Next steps towards a networked RSA

Here's an update on my earlier suggestion for a Fellows-led exploration into how to develop a more fully networked RSA. See comment below for the latest: Will Fellowship Councillors lead? 

Recent studies and discussions have confirmed the need for a new approach to help Fellows connect and collaborate, and revealed some opportunities for action. My main conclusion - it is NOT about technology. Earlier ideas here on a Fellows-led exploration of the issues and possible solutions.

Firstly, the recent substantial Fellowship survey showed professional networking is the main reason for wishing to be active in the RSA - but online communities are current the lowest-rated offering. So - a huge gap between what people want and what they get.

Then a lively debate on Linkedin about "Why did you join the RSA" showed a lot of frustration with the lack of clarity about what networking is encouraged within RSA, and how it is supported - with a number of Fellows offering to help develop ways forward.

Fortunately candidates for the Fellowship Council - now elected - joined a hustings discussion, debated communication systems and networks, and agreed this was a priority.

What comes through strongly from the survey and the discussions is that Fellows want high-level discussion, well-signposted information, and managed content. Linkedin, followed by Facebook and Twitter, are the ways that Fellows network online, linked to face-to-face activity. Ning sites, like RSAFellowship.com are little used.

The survey showed that despite the desire for networking, in practice it is low - with only 56% networking with more than five other Fellows and only 11% collaborating with more than five other Fellows. That's probably because Fellows can't find each other.

The survey identified a latent potential for the greater of engagement of Fellows with projects, with a preference for Fellow-led initiative (70%) over staff-led initiatives (48%). Again, the barriers are difficulties in finding information and how best to engage.

At the moment there is an RSA Technology Strategy - reported here by Jemima Gibbons - but not, as far as I know, a content strategy or a network building strategy designed to meet the needs articulated in the survey and discussions.

The technology strategy includes looking at personas - typical Fellows - and the information and networking pathways they might follow. However, I believe that is mainly to design new systems, rather than facilitation and network-building support.

The conclusions I draw are:

• We first need some ground-clearing work to update the questions and answers about Fellowship, and resources available, and work under way. One thing everyone agrees on is that they are confused. Several people in the Linkedin group offered to work on that.
• We then need a strategy for network building and content management to complement the Technology Strategy. This involves facilitation, curating and reporting. It might be achieved by a combination or staff and volunteer Fellow activity, if it could be connected with people's interests and enthusiasms.
• The network building and content strategy need to encompass regional networks, interest networks, as well as project initiation and development.
• A lot could be done by facilitating discussion on Linkedin, with email newsletters and related content on Facebook and Twitter. Additional tools could be added as needed, where possible using those Fellows already use.

Undertaking something on this scale across RSA activities would be a very substantial task. It is not clear where responsibility would lie, because it crosses a lot of departments, and staff and Fellows activity.

In my previous post I suggested an exploration could provide a way to try some small-scale experiments, research experience elsewhere, and develop an optimistic view of opportunities for the future. I said that in practice the explorers may:

• highlight existing good network building within RSA
• find out from Fellows what greater networking they would welcome
• report on what is planned by RSA staff and build on existing collaborations with staff
• look at examples elsewhere
• help build a core network of digital champions and network builders
• map some networks to find the existing strong connections, and gaps
• Start experimenting

... and I would now take account of the additional points from my conclusions above. Thanks to those who signed up previously (Dave Briggs, Peter Churchill, Jemima Gibbons, John Oakley, Roxanne Persaud) I held back from trying to take things forward because of the potential offered by the Fellowship Council discussions, and what came up on Linkedin.

We might now interest the newly-elected At Large councillors in joining in, and perhaps taking a lead, so that we are plugged in to official RSA development. Ed Whiting has blogged about The RSA - awakening the sleeping Fellowship giant, so I am hopeful.

In addition, I believe that there are a lot of Fellows who are interested more generally in how to build networks and develop collaborations in and across organisations, and localities. We could set up an officially recognised special interest group like those here. That could both look at general theory and practice - and also how it can apply to RSA.

The digital engagement group, led by Jemima Gibbons, has done a terrific job over the past three years - and there is plenty still to do. I believe we now also need to look at the non-tech issues that work has helped to surface.

The survey results in more detail

The recent Fellowships survey showed professional networking as the main active reason Fellows are in the RSA - only behind the more passive "being associated with the RSA and its work.

However, networking is low with only 56% networking with more than five other Fellows and only 11% collaborating with more than five other Fellows.

The survey concluded that there is a latent potential for the greater of engagement of Fellows with projects, with a preference for Fellow-led initiative (70%) over staff-led initiatives (48%). The barriers are difficulties in finding information and how best to engage.

One of the reasons why there is such a gap between desire for networking and collaboration is the poor offering and use of online communities. They rate lowest in an analysis of familiarity and favourability scores

• RSAnimate 4
• Podcasts 2
• Vision videos 1
• Fellowship directory -13
• Skills Bank -12
• Online communities -20

A more detailed analysis of the communication methods, and the social media that Fellows use, shows a big preference of email of post, text and phone (83, 23, 1, 1) and also that Linkedin is the most used network, and Ning the least

• Linkedin 72
• Facebook 54
• Twitter 39
• Google+ 36
• Ning 8

Fellows value high levels of debate in local networks, followed by online platforms. Looking at where small changes could bring major changes, shows "relatively small improvements in the standard of intellectual debate in online communities and local Fellows' networks are likely to have a significant positive impact on the levels of overall satisfaction".

Here are some of the key survey recommendations

• Ensure uniformly high standard of intellectual debate and address identified areas for improvement; online communities may require more moderation and quality assurance
• Involve parts of the Fellowship as an extended expert group for staff- and Fellow-led Projects
• Leverage the existing high usage of social media by Fellows, particularly Linked-In and Facebook, to encourage more intra-Fellowship networking and collaboration
• Encourage retired Fellows to be more engaged in a way that matches their retired lifestyles and make Fellowship more personally relevant
• Tap into the intersection of Fellows’ interest to network, and the RSA mission, by shaping online and offline platforms accordingly
• Provide clearer and more tailored paths to engagement, e.g. how can a Fellow engage with only little time at hand?