Social Networking: Theories Theories: Social Networking

Goffman argue that individuals' performances are a representation of self. Individuals will often use their performances to create specific impressions in the minds of their audience. Online platforms make it possible for individuals to adorn different masks in different situations. This should, however, be done within the confines of rules and conventions that govern the environment. This text assesses how Goffman's argument affects organizations, and how it influences collaboration in teams.

Performances Online

Goffman explains that individuals' performances are a presentation of self (Bullingham & Vasconscelos, 2013). Individuals will, therefore, often use their performance to create specific impressions in the minds of others. When in front stage, an individual is conscious about being observed by an audience; as such, they will try to perform in line with the social norms and expectations of their audience (Bullingham & Vasconscelos, 2013). The same is not the case in a backstage environment, however, where there is no audience to impress. Face-to-face interactions are a form of front stage environment, where an individual, engaging physically with their audience is unable to mask or hide their real identities. In this case, the individual expresses exactly who they are (Bullingham & Vasconscelos, 2013). In online platforms such as Facebook, however, the physical detachment between the performer and their audience makes it relatively easy for them to adorn different masks in different situations. This essentially means that a performer is able to present themselves differently in online settings from who they are in real life (Bullingham & Vasconscelos, 2013).

It is possible for individuals to mask their identity cues (such as age, appearance, or gender) on online platforms, and to purposefully misrepresent these in such a way that they emphasize some qualities and conceal others. In other words, identity is typed into being in online platforms, and individuals are able to express multiple personae and hide their real identities. This essentially means that it is possible for individuals to separate their work performances in the real world from their online performances. In the physical world, they are just who they are; however, in the virtual world, they are able to post their best pictures, their best updates, their most charitable moments so that they look better, fitter, and stand out more than they do in real life.

This ability to 'change face' in online performances is allowed. What people do in their personal blogs, and on their social media profiles may have no effect on their work performance, and the organization as a whole if such actions are within the rules and conventions of the organization. However, the organization's reputation could suffer if individuals negate rules and conventions in their online performances (Bullingham & Vasconscelos, 2013; Keyes, 2013). For instance, organizations expect their employees to conduct themselves in an ethical manner both inside and outside the organization as a way of preserving the organization's positive image. When an employee posts racy photos and funny updates about club music, drugs, and other things that they do outside the workplace on their social media profiles, the organization's reputation suffers.

I encountered a recent news article where a police officer from the Medford Police Department made himself the subject of an internal affairs investigation for posting an 'inappropriate ' image on his personal social media profile. The image suggested that the nation needed to make peace with Muslims if it was to succeed in the war against terrorism. Questions have been raised as to whether or not the officer's employment ought to be affected by his personal post. I believe it should; for two major reasons. First, although the officer posted the image on his personal profile, it (the image) puts forth a negative perception about Muslims. The post, though posted on a personal platform, reflects his perceptions and beliefs, and casts doubt on his ability to maintain impartiality in his professional duties. Moreover, as a member of the police force, the officer is the face of the service. What he does in his personal life affects the public's perceptions about the police service. As such, he ought to ensure that he puts forth a positive image about himself, and consequently, the force in both his professional and personal lives.

This means that although individuals are allowed to 'change face'; in online performances, such performance ought not contradict their professional values

Part 2: Team Performances

Based on Goffman's metaphor, there is a difference between how individuals collaborate online vis-a-vis how they collaborate in face-to-face interactions. The difference draws from the fact that online interactions,...

Since individuals are allowed to emphasize their positive aspects and qualities on online platforms, they are able to improve their self-esteem (how they feel about themselves) and self-concept (how they see themselves). In their study seeking to assess the impact of viewing one's social media profile vs. looking at oneself in a mirror, Gonzales and Hancock (2011 as cited in Ellison, 2013) found the former to produce significant increases in self-esteem. The authors associated this finding with the fact that virtual platforms allow individuals to post only those aspects of themselves that they deem desirable -- this enables them to have higher levels of self-esteem and self appreciation. In a team setting self-esteem enables an individual to fit in, and to consequently collaborate and engage in effective knowledge-sharing with others. From this end, individuals are able to collaborate better on virtual settings than physically.
This may not, however, always be the case, especially if the group is affected by the sucker and free-rider problems. The sucker problem comes about when one or more individuals, often times the most able, are left to carry the bulk of the workload (Roberts & McInnerney, 2007). The free-rider problem, on the other hand, occurs when one or more group members do little or no work, thereby contributing almost nothing to the group's well-being (Roberts & McInnerney, 2007). The combination of the sucker and free-rider effects gives rise to a situation where some team members (the suckers) take over the project, while others (the free-riders) virtually disappear. This usually affects the group's ability to perform to its highest potential.

A group leader could take a number of actions to minimize the effects of this particular problem. First, they need to identify the suckers in the team. They could then hold confidential correspondence with these suckers, stressing the benefits of group work, and trying to make them understand that everyone in the group is likely to benefit from participation, as opposed to being supplied with finished work (Roberts & McInnerney, 2007).

Additionally, they need to develop an appropriate reward and punishment scheme for suckers and free riders respectively. Appropriate in this case means that they ought to be capable of influencing members' drive to participate in the group's well-being. Bonuses could, for instance, be offered to suckers, as free riders are given warnings. If the rewards are high enough, every group member will want to be a sucker, and the group is then likely to outperform its expectations. Likewise, if the punishment advanced to free riders is sufficiently significant, such as loss of their position in the organization, every employee will keep themselves from being regarded as a free-rider. In the end, the sucker and free-rider effects in the group are neutralized.

Another possible solution is to use subgroups, groups-within-groups (Roberts & McInnerney, 2007). Having small subgroups within the larger group would help to create a more equitable working environment as it would push the free-rider to work harder while ensuring that the sucker does not carry the work burden of the entire group (Roberts & McInnerney, 2007). Dealing with the sucker and free-rider effects would go a long way towards increasing the degree of collaboration and engagement among members in virtual groups. Consequently, it would ensure that members collaborate better in online groups than in face-to-face interactions.

On the other hand, since everyone is over representing themselves on online platforms, it is possible for an individual to develop inferiority complex, in which case they may not collaborate effectively with others. For instance, everyone puts forth their best and most positive performances on online platforms. Social comparison theory postulates that the social attractiveness of one's peers impacts perceptions of one's own social attractiveness (Ellison, 2013). An individual could, therefore, develop feelings of inadequacy or low self-esteem when they compare themselves to the self-promotional boasting of their team members on virtual platforms. This could in turn affect their ability to relate and collaborate with others in a team setting. This would, however, not be the case in face-to-face interactions, where people present themselves as they truly are, and are not able to conceal their negative aspects as they do in online settings.

Towards this end, one would conclude that individual performances could have both positive and negative effects on collaboration within teams.

Part 3: Relevant…