Confident Networking

The phrase networking and social media are often thrown about in abundance, but what does it mean to network and is it really that easy? Apparently it is all about identifying clear personal goals, being prepared and listening properly. Today I attended a ‘Personal Impact and Confident Networking’ workshop, facilitated by Sara Shintom from Shinton Consulting at the University of Dundee. The full presentation can be found here.

What does it mean to network?

Sara highlighted that networking is about “contributing to a conversation and discussing ideas”. When those around the table were questioned it came across that our biggest obstacle was insecurity and fear of how we were being perceived. As Sara highlighted, “most of us have packaged it up as a chore, a herculean task”.

It doesn’t take much to fill up a toolkit apparently all you need is:

The ability to ask questions | The ability to listen | Lots of enthusiasm

So what are the barriers to networking?

General barriers include: Insecurity, lack of preparation and lack of goals.

We took a little time to reflect on what our barriers were, (in my head) mine included:

1. The act of approaching people, especially if they are in formed groups.
2. Joining conversations
3. Leaving conversations
4. Running out of things to say
5. Not knowing enough on a specialised subject area
6. Interacting with those from different cultures…what is the correct process?
7. Building a rapport and sustaining small talk

So how do you overcome the barriers?

Step 1. Question yourself:

1. What is stopping me from being effective?
2. What messages do I want to get across? What do I want to put in peoples heads?
3. Think in advance about the person you are talking to-what will make a difference to them?
4. How do you plan to manage your networks? Do you have a strategy?

Step 2. Make some plans:

1. Preparation: If you are seeking to further your research be knowledgeable about your work. Have a pitch, value what you do and be comfortable when you talk about it.
2. Constructing stories: What stories do you have to share? What audiences are they for? What are the headlines and follow up story?
3. What topical/ targeted resources do you have stored to react to the individual?

Final thoughts

When reflecting on the session, there were many things I thought I should know yet so often practice is so different from theory. My main takeaway from todays, never underestimate preparation. As highlighted in this quote:

“In the fields of observation chance favors only the prepared mind.” Louis Pasteur

Research project timeline - Design Ethnography

Check out:

Dan roam: Back of the Napkin
RSA Animate: Collection of lectures transformed by animation

Step 1. As my last research partner used to quote: Work smart, not hard. This is not an excuse to slack off, but to direct your energies for better impact!

If I don’t go on an interview, I try to watch the videotapes. Whenever a participant says something I think is interesting or important, I write it down on a Post-it Note and record the timestamp from the video, which makes video-editing clips much easier. In Grounded Theory, this is known as “memoing.”

Rachel Hinman – Demystifying Data Analysis Step

Step 2. Think about your process and document it:

Process isn’t a panacea. It doesn’t make that mountain of data at the end of field interviews any smaller. However, having a process that you can clearly communicate is a powerful skill. It allows people to engage with your work on a deeper level because you can show both the insights and implications you’ve discovered as well as the work you’ve done to get there. Process gives your team a road map to follow, making collaboration easier. In addition, it builds confidence within your organization for your effort, ensuring the hard work you’ve done won’t be dismissed. Rachel Hinman - Demystifying Data Analysis 

Step 3. Set rules to the analysis session, this step sets off discussions again and again in the Design Ethnography studio. When there are up to 16 of us conducting the analysis, how can we all understand what each other are saying on a post-it note?

Having explained how things could go wrong, here are some simple Post-it Etiquettes to help each other digest, analyse and synthesize our vast data spread across hundreds of post-its!

1. Choose different colours of post-its for writing under different categories. If you run out of colours, tag them at the bottom with a code using a 0.5 mm blue pen.
2. Choose the same dimension and shape of post-its for working within the same category or task.
3. Use a black Sharpie pen to write on all the post-its.
4. Write between 3 and 10 words.
5. Write words of height around the size of your thumb’s nail.

Rashmi Kakde - Post-it Etiquette for Smooth Digestion.

Step 4. Have snacks, you need lots of energy, lots of breaks and lots communication between team members. 

In some ways, an ethnographer is just a vessel, a sieve through which the world is organized and presented. Our bodies and minds are our instruments. A harpist wouldn’t dream of performing on an untuned instrument–so why would an ethnographer try to work in a body dissonant with exhaustion, mind a dischordant clash of frustration and misery?

