Needle, Meet Haystack

Let’s say that you’ve decided to launch a new website or business.  How many people from your social circle can you count on to support your new endeavor?  Using a bit of math, here’s what I came up with:

Not too long ago, I mentioned Dunbar’s Number, a theoretical proposition that states that one cannot maintain close, stable relationships with more than 150 people.  Any friends over that number will be assumed to be part of a collection or spam.  Dunbar’s Number will be the basis for this experiment.

So let’s say that you have 150 close friends, family members, and co-workers.  It doesn’t matter if you have more or less, but let’s use that number for the sake of this experiment.  Let’s say that you have twice as many friends as family members or co-workers (who get the extra person, since you can’t have half a person):

• Friends: 75
• Family: 37
• Co-workers: 38

Of your 150 contacts, there is a bell-curve (“normal”) distribution related to how interested they are in your life which in this case equates will help you out or promote something for you.  We will be using an eight-point scale on propensity to help, ranging from “no way in hell” to “without a doubt.”  So the percentages look like this (rounded to whole people):

• no way in hell 0.1% = 1 person
• probably not 2.1% = 3 people
• unlikely 13.6% = 20 people
• maybe (negative) 34.1% = 51 people
• maybe (positive) 34.1% = 51 people
• possibly 13.6% = 20 people
• probably 2.1%  = 3 people
• without a doubt 0.1% = 1 person

Distribution remains constant across all groups.

The proclivities for the groups will be based on an equal percentage distribution for all categories (higher percentages means that they are more likely to help, with numbers rounded to the nearest whole person):

• no way in hell 0% = 0 people
• probably not 14.3% = 0 people
• unlikely 28.6% = 6 people
• maybe (negative) 42.9% = 22 people
• maybe (positive) 57.2% = 29 people
• possibly 71.5% = 14 people
• probably 85.7%  = 3 people
• without a question 100% = 1 person

So this means that you should have the interest of 75 out of 150 people, or 50% of the people you ask.  So half of the people you ask won’t even click on the link to join your Facebook fan page or follow you on Twitter.  Using the same metrics, we can determine that 37 out of those 75 people will follow through to join the group or follow you, which equates to 25% of your social circle.

We will use the metrics* again to determine involvement (ie: people who check in on or interact with your product), and we find the following:

• 19 people (13% of your social group) will interact with your brand
• Of those 19 people, only 12 will do so at a frequency of weekly to monthly

And finally, if you subdivide the math again and assume that this time you are reducing the number to find the amount of people who will tell others about the product, promote it, and so on…

You’re left with 8 people.  10 at most.  That’s around 6% of your original 150 people.  Or, to put it another way, 4 friends, 2 family members and 2 co-workers (or, at most, 5, 2 and 3, respectively).

So what does this mean?

Whenever you plan to start a new business, publicize yourself, or try to find something to do within your own social group, you won’t have as many positive responses as you might expect.  Instead, look to groups or communities outside of your own who might be interested in what you have to offer – you should find greater returns than if you simply throw it out there for people to see and hope that they like it.

There are many marketing metrics and for cost resources that one can use to find these targeted groups.  But doing one’s own research into competing or similar fields, even on Google, should yield greater returns.  Anticipate who your target is, and you can find them and draw them in.

And who knows?  You might make some new friends.

*Truncated from this point on for brevity’s sake.

EDIT: I received no credit for working on this book anywhere in its contents, despite several chapters using my content exactly as I wrote it without changes in the final draft.  You can also see pictures of me demonstrating body language poses on pages 67 and 85.

I try my best to keep the specifics of my career out of the blog for legal reasons (aside from some stories and examples), but this is something that I want to share with you guys: Yesterday, my book was released in stores across the country.

Sort of.

Back when I was living in DC, I worked for a body language expert and helped research and develop content for her book.  I’ve been told by several people that “truth is the best defense to libel,” but out of respect for my former employer, I won’t disclose any more information.  I haven’t seen a copy of the book yet, so I don’t know what content made it in there, but I did contribute to a book that has now been published and is out for all the world to see.

It’s a weird feeling.

So if you enjoy the Body Language Basics series or are looking for an interesting read on lifestyle design (aka self-help and motivation), give it a read.

BIG BOLD LINK TO THE BOOK ON AMAZON*

*This is an unpaid endorsement. I don’t make anything off of the sale of this book

This past Sunday, I woke up at a time that no reasonable person* should be awake at on a Sunday morning: 8:00 AM.  Unable to return to sleep, I flipped through the channels, trying desperately to find something on the air to justify the early morning consciousness.  As I had seen all of the infomercials that were on at the time, I opted for some good ol’ church TV.  And what I saw was amazing.

