The formula for building influence

in OCD16 days ago

I am in a training session as an observer, which is always interesting as it allows me to see the delivery styles of other trainers, pick up new methods and note the kinds of things that I might also do, but are annoying or get in the way. I work for a software company and train various enduser groups on how to use or manage the client, with specific goals in mind and techniques employed to reach them. Understanding the purpose of the training is important in identifying what should be included and how it should be delivered.

OI001504 (1).jpg

Traveling a little further along this path, we can use purpose as the basis for the content we create on Hive and there are many different ways to approach content creation. For example, if writing some kind of user guide, it generally becomes a stand alone piece of content, that works on various assumption, for instance, the background information required.

A lot of people on Hive think "shorter is better" but this is going to make assumptions on the background of the audience too. A lot of people like to use lists and little phrases to explain larger topics, but is this the best way for someone to actually learn, or is it giving the feeling of learning? An easy demo I use for this at times is featuring the most famous equation of all.

E = mc²

I will make the assumption that all readers have seen this and many will know what each piece represents, but how many really know what it means? For a simple exercise, firstly think about what each letter means in the equation, secondly what it can be applied to and thirdly, apply it to find a solution to a problem.

How many people understand this "simple" equation well enough to practically apply it to their world at a practical level? So, how many people read the list of things to do, understand the words, have examples of ways it could be applied - but don't have the skill, knowledge or will to actually do it?

What is the purpose of getting information to an audience that is not enough for most of the audience to apply to their personal processes? This raises more questions about what is useful content, as while a post for example could be applied* if it doesn't actually get anyone to change their behaviors in some way, it has been ineffectual, uninfluential.

Influence. This is something we hear about a lot in the world today and we could use Elon Musk as a current example of an influential person. I have heard people say, "look at the influence one tweet can have over the market", but this fails to recognize the reality - it isn't the one tweet that has the influence, it is all of the information content that led to the person behind that tweet holding sway, so the one tweet could convey their message. If Elon Musk hadn't done all that he has done in the past, he can tweet all day and have no effect, because he would have no followers.

Each Tweet that goes out is like "E = mc²", a formula that carries the weighting of all of the knowledge that people have surrounding him and what he has done, positive and negative. If it was the content of the Tweet itself that was influential, everyone would be an "influencer" and it would be even messier than it is now. To be an influencer, requires building a track record, and that comes through consistent activity, often in a narrow field of information or behavior.

When it comes to posts on Hive, some people spend a lot of time developing posts, but far less time building influence. This often results in content comparisons that do not take into consideration the track record of the author. Someone who has built their account through the development of content, recognizes that while each individual piece is a part of the puzzle and important, it is the overall experience of the account that has value, as there is a consistent and continuous story that weaves through the account itself, usually, the personality of the author.

This means that regardless of the content topic, length or delivery, there is a familiarity with which to connect, a type of "logic" that gets applied to all content. This can be consistent even when different kinds of writing styles are applied and perhaps for some, when they read the same author enough, they develop a "voice" for the character that represents the author. This adds to the story of the account and makes it personal in many ways, as the audience is a creative force itself, as they build the narrative in their head.

When I am training the client software, I spend a lot of time on the logic, terminology and mindset behind it, as everything else is built atop these things. Once an enduser has a strong understanding of the logic and a few case examples, they are able to practically apply it to their further self-directed learning, as they have a base from which to push from, as well as hooks to hang what they have learned upon. This means that they flesh-out their own world in regards to the software, focusing on the points of interest and need that are relevant to them specifically.

I often get asked,

"How can you write so much and still have people engage"

Well, on average I not only get a fair bit of engagement, but the level and quality of engagement is also high, because there is something to actually interact with. Let's say I posted a single photo, no matter how great the photo is or how brilliant the technique is behind taking it, what is there to really engage with? To interact with the skill of the photographer and techniques, requires specialized understanding and a discerning eye and while people can appreciate the picture, it is unlikely to evoke more than a "nice pic" kind of comment from non-specialists or enthusiasts. Adding in a bit of background and context for the image is far more powerful as an engagement tool, because it gives more points of reference for a wider audience to build upon or query.