  Rachel Shadoan - Our Bodies are Our Instruments

I would definitely check out the whole post Demystifying Data Analysis by Rachel Hinman (who is a design strategist for Adaptive Path), we ended up here after being pointed to it by Palojono on his post on the same subject. Indeed all of the blogs are worth a look,  if you have any analysis stories, tips or worries, share it here! And as for me, its time to get back to those brightly coloured rectangles of wonder…

For headers of categories during synthesis, choose a different dimension/shape/colour of post-its, but keep the style homogenous among the header post-its.

There is an immense gap between research and practice. I’m tempted to paraphrase Kipling and say “Oh, research is research, and practice is practice, and never the twain shall meet,” but I will resist. The gap between these two communities is real and frustrating. Between research and practice a new, third discipline must be inserted, one that can translate between the abstractions of research and the practicalities of practice…We need translational developers who can act as the intermediary, translating research findings into the language of practical development and business while also translating the needs of business into issues that researchers can address. Notice that the need for translation goes in both directions: from research to practice and from practice to research. Translational developers are needed who can mine the insights of researchers and hone them into practical, reliable and useful results. Similarly translational developers must help translate the problems and concerns of practice into the clear, need-based statements that can drive researchers to develop new insights. Neither direction of translation is easy. There is a huge gap between research and practice. To bridge the gap we need a new kind of practitioner: the translational developer. The gap is real, but it can be bridged.

Don Norman - The Research-Practice Gap 

It is the 3rd semester of Design Ethnography and everyone is busy in the field, so we have a lot on our plates just now, but I would definitely give this paper a read. The role of translator really struck a cord with me, how many audiences have we had to interact with and communicate to in this one year? In my opinion, the points raised by Don Norman relates to many that have arisen in our journey with Design Ethnography. In tune with our work, it raises more questions than it answers. If we want to develop and cement a space for ourselves in this field, we should start questioning what roles are being filled and what roles are laying vacant. So if you have spare time between fieldwork, interviews, analysis and soul searching, have a read.

Around the ping-pong table in our crowded studio we were waiting, in varying stages of readiness and anticipation, to get the teams sorted. This time round we were getting a choice, who you work with, who you work for, we were working for live clients and there was more than one route to follow. So it was time to voice my opinion, stake a position and defend it, a situation that makes me uncomfortable, a trait I have to develop. From this point it seems that the project promises to challenge me, this is simultaneously exciting and scary.

(Excerpt from my journal after the briefing session in class)

THE WHOLE PICTURE

So what happened?

It was meant to happen like this (Fig. 1), I would begin as part of a two-person research team, to move to a 6 person team, and finally as one of 14 researchers and 3 clients, mapping the research landscape.

(Fig. 1 ‘User Research Landscape Map’)

Though the diagram above represents the flow of movement, it did not capture the human behaviours, actions and energy needed for each stage. Though I had undertaken research projects before, this setup challenged my understanding. On reflection, on my part, the flow that took place during the first two stages did not balance properly, so much energy was placed into the first stage (Fig. 2) that it was hard to regain the momentum for the second stage. In fact a decision was made to approach the meta analysis stage as a whole group, increasing output and flow of ideas. (Fig. 3).

(Fig. 2 ‘Stage 1: High energy levels’)

(Fig. 3 ‘Stage 2: Group work ‘)

What does this mean?

Our bodies are our instruments, wise words from my colleague Rachel Shadoan. She argues that it is vitally important to maintain your body and mind at certain level of health, as they are integral to our work as Design Ethnographers, indeed they are our instruments. Building on her philosophy, if our bodies, mentally and physically, are our instruments then our relationship with other researchers, with clients and our surroundings are filters. Filters keep us balanced, on track, focussed and free from the murky water. Filters must be maintained, regularly checked and treated right in order to sustain a high standard of output.

On reflection this is not a balance that I managed well in stage 1 and 2 of this project, I was so focused on the individual project, so intent on producing the best research, improving my personal skills that I withdrew from my fellow researchers, and did not fully develop a relationship with my client. I failed to ‘touch base’, or get another take on what I was up to, instead wanting to wow people with the finished results. In this failure of using resources during the process, I limited myself to a certain level of personal and professional growth.

