capital. Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of
Education. Connecticut: Greenwood Press.

Bourdieu, Pierre. Outline of a Theory of Practice Cambridge Studies in Social and Cultural
Anthropology No. 16, 1977.

Brogan, Chris and Julien Smith.  Trust Agents: Using the Web to Build Influence, Improve Reputation,
and Earn Trust Wiley, 2009

Canadians Say Yes To Social Media EMARKETER, November 29, 2010.

Churches Embrace Social Networking And Social Media, PR WEB / SF CHRONICLE, January 28, 2011.

Coleman, James. Foundations of Social Theory Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1990.

DiVita, Yvonne. Back to the Future: How Social Networking is Recreating the Neighbourhood 2009.

Egan, John. Klout Predicts Grammy Winners Based on Facebook and Twitter Power February 12, 2011.

Ellison, Nicole B.  And Charles Steinfield, Cliff Lampe. The Benefits of Facebook "Friends:" Social Capital and College
Students' Use of Online Social Network Sites, Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 12(4), article 1, 2007.

www.facebook.com/press/info.php?statistics

Friedman, Thomas. They Did It New York Times, February 12, 2011.

Friedman, Thomas. The World is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty‐First Century Farrar, Straus and
Giroux, 2005.

Gladwell, Malcolm. Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking Back Bay Books, 2005.

Gladwell, Malcolm. Outliers Little, Brown and Company, 2008.

Godin, Seth. Tribes, TedTalk, http://blog.ted.com/2009/05/12/you_asked_seth/,  February 2009.

Godin, Seth. Tribes: We Need You to Lead Us Portfolio Hardcover, 2008.

Gossieaux, François and  Ed Moran. The Hyper‐Social Organization McGraw‐Hill , 2010.


Happe, Rachel. 5 Risks of Having A Community Without Management http://community‐
roundtable.com, February 11, 2011.

Hunt, Tara. The Whuffie Factor: Using The Power Of Social Networks To Build Your Business, Crown
Publishing Group, 2009.

Kilgannon, Corey. A Life on the Streets, Captured on Twitter New York Times, February 24, 2011.

Lattery, Adrienne. From Bowling Leagues, BBQs, and Potluck Dinners to Bits, Bytes, and Motherboards
Cape Breton University, 2006.

Levine, Locke, Searls & Weinberger The ClueTrain Manifesto, www.cluetrain.com/book/index.html,
2001.

MacIntyre Ph.D., Gertrude.  Class Discussion February 2011.

Mandarano, Lynn. Social Network Analysis of Social Capital in Collaborative Planning Society and
Natural Resources Volume 22, Issue 3, March 2009.

Matei, Sorin Adam. The social impact of social media: creator or destroyer of social capital? Journal of
Broadcasting and electronic Media, July 26, 2010.

Miemis, Venessa. Social Capital is not Whuffie
http://socialmediatoday.com/index.php?q=SMC/180077, March 8, 2010.

Putnam, Robert. Bowling Alone: America's Declining Social Capital, Journal of Democracy Volume 6,
Number 1, January 1995.

Putnam, Robert. The Collapse and Revival of American Community New York: Simon & Schuster, 2000.

Putnam, Robert. Social Capital: Measurement and Consequences  Isuma: Canadian Journal of Policy
Research 2, Spring 2001.

Samuel, Ph.D., Alexandra. Defining the impact of social media on social capital,
www.alexandrasamuel.com, Emily Carr University, 2010.

Shirky, Clay. Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organizing Without Organizations Penguin USA,
2008.

Solis, Brian. The Conversation Prism www.theconversationprism.com, 2010.

Solis, Brian.  Social Capital: The Currency of the Social Economy, www.briansolis.com, 2010.

State of Community Management Report, http://community‐roundtable.com/socm‐2010/, 2010.

Turkle, Sherry. Alone Together: Why we expect more from Technology and less from each other Basic
Books, 2011.

Vanderbeeken, Mark. Reflections on LIFT Conference 2011

http://www.core77.com/blog/education/reflections_on_lift_conference_2011_18646.asp.

Wellman, Barry and Anabel Quan Haase, James Witte, Keith Hampton. Does the Internet increase,
decrease, or supplement social capital?: social networks, participation, and community
commitment American Behavioral Scientist November 2001 vol. 45 no. 3.

White, Nancy. Active lurkers – the hidden asset in online communities February 18, 2010.

Whittemore, Nathaniel. Why Social Capital is Coming the Decade's Most Important Buzzword Social
Capital Blog, February 6, 2011.


Social Capital Evolves Online

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (11)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (6)

Similar to Social Capital Evolves Online

Similar to Social Capital Evolves Online (16)

More from Lindsey Fair, MBA

More from Lindsey Fair, MBA (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Social Capital Evolves Online