Setting Social Norms

One of the larger cultural challenges we face presently is the loss of social norms, opening up the responsibility – and better yet, opportunity, for community organizers lovingly dictate how people show up for the benefit of much-needed deep human connection.

I’ve pointed out before that we’ve been living in an individualistic world for the past 50-60 years which, while it’s been beneficial in many ways, has also been taken to its extremes for deleterious effect. Dawn is breaking, and we can see on the horizon a more community-oriented world, the “me to we” movement that all the hipsters, hippies, and hackers are already living in. We have the opportunity, and responsibility, to pursue ventures that realize this vision. If you completely disagree, I invite you to not waste your time on the next few hundred words. Still with me? Let’s dive in.

In our escape from social institutions to prioritize more individualistic pursuits, it’s no question that we’ve lost the third place where we can find our community. What we also don’t pay enough attention to is we’ve also lost the channels through which to build deeper relationships – with each other, and to a lesser extent, ourselves. The moral ecologies we used to adopt would manifest themselves in many ways – how you show up, how to interact with each other, and a values framework that you can trust that everyone in the same community as you would at least be aware of. We could feel comfortable walking into a mosque, synagogue, or church anywhere in the world and having a generally good idea of how not to look like a fool. Put simply, it also gave us something to talk about. You could comfortably engage in conversation with another constituent and feel comfortable progressing to a deeper discussion.

We need something “bigger” than us to co-operate, and that can be provided by our faith, our employer, our nationality. To believe that we are being watched, or that there is some karmic balance sheet somewhere with our name on it, and it is on us to move it up and down by being a positive force. It was a binding agent for all of us.

We are all used to holding, defending, and promoting our opinions. Opinions don’t work when there is no common grounding amongst two people – both can be right in their own way. But by agreeing to the same underlying beliefs, and having the same language to express them, we can finally make progress. Companies do this by having values, but even then, values can be misconstrued and distorted when they come at the cost of the bottom line. I’ve been entangled in many intense discussions among colleagues, only to realize that we were arguing the same points, just in our own dialects.

At extremes, we see online interaction devolve into some of the most primal and savage behavior – you know it’s not that acceptable to shout racial epithets at a company standup, but apparently baring your genitalia to a stranger on ChatRoulette feels 👌🏼?

We could go in many different directions with this from here, but let me jump ahead. One of the fundamental root causes of our epidemic of loneliness is the inability of us to really connect at a deeper level. Put a bunch of us around a table and even if we know each other well, we kind of suck talking. We tend to stay superficial, on what seems acceptable to talk about. Small talk, the latest at work, silly things our kids have done, gossip.

The more structured the social interaction, the better.

I have yet to talk to someone who truly enjoyed the aimless Zoom happy hours, and hoped to return to them every week. Why? Beyond some of the technical challenges such as the inability to break off into side conversation or raise your voice to make sure everyone hear you – which some newer entrants are toying with – we don’t know what we can talk about.

Deep down, we are not independent entities with tenuous connections, we are nodes in a network, links in a web. And one of the fundamental requirements of networks is the interoperability of nodes. If one node can’t actually talk to one another, the network gets boring, real fast.

At work, it’s obvious to everyone the primary subjects to talk about. Even there, certain best practices to break through the veneer have been codified into rituals. Sit in most engineering teams’ daily standups, and the prompt “what’s blocking you?” can identify and solve problems that otherwise might fester under the surface. At Contactually, my prior company, a big part of our company retreats was dedicated to an open, guided, discussion around what we should start/stop/continue as a culture.

Talk to anyone who builds community – whether building a non-profit, bringing together teammates, or just hosting a dinner, and it’s just as nourishing for them as it is for their participants. And with that, “structure helps good parties, like restrictions help good design.” – Priya Parker. BTW, I get bonus points for only quoting Priya’s stand-out book once, I’m surprised I’m only recommended the book three times a week.

What does structure look like?

It can show up in the form of rules set on how to show up – no “work talk” or “covid talk,” or simply to put your phones away. It can also best be represented in the meat of the social activity itself – the topic to discuss, prompts prepared in advance, and sequence of who talks when. In The Most Human Human, Brian Christian notes that what we seek out are “footholds” in a conversation – little bits of personal information that open up the possibility to start a discussion and deepen a relationship.

We are story-driven beings, and the best conversations are the ones that evoke personal stories. Telling me where you live yields a fact. Telling a group why you live where you live brings up stories. Did you make the move to support your partners’ career? Were you looking for somewhere warm? Do you honestly lack a reason, and searching for a reason to live somewhere else? All of these are stories and open up the ability to peel back the onion further. And that’s what we all want – to see others and be seen.

I’ve had the opportunity to witness this many times. If you’re fortunate enough to attend one of Chris Schembra’s 7:47 Club dinners, you’ll find his experience on Broadway lends itself to the conversation being treated as a performance (yes, you can even get the run of show). Multiple people around the table having “a moment” during the conversation is all but guaranteed.

Attending one of Ben Michaelis’ and Charles Duhiggs’ “Off The Record” breakfasts demonstrated that a few simple prompts and some baseline rules can result in the quick evisceration of small talk, the revelation of multiplex relationships, and the initiation of deep connection.

Jayson Gaignard, the author of Mastermind Dinners, has shown that it’s not just about the structure of the event, but the commitments everyone is expected to make when showing up. With such diverse backgrounds coming together, establishing a miniature moral ecology, even as simplistic as “please don’t share what’s discussed here” can provide the foundation for people to feel safe enough to open up.

Irrational Labs has spent time researching this and found that applying Strong Rules to a conversation can yield a quantifiable increase in the number of connections made. That’s why they, Holstee, WNRS, and others have found that even a stack of question cards can change a social experience.

I’ve reflected on my own experiences – as much as I may be labeled an extroverted networker or connector, walking into an open room of people is a hellscape for me. But present me and others with facilitation and rules, such as Jillian’s Joy List Socials, and I’m much more at ease and open, as I find most others are.

I’ll sum up my learnings here.

A great social experience is made up not just by who is in the room, but the structure to the interaction.
As much as we may think we abhor structure, we find comfort in knowing how to act and can trust the host or facilitator.
Structure to a social interaction creates a temporary bubble in which participants can feel safe operating in a different – and hopefully more pro-social – way.
A structure can also guide the activity to achieve the desired social outcome – a discussion on company culture, the revelation of sub-surface concerns, or otherwise opening the kimono and learning about each other’s stories and interests.

The big hypothesis that my team is taking a leap on – how can technology lighten the load to establish better social norms? If this is indeed a “performance art” – rather than the creator performing it live every time, can they improve the lives of millions by writing a screenplay to be performed by others – potentially technology?