Stephen Downes On Blog Metrics

Stephen Downes summarized my post on Social Media Metrics and Measuring Blog Outcomes and added some commentary.  I agree with some of his points and disagree with others.

My post wasa riff on evaluating the effectiveness of blogs, and in particular, a set of metrics from Avinash Kaushik:

• "Raw Author Contribution (posts and words in post)
• Unique Blog Readers (content consumption - Unique Visitors and Feed Subscribers)
• Conversation Rate (measuring success in a social medium)
• Technorati "Authority" (measuring your impact on the world!)
• Cost (what!)
• Return on Investment (what's in it for you/your business)"

Stephen offers a snarky comment that I actually agree with:

Would this newsletter be twice as good if I wrote twice as many posts or wroite them twice as long? If I wrote about a more popular topic - educational policy, say - I would have more readers. Would that be better? Is Will Richardson better than me because he gets more comments? Am I better than you because I have a higher Technorati rank? Would it be better if I made money and spent less on my website?

I agree with you that it is meaningless to use the numbers to get into "mine is bigger than yours" comparisons to measure quality or popularity.  Some pr professionals agree.

Stephen goes on to say:

Measuring "your blog's outcome" is ridiculous. It's like measuring 'friendship'. measuring 'reflective moments'. As Beth Kanter says, "numbers and data alone are almost meaningless." I don't think they get a lot more meaningful even if you add them to qualitative data.

Yes, you can't measure friendship or reflective moments, just like in the nonprofit sector we can't measure world peace.   

With all due respect, I think you really missed the point about the usefulness of combining numbers with qualitative reflection on how to improve your blog. Whether you want to make money or educate people or just deepened your own learning -- setting some realistic benchmarks or goals, figuring out a way to determine if you reached them, and reflecting on why or why not - can lead to continuous improvements in the quality of your blog writing.

AND, if that leads to more readers, higher ranking, more subscribers, more comments - that's the icing on the cake!

Kathy Paine left an interesting comment on Kaushik's blog "you’re trying to engage employees or customers in a conversation, and improve your relationships, these metrics fall short."  I hope she will unpack that a bit more.

UPDATE:

Stephen responds to this post here.

My post yesterday on measuring your blog's success had generated some reaction, from the comments to Tony Karrer to Beth Kanter, who says I "missed the point' - "Whether you want to make money or educate people or just deepened your own learning -- setting some realistic benchmarks or goals, figuring out a way to determine if you reached them, and reflecting on why or why not - can lead to continuous improvements in the quality of your blog writing." One of my posts from earlier today constitutes part of a response - but also I want to point to Karrer's reasons for blogging - personal learning and network building. My point is that there is no quantitative indicator of successful personal learning or of a valuable network contact, and that any attempt at such will misrepresent what it is we actually value in learning or network contacts.

Comments

[Harold Jarche]

I agree with you in that the data are indicators, but must be looked in context. This works on a personal level but usually falls apart in an organisation where the numbers can take on a life of their own. Once you start measuring, there can be a tendency to only look at the numbers.

Yes, I look at my stats, but they sure don't drive what I write about. Sometimes they influence a re-write or where I put some information, so it's easier to find.

[David Brazeal]

Measuring "your blog's outcome" is ridiculous. It's like measuring 'friendship'. measuring 'reflective moments'. As Beth Kanter says, "numbers and data alone are almost meaningless." I don't think they get a lot more meaningful even if you add them to qualitative data.

We can't rate friendship numerically, but we most certainly measure it. It's why we use the term "best friend."

I'm all for blogging because of passion, but if you want anything from it other than personal fulfillment, it's a good idea to figure out whether you're doing the right things to achieve your goals. That's not stripping the heart or humanity out of blogging. It's simply recognizing that we may blog for reasons that allow us to set goals and measure our results -- sometimes using numbers.

[Catherine Carey]

Whew. This is tough on a Saturday morning. Weeds in by back garden, my City Farms plot, visiting a sick friend and buying coffee, gifts, bacon ends, etc. are calling me.

Stephen goes on to say:

Measuring "your blog's outcome" is ridiculous. It's like measuring 'friendship'. measuring 'reflective moments'.

In addition to "best friend" other words for 'friends' include:

Good friend
Fair weather friend
Old friend
Dear friend
Firend of the family
Instant connection
Love of my life
Confidant
Someone I know
Aquaintance

These 'friends' are not simply gradations of friendship. Though that may be one way to think of measuring. It seems to me that we make judgements about our relationships with people when we call them an acquaintance, a confidant or a dear friend. The relationship differs among the three.

Thus it is with blog outcomes and learning. If my blog is about making friends or putting information out in the world my outcomes differ from a blog that seeks to encourage commerce.

If a family friend calls and says I need you right now, I'd turn off the computer and go. If a fair weather friend calls with the same request, I'd say, "sorry, I've got stuff piled on me today."

Outcomes measures should be designed to help you make decision, choices and judgements.

Catherine

[Liz Strauss]

Hi Beth,
I think that paying attention to what's happening using both sides of our brain, using our heads and our hearts, is the way to go.

No, numbers to don't tell us about people or relationships, but they point out patterns and sometimes reveal information that we won't consider or even recognize if we don't use them.

Humans have a natural tendency to count what we care about and to disregard what we don't. Metrics help us -- if we let them -- to keep a balance on what else we might look at to be curious about.

Nothing is ever wrong with being curious. :)