I have been interested in social media / web 2.0 long before there were fancy names affixed to the use of technology to bring people together in an attempt to encourage participation, collaboration and to share content, opinions, insights, experiences, perspectives, and media. That’s not to say that I had any foresight into just how big it would become or realized it’s true potential, rather I simply knew it was an important phenomena but couldn’t put my finger on whether it was simply a fad as so many things related to the internet have been or a lasting trend that would ingrain itself into the fabric of our culture and society.

However, now that we have seen the entire social media movement mature, grow and move beyond something that is more than just a flash in the pan over the past few years, I am still struck by how little people know and understand about it holistically. It’s more than just about killer web apps (MySpace, Facebook, flickr, Twitter, Del.icio.us, etc.), bringing people together and catchy buzzwords, and many people seem to have a difficult time getting their heads around the idea as an aggregate. It also seems like the buzz surrounding the idea hasn’t subsided either as individuals, organizations and associations are now, more than ever, looking to leverage some or all aspects of social media to create more unique, lasting, and valuable interactions with other individuals, customers and members.

As such, it’s often useful to revisit some of the basics just to keep things in perspective. As I was cleaning out my feed reader, I happen to come across a blog post that does a good job of focusing on the essentials. It was written almost a year ago and discusses the habits of highly effective Web 2.0 sites. Granted, it is written with more of a technical bent, but at the same time it does provide a solid list of attributes that are really essential to creating relationships as opposed to conducting transactions.

• Ease of Use is the most important feature of any Web site, Web application, or program.
• Open up your data as much possible. There is no future in hoarding data, only controlling it.
• Aggressively add feedback loops to everything. Pull out the loops that don’t seem to matter and emphasize the ones that give results.
• Continuous release cycles. The bigger the release, the more unwieldy it becomes (more dependencies, more planning, more disruption.) Organic growth is the most powerful, adaptive, and resilient.
• Make your users part of your software.They are your most valuable source of content, feedback, and passion. Start understanding social architecture. Give up non-essential control. Or your users will likely go elsewhere.
• Turn your applications into platforms. An application usually has a single predetermined use while a platform is designed to be the foundation of something much bigger. Instead of getting a single type of use from your software and data, you might get hundreds or even thousands of additional uses.
• Don’t create social communities just to have them.They aren’t a checklist item. But do empower inspired users to create them.

As I read through the article, and specifically this list, I couldn’t help but see some similarities between it and what Jeff De Cagna proposed in the August 2007 Associations Now article The Ungovernance Model. Specifically, I believe there are commonalities in the following areas: simplicity of activities, distributed accountability/responsibility, and diversity of thought.

The name of the game is convergence and change. There are lots of examples and lessons that exist in seemingly unrelated areas that we can learn from and not only to how we think about governance, but also how we do just about anything with/for our associations. The key is to be on the look-out for them, even in the most unlikely places.

Web 2.0 is more than just technology empowering people, it’s about challenging conventional thinking and long-held beliefs. It’s also about identifying and creating value for stakeholder groups and getting and holding their attention. This shift is forcing organizations/associations and individuals to take a good hard look at what they are doing and why they are doing it. Status quo, as much as it has worked in the past and may still be working today, may no longer be enough.

I am not trying to make any sort of intellectual leap in comparing this information to Jeff’s article on Ungovernance. They are obviously two separate topics that happen to share a few common themes. And much as Jeff’s article was simply a starting point, so too are the principles listed above. The question is: are you (or your association) ready to take a good look at what is happening around you and react in a way that might be different than the way you are operating today? Are you willing to embrace change or rise to the challenge of thinking in a new way? Chances are, if you aren’t someone or some other organization or association is.

Sphere: Related Content