Regardless of the station that I chose, the evangelists all seemed to be speaking in the same way.  Though they had distinct personalities and stories to share, there were many unifying characteristics that highlighted not only their similarities, but also some core skills that can make a good public speaker.

So, with the oft-quoted statistic that public speaking is the #1 fear in America (at least) in mind, here are some tips brought to you by early morning church TV shows:

• Use a compelling narrative. Many of the televangelists would start their sermons with a story before drifting off into other lessons or smaller stories, but would consistently reference their earlier stories.  In this way, they created a story and structure that was easy to follow and reinforced the points that they were trying to get across.
• Don’t be afraid to get physical. Televangelists will use a great deal of body language while telling their stories, making wild gestures and jumping around as necessary to provide a visual element for their audience, as well as a stronger nonverbal message.
• Create dynamic speaking patterns.  Whether it’s changes in inflection and intonation, a different pronunciation of several words or even rhyming, televangelists make sure to have an auditory presence that keeps their audience rapt with attention and interested for longer.
• Audience participation bridges the gap. Many televangelists are celebrities in their own right, speaking to audiences of hundreds or even thousands.  Some help to improve their images and seem more personable by using audience members a a cipher: they connect with these individuals on stage, which in turn makes the entire audience feel more connected to them.
• Break it down.  During their sermons, the televangelists rarely (if ever) used words that had more than three syllables.  Using simple language allowed them to be understood more clearly by their audiences and made their messages more accessible to viewers.
• Don’t be afraid to offer an opinion. Almost all of the televangelists were discussing the same piece of scripture, yet no two of them had the same perspective or lesson to share.

So the next time you find yourself awake at the absurd hour of 8:00 AM on a Sunday morning, take a few minutes to watch and listen to the televangelists.  You might learn how to make a better presentation.

* Unless you’re at work, in which case it’s your job that’s unreasonable.

I spent a good part of my day yesterday making chocolates.  Now before you judge, it just happens to be something that I do that relaxes me.  I don’t eat all (or even that many) of them, and I don’t have a girlfriend who I’m trying to fatten up.  I just make candy to make it and give to people.  And yes, you can see a picture of the peanut butter truffle bars, piña colada macadamia mounds and blueberry jellies that I assembled with my own two hands by clicking here (I’m really bad at making food porn; sorry).

The reason that I tell you this is because it is one of several hobbies and character traits that put me in a relatively new category of men: the domesticated bachelor.

Born out of the ashes of the (regrettable) Metrosexual movement, a domesticated bachelor is a dude who seems like he’s in a relationship even though he isn’t – he cooks, cleans, can dress and groom himself in a socially presentable way, and  is interested in activities usually reserved for couples (farmer’s markets, museums, brunch, etc).  This sounds like it goes in direct opposition to the definition put forth on The Domesticated Bachelor, but the number of guys in this group are on the rise.

Sure, we occasionally like lounging around in sweatpants, but who doesn’t?  Watching the game with friends is not mutually exclusive to having a beer gut or slopping around in old and ragged clothes.  We know how to cook more than just barbeque.  We can sort-of distinguish between wines.  Heck, you might see us unironically attending cooking classes.

The Domesticated Bachelor seems to be the male response to the hookup culture – a man developing the self-sufficient techniques and capabilities that used to be obtained through being in a relationship.  A domesticated bachelor has adapted all of the necessary skills and traits of a man who is in a relationship, only without having a girlfriend.  As a result, there can be a bit of a perception versus reality gap that occurs when we actually DO get ourselves involved romantically.

As gender roles continue to redefine themselves and the very structure of relationships begins to change, men and women find themselves becoming parts of new groups.  The Domesticated Bachelor is but one of the first.

If you haven’t looked around the blog lately, there have been a few changes organization-wise.

The categories have been completely redone to reflect the different areas that the posts fall in more specifically.  You can easily navigate between them using the drop-down menu at the top of the left column.  In a few weeks, a new page will be added for further accessibility.

The links page has been expanded to include many of the links that were on the old blog but do not fall into the “blogroll” category – you can find employment resources, other blogs and great time wasting pages at a click.

The NMH on the Web page contains links to everything from the blog’s Twitter and Facebook pages to email and RSS subscriptions and even the old site.

If you’re looking for a collection of posts that have been featured as guest posts on other blogs or as Brazen Careerist featured posts, check out the Notable Posts page.

