An MA Social Media academic study piece.
For context, research and history, please see the accompanying “Inclusion #FAIL” presentation at http://prezi.com/ifyj_hqqdcd7/
The example used in my presentation cites systemic failure and exploitation of social capital. The presentation highlights considerable opportunities for these failures to be rectified, building social capital and increased inclusion, economic and social gain. At the root of this highlighted incident are failures in planning and attention to detail, inclusion, cohesion, communication, understanding and accepted norms, duty and physical action.
In contrast, all of the above failings have been mentioned in the reading “In search of social capital” by Gordon Johnston and Janie Percy-Smith.
The lack of forward planning by key influential management is directly reflected as a failure in this instance, as suggested by “consensus around traditional values, duties and responsibilities” (Garmarnikow and Green, 1999:58-9). It was the element of non-performance of responsible action which initiated this systemic failure, leading to exploitation of social capital via networks established within social media communication platforms.
However, as the incident progressed, the exploitation of the social media communications, and failure to act within accepted norms led to further communication breakdowns. In reality, there were a team of six bloggers within easy physical speaking distance of the event organisers, any of whom could have alerted the awareness of possible problems by simply speaking out. This in itself is a good example of “lacks the level of minimal agreement about the meaning of the key operational concept to sustain meaningful debate and dialogue” (Johnston and Smith, 2002: 332).
Positively, the presented incident highlights examples of appropriate exploitation of social capital and networks via social media communication platforms. Both the complainant’s and respondent’s associated social media networks responded in a manner as appropriately demonstrating good use of social capital for both individual and group benefit. The support, coherent on-line communication, and subsequent cooperation demonstrated positive social capital values, as defined in “those features of social organisations, such as networks, norms and trust, that facilitate action and cooperation for mutual benefit” (Putnam, 1993:35-6).
By building upon the subsequent cohesive social capital evidenced by both the complainant and respondent, with careful communication and planning, the actions delivered by “strong formal and informal networks, contributing to shared norms and trusting social relationships” (Johnston and Smith, 2002: 331), it is suggested that a long-term positive outcome for all interested parties will be achieved. However, without physical human action, based in influences drawn from cohesive communication exchanges, understanding, negotiation, mutual trust and successful delivery of such, there is a possible danger that similar instances may occur again in the future.
A large part of the successful exploitation of social capital and transforming this into both economic and social gain, it is argued, cannot be delivered purely by utilising social media on-line platforms. In this instance, tangible, measurable and real action is required to further increase social capital and lead to an improved local cohesive society. This in turn can be exploited nationally, demonstrating that both the complainant and the respondent will have an opportunity to achieve even further mutually beneficial increases in social capital.
It is suggested that this will be evidenced in both quantitative and qualitative forms by both the individuals and organisations concerned, and subsequently, society as a whole. This will have a cyclical effect, building further and increased social capital, ergo social and economic gain.
If social capital has been identified as “a key element in tackling disadvantage” (Commission for Social Justice, 1997), the exploitation of techniques employed in communication via social media platforms should highlight this example as both a negative experience to learn from historically, and more positively, inform policy writers and decision makers of appropriate levels of attention to detail in social discourse, communication, action and adherence to successful delivery of increased social gain.