But, that isn't why I write longer posts, although it is a part of the reason. For me, the length of the post doesn't matter that much, but I look long on almost everything in my life, including the content I consume. If it doesn't bring value to me that improves me, there is no point and for the most part, a list doesn't cut it. For me to be able to have real control over my life, it isn't good enough to follow the right list of things to do, I have to be able to change the list as I need to, because we live in a dynamic world in continual flux.

As a consultant and as a parent, my job isn't to tell people what to do, it is to facilitate the building of the tools that allow them to self-direct and discover what works for them. The goal is to make myself obsolete. As a content creator however, the "obsolete" is a little bit different, because I am developing content that is relevant (usually) continuously in various ways and for a dynamic audience that is changing, from people who have read similar before and might be looking for something new, to people who have never come across a topic or me earlier.

For the "regulars", the new might not be about the topic directly, but it could be more related to some aspect of my life they have been following, for example the renovation of my house or the challenges with the bank loans. For the "new" reader, they may have no visibility on this aspect of my life at all, so look more from the perspective of the individual post, but as they read more and especially when they comment, we start to build a kind of relationship with various complexities, some where we interact directly, some where people have built an "impression" of me that becomes their mental representation. Many people picture me as taller than I am, yet what gives them that visualization?

I have never said I am tall, yet through the content I have written, people tend to make various assumptions based on their feelings about the content. One aspect of that is probably tied to the sense of authority or applied influence, where there is a stereotyping and characterization of that feeling. the reason people might attribute me some kind of informational authority is not because I force them to or tell them to, it is because I have built a reputation on the platform that goes far beyond the silly number next to my name.

The reputation isn't all positive either, as there are plenty of people who dislike me here for various reasons, mostly because they have "imagined" some kind of slight I have caused them, where they haven't agreed with what I have said or often, that they compare their results to my own and think I am undeserving. For those who do actually have influence in some way, they will know that a significant portion of people are going to dislike what is said. However, being disliked doesn't mean the content has merit, which can be seen by those who are disliked by many because they are unlikable people who do not offer much value, leaving them without influence. They won't think this way though, as they believe what they have to say is important, because it is important to them.

I think the content that we create should be important enough to us as content creators that we care to put effort into it, but this in itself doesn't necessarily mean it is valuable to others. For that to happen, the audience has to come across the content, consume the content and then, feel that it was worth their time and effort. This is easier said than done as a content creator who is looking to build a presence that spans across a long timeframe, because people's attention spans are short and most have been led to believe that quantity over quality matters.

You see, what many don't seem to realize when they are consuming short and complaining about long is they don't realize that the time they spend consuming is likely longer with the short content as it feeds this little dopamine kick of getting something "new", even though they didn't get enough out of it to act upon it. This is great for driving higher consumption and marketing products, but has very little value in building the skills and knowledge required to have personal value.

If it is all about how much information can be consumed, Google wins. However, the marketable value for an individual is what they are able to practically do with that information and if the information and the skills are easy to obtain, there is very little value in it for the individual, as there is an over supply or a very low barrier of entry into the topic. The skills that are actually valued in the skill marketplace however, are the ones that are practical and hard to come by, so that specialists are required. Stacking a supermarket shelf isn't a high barrier job, writing the code for inventory software is, because of the time and effort it takes to learn and, the types of skills required to effectively do it.

Almost without variation, things of value take time to learn, whether it be how to write well, move well, speak well, jump well, dance well or *consume well - as well as a million other skill areas. Most people can speak and move, but it doesn't mean they are master speaker or top athlete material. It takes time to master something, but in a world of quick content and rush for low-grade result to get the dopamine hit, those willing to master something is a shrinking pool, which makes those who do it an increasingly scarce resource. If what they master is seen as a valuable skill, they themselves become valuable.

The internet is absolutely jam-packed with low value content because it is consume only, not actionable. There is value in this, but that value is for the platforms that position it as valuable. Instagram is full of selfies and travelbloggers, Twitter full of trolls and shillers and Facebook is full of people spying on the daily lives of others - but where is the real value for the audience, what is being learned and is the life of the consumer any better off?