And speaking of guest posts, did you read my guest posts from this week on Ophelia’s Webb and the Gen-Y Examiner?

Have a happy Valentine’s Day/Chinese New Year/Arizona and Oregon Admission Day/Anna Howard Shaw Day!

Have you ever walked into a place you’ve never been to and found yourself inside the platonic ideal of that sort of location?  Maybe you stumbled across the perfect grocery store, that’s laid out and stocked in the way you always imagined a grocery store should be.  Or you found a mall that seems to epitomize exactly what you perceive a mall should have.  It happens very rarely to any of us, but I was lucky enough to have one such experience recently: I found the Perfect Bar.

A friend and I were wandering around a “social nightlife” area when our attention was caught by what seemed to be a metric ton of neon beer signs.  Venturing closer, we discovered that this was indeed a bar, tucked off to the side and away from the more well-known clubs and lounges in the area.  And when we got in, it was nothing short of amazing.

The walls were littered with every conceivable item: sports plaques, old concert posters, wood carvings, original art, license plates, laminated dollar bills, neon signs and more.  Halloween masks, a ukulele and a fishing net hung from the ceiling.  To the right of the door, a little person tended a proportionately-sized bar, serving full-size drinks to patrons sitting on miniature barstools.  A jukebox in the corner played everything from Lionel Richie to Peaches.  The bar itself took up the entire back wall, bartenders pouring drinks out quickly to a steady crowd of regulars.

We saddled up to the bar and ordered.  A woman sitting nearby brandished a 2/3-full 22 ounce bottle of cheap beer, swinging it like a club.  It shattered on impact with the bar, and for a split-second, the venue fell into a hushed silence.  But then the bartender wiped off the shattered glass and spilt alcohol and gave her a new bottle.  Everyone cheered.

This is to say nothing of the other assorted devices and decorations around the bar.  It’s the unique form of controlled chaos that one rarely (if ever) encounters anymore: a proud dive bar that is fun by nothing more than its presence; the patrons only add to the ambiance.

So many people get dressed up to go out, stressing about the details of their appearance and personality.  They create stress for what should be a relaxing and fun time to unwind, creating a counter-intuitive cycle that only leads to buyer’s remorse over the entire evening.  It was refreshing to find a place that exists not for social status, preening or illusions of luxury, but just for fun.

Now, this may not be your idea of a perfect bar.  But if you’re ever lucky enough to find one that is, be thankful that you have.  Places like that don’t come around often.

How many of you use Craigslist?  Hold on a second – I’m not talking about the, ‘Oh, I’m looking for an apartment’ Craigslist.  I’m talking about ‘Gimme a h*** j** and I’ll give you a coffee table.’  Like that kind of Craigslist.  THAT’s Crisglist.  -Aziz Ansari

Oh my gosh you guys, Craigslist is the most amazing thing ever.  If you’re talking about the pinnacle of human achievement, the alpha and omega of culture and society as a whole, than you’ve GOTTA be talking about the ol’ CL (as the kids say).

I’ve bought a stereo on Craigslist.  I’ve sold furniture on Craigslist.  And when I’m feeling down, I turn to Craigslist fur the pure, unbridled joy that can only come from the schadenfreude found on the Personals page.

The best thing about the personals page on Craigslist is that unlike the classifieds pages of days gone by that Craigslist itself is modeled after, they permit longer messages.  This allows people to elaborate about themselves more, include pictures, misspell more words, create unintentionally funny messages and, perhaps most tellingly, shows an interesting phenomena in gender relations.

I call it the Assumption of Predisposed Intent.

Men write what they imagine a woman wants to hear, but from the perspective of a man.  Women do the inverse.  And the result is that most everyone sounds silly, creepy or desperate.  Because instead, the men and women should be writing as themselves.  This ties in with the lack of physical contact, which also explains some of the problems that can arise in online dating profiles.  But this is really a problem with the male and female brains.

For years, we’ve heard the cliches that all seem to boil down to the conceit that “men are stupid and women are crazy,” but that’s really overstating it on both sides.  They just have different opinions about what love and a relationship should be.  So what should happen is that the men should think like women, and the women should think like men.  So the guys need to change their writing to show more personality and less sex talk (preferably without shots of their junk), while the women need to be a bit more succinct in their word choice (and not write twenty paragraph essays on the guy they want to be with).  We need to re-wire our own brains in order to really connect with others on their own levels.  But this problem goes beyond singles posting on CL.

