Blog

Since the launch of Google + a few months ago, huge debate has been brewing about which social networking sites Google + will destroy over the next year or so. Number one target is apparently Facebook and number two is LinkedIn. I have no magic mirror to peer into the future with but I have a few observations.

1. There are overlaps between all three social networking sites but there are massive differences. If Facebook started out as your circle of friends, then Linked In started out as 100% business focussed. By and large, they have stuck to their guns. LinkedIn is a business networking tool. Increasingly it is about jobs and joining groups of like-minded individuals, but it has 'work and career' running through it like a stick of rock. And Facebook, although businesses join and some connections are work related, it is still a friends and family site and the business element is aimed at consumers rather than other businesses. You would not meet your Mum on LinkedIn, or your boss on Facebook. However nuanced, and the new 'branching out' app on Facebook is very LinkedIn like, the differences remain and it is hard to imagine that they will disappear. I have never seen a holiday photo on LinkedIn (I am relieved to say) and I have never seen a business chat forum on Facebook.

2. Google + is fundamentally more interactive: it is a place to group; meet and discuss but so far the groups are more work related than friend related. But the core is small spontaneous groups that share something in common. You come to Google + largely to DO something. You come onto Facebook, on the other hand, to hang out and snoop around. You check out what your friends have been up to and where they have been. Participation is an option. If you share a photo or an opinion, commentary is useful but not essential. On Google +, commentary is the life blood of the system. In LinkedIn it is also okay to hang out and leverage your network and see what colleagues are up to. There is nothing much to hang our for in Google +. Of the huge numbers in the US who have jumped into Google +, over 30% have never gone back and have not made a single posting and the lively contributors on Google + post most of the time and meet and greet their friends and acquaintances. There is space for work and space to set up separate friends groups but the emphasis is distinct from their rivals. So far at least. I can see LinkedIn as a place to maximise your network for work and Facebook where you build a huge network of 'friends' but I can't see Google + in the same light: more select, more active and more engaged groups will veer towards Google +

3. Google + is a loose collection of tools. It is a space to have meetings; to discuss a topic or share resources and organise your photos. It engages directly with the work process and is an adjunct to it. LinkedIn is an add-on. It does not depend on any specific work activity. It cannot really be integrated into the workplace in the same way.

4. Google + is deliberately made up of quasi-autonomous elements that exist together or stand alone rather like Google Docs and Google Mail.

5. A key component of Google +, is the power it puts in the hands of a user to develop, cultivate and connect with a specific, hand-picked community. You would not go to to either Facebook or Linked In to do something similar. It just would not work in the same way.

6. The 'hangout' feature encourages spontaneous real time video chat. They might add features like that to Facebook (via Skype) but it will not be at the heart of the application as it is in Google +. All part of the community building and community development and designed for a small group to work together or simply talk about an issue.

So the simple point is: Google + is new and exciting and quite easily slips into its own niche. We can easily manage Facebook, LinkedIn and Google + without having to choose between them. Our active community might live on Google +; our wider friends and family on Facebook and out extensive business network on Linked In. I have no problem with that. Just as I have an iPad an iPhone and a MacBook. They have some similar functions but overall they do things differently for different purposes and I can't see the iPad knocking out my laptop or my phone. I feel comfortable with all three devices and so do most people I know. The market is not so crowded and sewn up that one more social networking app. can only succeed if it destroys another one and takes its place. I hope in six months time, when Google + is more firmly established, I will like and use all three and see the role and place for all three. That will enrich my working life not make me schizophrenic! I am pretty sure that Mark Zuckerberg and Reid Hoffman are not quaking in their boots, but neither should they be complacent.

Any thoughts of complacency can be dispelled in an instance by simply mouthing two words at them: MySpace. Its collapse is the real warning and the potential fate which looms over them and which they have to do everything to avoid.