In my opinion, so much of the content now is directed to keep people preoccupied so that they don't learn anything of value. It is entertainment that holds most of us back from focusing out attention on more important things and more importantly, ensuring that we are unable to reach anywhere near our potential. The people that create the content don't care much as to whether people are improved by it, as long as they get some popularity, some money, some influence - even if that influence is as a managed tool, designed and deployed to enslave others in a flood of inapplicable content.

Design your own purpose, or be a slave to someone else's formula.
Everyone has influence over their world.

Taraz
[ Gen1: Hive ]

Sort:  

Skimmed it. Needs more pictures, but not of leaves. 2 stars. Wouldn't recommend.

We appreciate your feedback and will try harder in the future.

Another excellent and insightful commentary. I'm beginning to really enjoy having found your work to add to my follow list.

At one point you use the phrase "a type of "logic" that gets applied to all content". Being a philosopher by training and understanding that logic is not subjective but an objective system of rules for determining the veracity of arguments, could you explain what you intended by 'type of logic'?

I whole heartedly agree with your closing paragraph. That state of affairs is exactly how the world works today and the reasoning is precisely as you point out, enslaving the masses to the whims and profit ambitions of a select few. This is exactly the reason I joined Hive, to try and combat the manipulation through the one thing I'm particularly good at...helping others to discover understanding and a broader perspective.

A key struggle I am trying to figure out is how to get content well viewed without having to constantly repost work. Maybe I'm not getting how Hive as a form of social media really works but my concern is that key concepts that are crucial for potential audience understanding get lost over time as I progress in posting new content. I would greatly enjoy your perspective on this.

My intent is to create a community that can discuss/debate critical issues and fundamental principles in a real time manner and act as a 'think tank' that generates functional ideas which can in turn become working projects that allow us all to participate in proactive movement towards real progress. In other words leverage systems such as the Hive Ecosystem to educate, create, organize, promote action and even provide financial bootstrapping.

I suspect you are one who would enjoy participating in such a project and your work so far tells me you would be an invaluable resource to it.

Thanks for the work you do.
Blessed be.

could you explain what you intended by 'type of logic'

Yeah, I can add a bit more. What I mean by this is the pattern of behavior that is unique to the author and flows through the content. I am loose with my terminology (hence the "quotes") but from the definition, there are two types

  • reasoning conducted or assessed according to strict principles of validity.
    "experience is a better guide to this than deductive logic"
  • a system or set of principles underlying the arrangements of elements in a computer or electronic device so as to perform a specified task.

You mention and use the first, I am applying the second to human behavior - in this case, perhaps more personality. We are all conditioned and act in pretty uniform ways and are quite predictable, once decoded. I think most people don't actually know themselves very well, which is why we are so easily manipulated by algorithms designed to hijack our code - making us slaves.

This is exactly the reason I joined Hive, to try and combat the manipulation through the one thing I'm particularly good at...helping others to discover understanding and a broader perspective.

It makes for a valuable purpose and life and on Hive, the value comes in many forms.

A key struggle I am trying to figure out is how to get content well viewed without having to constantly repost work.

It is a challenge for everyone, including me. The only advice I can really give in this area is that it is about building lasting relationships in the community with those who value what you do. Slowly, the network grows and more people join the conversation. What you will also find is that the most engaged accounts are those who have built a persona of some kind around themselves. They might not be known IRL, but they are consistent.

One of the problems with the system is that old content is pretty much dead, even if it is still valuable. There are ways this can change in the future, but it is what it is for now.

In other words leverage systems such as the Hive Ecosystem to educate, create, organize, promote action and even provide financial bootstrapping.

It is worth exploring the various communities and seeing what is adjacent as well, as there might be people to connect with that will help you on your way. What will rally underpin Hive is a lot of niche communities that get support from people who are using several communities to add to and consume from. There needs to be a lot of consumers of course, but that takes time as it is more valuable to create here, even if not creating much of value.

Thanks for the feedback. You are correct in that I do use the proper definition of logic. At the same time Theory of Mind is an area of particular interest to my philosophical endeavors and there can be no doubt that non-rational elements are a fundamental part of human nature. It is manipulation of these elements that allow the 'users' to shackle others to their ambitions. Fortunately it is also possible to use the same tactics in conjunction with logic and reason to combat such practices.

and there can be no doubt that non-rational elements are a fundamental part of human nature.