An example of this was during the stage 1 analysis phase, tempers were frazzled and there was limited time remaining. Ilya and Mark requested some time where they could talk things over with us, my politeness overrode my temptation was to say ‘I am too busy!’, so I took time out. As we sat at the desks, littered with papers, laptops, post its and low energy levels, the boys began to discuss their problems, points that they felt were arising from their research, but were as yet unformed. During the conversation there arose several points that were connected to our research, indeed to other groups also, by now more people had joined the discussion, spirits were raised and motivation heightened. Yet this situation was a one off, never something that I initiated for our individual project. This is when I realised that Aristotle was correct when he stated, the whole is more than a sum of its parts. Our research together would yield greater results by sharing and mixing, than individual ownership or curation.

So what did I learn from this?

It is now we, not me. Learn to balance your energy output:

When research is shared, challenged, taken apart and reworked as a group, it allows you to take a step back and review it on a new level. This process allows for the research to transform, indeed the final outcome will be produced to a higher level of work. In this setup of research stages, do not exhaust yourself in the first stage, because it will reduce the quality of group work and this is where the magic happens.

There is no ‘I’ in Ethnography:

Any individual can create a body of work, yet the quality produced is increased with the choice of good materials and instruments. In the case of ethnography, instruments take the form of your mind and body, your fellow researchers, your clients and participants. They must be attended to and maintained, in the form of relationships, communication and interaction. We must support others but also lean on them in our time of need, which will inevitably happen.

You will never know enough, but that’s okay:

The trick is not to master every skill in the book but to surround yourself with the right people. If you can decide what skill base will be needed for the project, then you are in a position to strategically choose who to work with, or ask advice to, this is how you will succeed.

A CLOSER (PERSONAL) LOOK

Part 1.

In stage 1, our individual project was focused on exploring the blogosphere, as Ethnography is the study of cultures in context, we had to take some of our research methods online. The three areas that developed into ‘problem’ areas were:

• How will we provide and create content for a public platform
• How will we observe participants in context
• How will we interact and maintain relationships with participants

(Fig. 4 ‘Problem areas’)

Our project became a journey of adapting and experimenting with the use of ethnographic methods for online practice. Roam compares qualitative researchers to aviators, he explains that they ‘are experts at guiding their aircraft by experience, instinct and intuition‘ (Roam, 2009, Pg. 114). If that is the case, for this project I was an inexperienced aviator that was flying blindfolded. I had all the usual instruments laid out in front of me, but I couldn’t identify them, I had to go by trial and error, in turn this delivered extreme highs, extreme lows and lots of turbulence.

So what happened?

We explored the space of digital ethnography, an influence to our working style was the work produced Michael Wesch. He explores online communities in a participatory fashion, this is detailed in his ‘An anthropological introduction to YouTube’, a YouTube video about his research of YouTube. Wesch discusses the information that people put up on the site, how they interact and what the space becomes, ‘It’s the most private space, but it is also possibly the most public space on the planet’ (Wesch, 2008).

His work with his students focused on observing by participating, each of the researchers went out as themselves and interacted in the space. In making yourself known for what you are, your work can aim to be transparent. This is a way of working that we tried mimic. Our public platform took the shape of a blog, titled ‘Blog watching with a purpose’,  it was part of the landscape we were exploring, it was accessible, it allowed us to share multi-media, and it was free.

What does this mean to me?

My interactions with blogs in the past has been consumption rather than production. This project challenged me to evaluate my position in the blogosphere, it was in fact during the analysis stage when I began to understand the mechanics of the blogosphere (Fig.5) that I felt the connection to producing content.

(Fig. 5 ‘Machinery of The Blogosphere’)

During the project, before the analysis stage, i found it hard to produce content and post it online. There were two problems that I faced, content and audience, the first, creating conent, is represented by Rebecca Roth (Poasm) a student of Michael wesch, and a new Vlogger.

For me the issue of content was the most significant block. With this project, Alicia and I, were wanting to explore transparent Ethnography, this would mean putting research findings on the blog as we went.

When you are doing work for a client:

• Can you post research online as you go?
• Can you produce it in your style, or should it conform to theirs?

These are examples of queries that were floating around my head during this period, unfortunately instead of confronting this issue, I shied away from producing any content at all. In retrospect, I should have approached my client instead of going to the default position of inaction.

So what did I learn? A lot as it happens.

Address your problems, with yourself and your client:

We can never know which is the right path to take, it is through asking and clarifying or trying things out, that we learn. It is through inaction that we make the same mistakes continuously, this route is unacceptable standard of behaviour.

