Twitter: Pattern vs. Abstraction

Grid_2
Picasso_3musicians1921

Jaffe posted a query to the Twitterati this morning: ā€œdoes it make sense to write about Twitter in my book, "Join the Conversation" - do you think it has staying power?ā€

I say yes, Twitter has staying power. But Iā€™m not sure what kind yet.

Twitter is clearly easy to use. Itā€™s somewhat addictive. But is it truly useful?

My buddy Chris took one look at Twitter and said, ā€œI just donā€™t have the timeā€¦ā€ Thereā€™s enough on our plates keeping up with email, IM, Blogs and social networks. Let alone actually doing the work our clients and employers pay us for.

I see Twitterā€™s appeal, and thus its potential value, as a large pattern. The individual posts arenā€™t important. Itā€™s the sum of all those posts that add up to something cherished by communicators and marketers. Itā€™s the community on one hand, and itā€™s the output of the community, on the other.

But is that output ordered, or abstract? Does the 50,000-foot view of Twitter look sensible and logical, or a bit of a mess (with apologies to Pablo)?

Letā€™s say youā€™re a project manager. Youā€™d appreciate Twitterizing your entire team, so itā€™d be easy to keep up on the status of humans and their work. (But then, isnā€™t that what IM is for?) An organizational manager might appreciate being able to keep quick tabs on an overall mood, the ebb and flow of an organizationā€™s emotions. (But then, isnā€™t that what company picnics are for?)

Consider social networks. Or YouTube, for that matter. They were new once, too. Were we aware of their complete ā€œusefulnessā€ in the beta stage? (Are we even sure of their usefulness now?) Maybe the point is in the trying, in the experimenting, in the twittering.

We donā€™t know if Twitter has staying power yet, but weā€™ll never know if we donā€™t give Twitter the old college try.

tb