We all act rationally, until we step outside of ourselves and look at it objectively.

Fortunately it is also possible to use the same tactics in conjunction with logic and reason to combat such practices.

To be able to use the skills well, requires emotional control, something that has been eroded in society for decades.

I have to disagree with your first statement here, primarily because I agree wholly with your second one.

Rational action only happens when one uses logic and critical reasoning in decision making and as we have agreed before this seldom happens now. The most powerful tools the manipulators have is their ability to get others to 'think' emotionally. This is how they have 'enslaved' so many and as you point out this process has been happening for decades and has a significant portion of the general population enthralled.

When I pointed out that there are undeniable non-rational elements as part of human nature it was my intent to imply that these are what get manipulated. Emotion, when allowed to influence decision making, makes the process irrational. The best value of emotion is it's ability to take thought/ideas and convert them into action. I like to phrase this, "Thought without emotion is impotent however thought derived through emotion is irrational and easily manipulated by others".

This is an article that was written after proper thinking.

Integrity and consistency is one thing I know that drives influence.

If you are known for being a profit maker and over time you have proven yourself, you will have some influence.

This is also why Warren has a lot of influence in the game of investing compared to anyone for now.

I was told by an influential doctor here in my country that influence comes from the people you are surrounded by and what those people think of you.

Recommendation and networking also contributes to it

I was told by an influential doctor here in my country that influence comes from the people you are surrounded by and what those people think of you.

It is also why people should pick their peers well. If they don't improve you, what is the point? And, if you don't improve them, why would they stay?

They won't think this way though, as they believe what they have to say is important, because it is important to them.

Haha well, I don't think I've come across the first person who doesn't think this way yet. Anyone who manifests and expresses himself from a public tribune or platform will invariably is always gonna think that what they have to say is really important to others.

The people that create the content don't care much as to whether people are improved by it, as long as they get some popularity, some money, some influence - even if that influence is as a managed tool

For that to happen, the audience has to come across the content, consume the content and then, feel that it was worth their time and effort.

Haha well, I don't think I've come across the first person who doesn't think this way yet. Anyone who manifests and expresses himself from a public tribune or platform will invariably is always gonna think that what they have to say is really important to others.

Yes - regardless of the feedback (or lack of feedback) from the audience. So many people scream into the void, but don't listen for the echo. If they did, many would hear the roar of silence.

Relevancy in a disposable world is hard to hold, unless one makes themselves worth keeping.

Feedback yeah. Feedback is only valuable if it actually challenge what has been stated and said. Otherwise it's just useless white noise bouncing back & forth through the walls where that echo comes from in inmodificated response to the initial noise that originated it..

Relevancy in a disposable world is hard to hold, unless one makes themselves worth keeping.

That's right, everything is indeed disposable in this technological world. Not even the most ingrained and deeply rooted scientific theories that have been maintained as absolute truths for centuries will be able to retain their relevance to be worth keeping.

So, Relevancy... ¿relevancy what? ¿for how long?

Feedback is only valuable if it actually challenge what has been stated and said. Otherwise it's just useless white noise bouncing back & forth through the walls where that echo comes from in inmodificated response to the initial noise that originated it..

Not necessarily. Encouragement is feedback too and can be vital for people to make another attempt. It is probably only when a person already has a certain level of proficiency in a particular skill, that critical feedback has positive affects. Some people do not seem to be able to do anything other than criticize though, as they have little sensitivity to the bigger picture, the greater story, so see the damage they do as helpful. It is another delusion, while they think they are "keeping it real".

Relevancy always has a time limit, especially when it comes to human concerns.

Not necessarily. Encouragement is feedback too and can be vital for people to make another attempt.

Yeah, I somewhat could agree with that. For those still too "green" who actually needs such encouragement as vital to make another attempt.

It is probably only when a person already has a certain level of proficiency in a particular skill, that critical feedback has positive affects.

Well, on this one, I somewhat would concur with you stronger now. :)

Some people do not seem to be able to do anything other than criticize though, as they have little sensitivity to the bigger picture, the greater story, so see the damage they do as helpful. It is another delusion, while they think they are "keeping it real".

In my opinion, they would only harm and would do some necessary mildy damage to the weak and frail. The older we get, the less time, tolerance and patience we have to go with pointless sensitivities, ineffectual rodeos and useless diplomacies to "keep it real"

Relevancy always has a time limit, especially when it comes to human concerns.

This time, I do agree with you absolutely.

You might have an opinion on this one based on your work...have you heard of the Dale Carnegie classes by chance? If so, what's your opinion on it? Just curious, as I'm dealing with it for the company I work for, and I have some opinions about it of my own - lol - thx!

I have never come directly across them. The only thing I know of Dalen Carnegie is the book "how to win friends and influence people" which while dated (I haven't read it since I was 15), still has a lot of relevance at its core - funny considering it is 100 years old.

Yeah, it's pretty dated (lots of Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, and Christ examples), but the core of it is logical. I mean, Charlie Manson was a big fan, so it can be that bad, right ?;)

I mean, Charlie Manson was a big fan, so it can be that bad, right ?;)

Does that qualify as "Proof of Work" ?

Definitely, old school style!

The fact that the main influencers at the time were certain characters of the show business, critics of that sector, mass media, TV, etc., is a tip to reach a sector that has chosen them as icons for that reason: for being figures that are continuously exhibited in social networks and other media. Not for the quality of their content or their statements.

On the other hand there are the reviews on websites and blogs (paid obviously) that limit the objectivity of the judgment on a certain product.

Yesterday I happened to receive a request from a software house to review their Internet Security product. Obviously it must be a positive opinion. That's what they pay for. I am seriously thinking about accepting it or less. Maybe I will do it because the product is interesting. But tell the truth.

I mean, I don't see it wrong for certain figures to be influencers. What I see wrong is that their opinion is totally vitiated.

Greetings @tarazkp, nice topic to debate.

The fact that the main influencers at the time were certain characters of the show business, critics of that sector, mass media, TV, etc.,

In 2019 (I think) Ronaldo made 3x as much (60 million) from Instagram, than from playing football. However, he wouldn't be able to do that unless he played football well first. It isn't always the case, but normally the real influencers are the ones who have years of work under their belt first.

At least you will get paid for the review - most of the social proofing is done for free through shares of products most sharers haven't used.

There have always been influencers in society - for better and worse. We all influence others through our actions too, for better and worse and often in unseen ways that we never intended. As the saying goes, no man is an island and that applies to all kinds of interactions.

You say many truths and interesting things in this post, I am new to Hive and am in the process of understanding its dynamics and how to position myself in this medium. It is difficult, I have been sharpening my skills of perception, understanding and analysis to determine what to do not to deviate from my roots and personal and professional values but at the same time generate content that meets the expectations of others, but that has my brand, my personal stamp that professionally forged me a successful career. I love to read in your writing words related to quality, self-direction, reputation, among others, that sometimes I do not perceive or I am not yet ready to perceive it in many posts, of course there are others that I consider excellent. I agree with you about our affirmation in the contents, although we write to capture an audience (readers or followers) it seems to me that above all this is our affirmation (I reiterate). I always believe that regardless of the size of what is written if it is meaningful, timely and relevant it will capture people's attention, if they get to see it. In short I think I am objective at least from my logic, when I tell you that your post is one of the best I have read. Greetings, successes and blessings.

A lot of the attraction I have to content and by extension the people behind the content, is authenticity. I think I can feel when people's hearts aren't in it, when they are just doing it because they want a payout. When people love what they do, it tends to shine through their content.

Being authentic also has another value. If the attention and rewards don't come, at least you have the value of doing something you enjoy, well for yourself.

From my very own twisted point of view, I have a simpler method to evaluate authenticity. As long as people don't behave as a brainless social weathercock at any point, more authentic they will look to me.

Congratulations @tarazkp! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :

You received more than 176000 HP as payout for your posts and comments.
Your next payout target is 178000 HP.
The unit is Hive Power equivalent because your rewards can be split into HP and HBD

You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word STOP

Check out the last post from @hivebuzz:

Feedback from the June 1st Hive Power Up Day
Loading...