Seek Critique, address your weakness:

Critique, it is a necessary evil. You should in fact seek critique from various audiences, this will give you insight and allow you to tweak or develop your work.

Balance your personal development with professional standards:

We will always have to learn on the job, though experimental work can yield exciting results, ultimately this should not compromise the standard of work that you produce for the client.

Part 2.

(Fig. 6 ‘The different shades of Ethics’)

In practicing and carrying out methods in these two areas above (fig.6 ), we hit upon the grey area of ethics several times.

So what happened?

When observing participants online we would take screenshots, scratch notes and bookmarks of videos, blogs, comments. This led us into the grey area of what is public and what is private online? What are you able to observe, analyse and reproduce as research?

Another quandary was in approaching potential participants, in our participant observation phase we found ourselves approaching individual bloggers. This was through commenting on their blog, emailing them directly, in one case contacting them on twitter. I discussed the twitter case in a blog entry here.

What does this mean to me?

The anxiety that I felt, in relation to ethics, was not in viewing content, in contacting individuals or taking private notes, it was in the reproduction of data from online sources. This was based in the uncertainty of what constitutes public and private data, and whether the context of use changes it’s status. This is an issue that is a recurring theme with other researchers, below (fig.7 ) is a snapshot of a thread in reply to a blog article titled, ‘How to do Digital Ethnography’, in which the topic is raised and a solution offered.

(Fig. 7 ‘A conversation about ethics’)

So what did I learn?

A lesser shade of Grey, is still Grey:

When everything is grey, it can be tempting to go for the lighter shade. Trust your instinct, if in doubt ask the opinion of someone you trust. If the doubt remains, don’t publish the work, something else will come up.

Ethics is essential, but the right one may not exist yet:

Ethics are a tricky yet important factor in ethnographic research, with the move to virtual and digital ethnographic methods, things will only get trickier. For the moment the best route is to trust your peers, or seek specialized advice, that is until ethics are updated to match current situations and technology.

State your intentions, and give a little:

There is a fine line between withholding your identity and purpose online, and lying. If you are want to participate in the culture, you should be yourself. This is especially true if you are wanting to form relationships, and a positive reputation. If on the flip side, you want one off encounters, some projects are short afterall, just make sure that you are not just taking, you got to give a little to0.

And in the end,

So in summary, there are many things that need to be developed, I have pinpointed several skills and personality traits vital to my own learning curve. They sit alongside other points that are in a state of flux, such as ethics and methods used in a digital or online settings. Personally I have to make sure I keep on reflecting on my own experiences and those of others. All the while remembering to take time out, connect with my peers, and ask for help or clarification when I need it.

Citations

Ellis, C. (2004). The Ethnographic I. Walnut creek, CA: Rowman & Littlefield .

Macauley, C. (2010, April 7). Fig.1 :2010 User Research Landscape Mapping Project. Retrieved April 10, 2010, from Ethnologik – Design Ethnography at the University of Dundee: http://www2.idl.dundee.ac.uk/desethno/external-partners/

Roam, D. (2009). The Back of the Napkin: Solving Problems and Selling Ideas with Pictures. London: Portfolio/Penguin.

Roth, R. (2007, March 10). An anthropohttp://www.youtube.com/user/thepoasm#p/u/20/jDAovt2lY4clogical introduction to YouTube . Retrieved April 10, 2010, from http://www.youtube.com/user/mwesch

Scott, K. (2009, July 21). How to DO Digital Ethnography. Retrieved April 10, 2010, from Digital Research blog: http://digitalresearchers.blogspot.com/2009/07/how-to-do-digital-ethnography.html

Shadoan, R. (2010, February 21). Our bodies are instruments. Retrieved February 24, 2010, from Ethnologik – Design Ethnography at the University of Dundee: http://www2.idl.dundee.ac.uk/desethno/blog/2010/02/21/our-bodies-are-our-instruments/

Wesch, M. (2008, July 26). An anthropological introduction to YouTube . Retrieved February 18, 2010, from http://www.youtube.com/user/mwesch

Audience: Catriona Macauley, Client,  lecturers, people interested in ethnographic methods

Page 1:

Page 2+ 3

Page 4

Webpage

Audience: client

This is an article in Wired, it is listing and comparing blogs on a scale of “lol” factor and popularity.

Analysing information design:

Audience:

The reader that wants to identify the blog and understand where it is located on the scale.

Title:

Grid:

Markers:

Text alignment: