My Photo

About Beth Kanter

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Beth's Blog: Channels, Screencasts, and Videos

Awards, Nominations, and Board Memberships

May 2010

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
            1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31          

Categories

Site Tracking




  • This is my Google PageRankā„¢ - SmE Rank free service Powered by Scriptme


« Twestival: Are Fundraising Groundswells A Massive Opportunity or Distraction for Nonprofit Organizations? | Main | Riffing on David Armano's Listen, Learn, and Adapt: Need Your Organization's Adaption Stories! »

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8345159b069e201116844f169970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Power Law of Participation: How does it differ for collective charitable giving?:

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Stephen Downes

When a graph like that has no y axis, it is literally meaningless.

It is meant to suggest that to 'lead' is somehow different from, higher than or better than 'to network' - but based on what?

I would throw away this graph, and any inferences based on it.

Alex, aka SocialButterfly

Hmm...I don't know if I would call this graphic "final" in regards tot he x axis as I don't this engagement goes from A to B. I think there is a loop there that would bring it back to once someone is SO engaged and becomes a content creator, etc. then eventually they lead and others starting reading, etc. It's more cyclical.

Maxine Teller on MixtMedia a few months ago had a similiar graph posing a similiar question where I and some others jumped in with thoughts. But, I don't think anyone put together what a more flushed out graphic would look like...course, it's continually morphing, so I'm not sure any graphic will ever be "final." =) Thanks for the thoughts Beth!

The comments to this entry are closed.