Whether it’s a job application, a memo, a presentation or even a conversation with a new friend, people don’t give enough consideration to their audience.  Sometimes, we say things that make others uncomfortable without knowing it, or are oblivious to nonverbal cues from others that could help us understand them better.  Whenever we talk or write to others, we have a tendency to choose our words and craft our sentences in a way that is pleasing to ourselves, not the audience.

So take the time to consider who you’ll be talking to.  Focus on them.  And then, if you’re really feeling up to it, send that post to “Missed Connections” so we can all see it.  Or sell your couch.  You know, whichever one you’re on the site for in the first place.

I submitted a story to Sharalyn Hartwel‘s  Gen-Y Dating Disasters Series, which was just posted today!  And as proof that it is indeed mine, I requested that my name not be anonymously attached.  After all, the best defense against libel is the truth.

So if you’ve ever wondered what the third-worst date in my life was like, check it out!

Alone on Valentine’s Day (via Gen-Y Examiner)

Information should be free, right?  We should be able to have access to all sorts of accumulated human knowledge because it benefits us as a society to have more educated people.  It’s a pretty solid concept, but there’s one problem: defining information.

The Great Napster Lawsuit of 2000 and the more recent Pirate Bay Keelhauling of 2009 only scratched the surface of the true issue that has been boiling under the surface of modern culture for almost 100 years:  is entertainment information, and if so, is it exempt from the rules of other information?

It wasn’t always this complicated; musicians and other artists were commissioned by the gentry to paint, write plays, create music, sculpt, tell stories and so on, most often about the employers themselves.  Much of it was work-for-hire, with the final result becoming the property of the paying party.  Occasionally, popular songs would be played by musicians at social gatherings, but there was no talk of royalties, percentage ownership, commissions or digital sales revenue.

But when the ability to record (and better preserve) entertainment was finally an option, something happened: celebrities.

Now, people all over the world could hear the same version of the same song, see the same movie and read the same book.  Shared experiences began sprouting in earnest, and trading cultural information became easier.  And those who provided the information (and entertainment) found themselves receiving more money and recognition than their forebears had ever dreamed.

But in order to properly recognize individuals’ contributions, laws and organizations were established to govern the flow (both cash and hard goods) of entertainment.  Similarly, when the Internet came into widespread use, new legislation and oversight had to be created to manage the information that people could find online.  Which is the can of worms that we’re now looking at.

Both Google and Wikipedia provide an unbelievably large store of cumulative knowledge, but consider this: most of the information contained on these sites used to be found in books, many of which required purchase.  Alternately, TV shows are now being sold on DVD, despite originating as a free (minus potential cable subscriptions) piece of entertainment.  So will the Internet (which already has service costs) develop anti-net neutrality practices and wind up more payment-based than it currently is?

Look at the blog model.  Most bloggers offer access to their sites (and the information contained within) for free.  Visitors can pop over to learn about any number of things from any number of websites.  The information is free and accessible.  But who pays for it?  Someone had to study and experiment in order to discover information on, say, body language, which cost time and money.  However, they do not have exclusive rights to the data – anyone can read and use (or even teach) it.  And with book reading on the decline, those who create new data and information streams can no longer rely on publishing to repay their costs.

We’re already starting to see the effect that free information is having on more traditional business models: eBook prices will rise, digital music downloads will cost more, and companies will restrict people from watching basic broadcast TV for free online.  This sort of makes sense – entertainment is a very profitable (and economically invaluable) industry.  But it seems that the cost of allowing entertainment (and information itself) to be cheap or free to consumers is getting too costly.

So enjoy access to the world wide web and all of the wonderful content that it holds.  While you can.

I can’t stop thinking.

When I was at a motivational seminar last week, I drifted away from paying attention to some of the speakers and wound up writing a list of over 60 potential post topics for the blog.

I went to a Thrash Metal concert recently and all I could think about was new business ideas for work.

When I’m scanning over my Twitter feed, I start to think of new mash-ups that I can make for my occasional DJ sets.

My brain is never where it’s supposed to be.

And yet somehow, when I sit down to work on a blog post, I get focused.  And that helps the rest of my day stay on track, whether I’m at work, running errands or working on various projects.  It’s become an essential part of my day and a vital component in who I am and how I function personally and professionally.

When I posted a few days ago about blogging every day, part of the reason that I do that right now is because it centers me.

Whether it’s going to the gym, talking with a friend, reading the news or even ordering the same coffee every morning from Starbucks, we all have our daily rituals that help us focus and be truly effective as people.

I know I don’t say this as often as I should, but thank you for reading and supporting my brain’s attempts to get back on track.