Hmmmm.....your question is a bit more complicated than you might think. Let me explain:
Average Minutes to First Reply, our best practice is indeed <1200, and the average that we saw across all of our communities (in August 2017, when this was last measured, which was a long process) was 1791 minutes. So this data is pretty clean and simple to understand. I could probably expound upon a few things that I do take umbrage with around the nature of this metric, but I'll save that for another time. 🙂
'Topics with First Replies' is not really a metric I understand, but I think I understand the spirit of the metric. I think it means that 75% of the Topics have at least one Reply, or conversely, that 25% of the topics have no Reply. We have historically had the metric, "Threads with no reply", which can be a bit of a maddening metric for a number of reasons. Not the least of which is that there will almost always be at least one Topic on a Community with zero Replies, or to be even more pedantic, there will almost always be at least one Topic on a Community that does not have a Reply during the time in which the measurement exercise takes place. Our best practice is that 70% of the Topics at any given time have at least one Reply. The reality is that (again, measured in August of 2017) that our communities averaged 41%. Ugh. Sad but true.
I like that you have a big fat red question mark with representing the Topics to Accepted Solutions ratio. We have not always been as good with quantifying that best practice as we could be. Conventional wisdom has been that a successful support-oriented Community should have a 'Resolution Rate' of between 20%-40%, but 'Resolution Rate' does not always nicely and mathematically correlate to the Accepted Solutions to Topics ratio.
Inevitably when you try to measure this ratio on a mass-level, you run up against the fact that not every Board and Topic (even for Support-oriented Communities) within our customer portfolio is looking for an Accepted Solution. So instead of trying to track down this ratio across are customers or even put our foot down and say it should be XYZ%, we throw our lot in with the study I cited earlier (which is platform-agnostic, btw) and say that the Resolution Rate should be between 20% - 40%. How do you measure Resolution Rate? You use our Value Analytics survey or run your own that asks the question, 'Did you find the answer you were looking for'.
Average Minutes to Accepted Solution is a wonderful metric because it can certainly be used to contrast the classic SLA that a brand might offer their customers. You can find how to get yours here. Sadly, Khoros has not run a benchmark on this (that I know of). We probably should though. Although I imagine that if the 'Minutes to First Reply' metric gets a little murky in terms of how to tightly quantify it to everybody's liking then 'Minutes to first Solution' will even more of a roller-coaster ride (what happens when there are two Solutions in a Topic and one is substantially better than another, or what happens when a Community has lots of great answers but is poor at marking them as such?).
Hope all of this helps.
... View more
If I may, I would like to suggest that you enable the Value Analytics survey tool in our Community software. It asks just the right questions that align with the classic 'Contact Deflection' formula. Furthermore, it the survey tool can be configured to survey all users or just those that are authenticated, so your pool of respondents can be ever-so-slightly customized in that respect. Oh, and you can also set it up so it only 'pops' on certain sections of the Community, or you can have it 'pop' Community-wide if that is your preference. Last but not least, our Value Analytics survey has the virtue of feeding its data / results directly into the Community metrics engine, so that is pretty convenient also.
But I have not really talked about metrics, have I? There are three metrics that need to be taken into consideration when judging contact deflection, and they are:
Accepted Solution Views
But my main issue with every single simple or complex formula that uses these metrics is that it does NOT contain a simple thing that the survey DOES contain, and that is a 'Control Question'. To wit, the survey asks, "If you had not received your answer on the Community, where would you have gone next to find it" (or something to that effect). This question thus takes into account what kind of Users typically use your community. If you have a bunch of 16 year old kids that would rather crawl off to crazy parts of the internet to find the solution to their problem rather than calling or emailing you, then that needs to be taken into account. On the other hand, if your community is made up of very nice elderly people that love to hop on the phone at the drop of hat, then it is likely that they would have contacted your Support team if they had not received their answer.
You can use all the metrics math in the world to arrive at an answer, but sometimes the most simple solution is to just ask the person who will give you the answer (i.e. - Occams Razor). It is no small comfort that both Forrester Research and the Technology Services Industry Association (TSIA) have reached the same conclusion:
http 😕 /tsia.com/documents/ Measuring_the_ROI_of_ SelfService/
https 😕 /www.forrester.com/The+ ROI+Of+Online+Customer+ Service+Communities/fulltext/- /E-RES48002?docid=48002
But in the absence of running the survey, you can get really clever (and use an arduous path) with an alternative method. This path, however, does require that you at least have Single Sign On (SSO), and becomes even easier if you have CRM connection with the Community. It goes like this:
Get a read-out of all the people that logged into the Community in the last 3 months (their email, customer ID, or something like that) and then reconcile that list with all the people that opened Support tickets during the same time. There is a fair amount of slicing and dicing required with this methodology, and it also rests on the assumption that the unique identifiers for a Community Member are identical to the unique identifiers used in your CRM system. But, it is a pretty darned thorough way of tracking how the Community may be deflecting 'direct deflections' from authenticated users.
A weakness of the above methodology is that it does not take into account the perhaps substantially larger audience that got their answer from the Community but never logged-in to get it / see it. So in that respect, it does not take into account the passive Community Members that got the answer to their question(s) and thus constitute what are called 'indirect deflections'.
I hope this helps.
... View more
The Lithosphere: Through an Employee’s Eyes
I have always been a fanatical user of message boards, with my deepest interest in them as an internet cultural fixture happening in the late 1990s. Taking a job with Lithium in late 2006 made perfect sense as it allowed me an exciting opportunity to passionately coach both Community Managers and business stakeholders on how to use Community as a business solution.
Over 12 years ago, having a community here at Lithium was an obligatory afterthought. After all, how could we call ourselves a Community company when we did not have a Community ourselves? The extremely small Lithium team back then (less than 20 people!) launched a legitimate Lithium community instance early in 2006. After a few months, there were only a handful of posts in our forums and a few blog articles from of our leadership when I walked through the door later that year. Candidly, we launched our very own community instance too early! From its inception, Lithium worked with huge brands, and so their huge communities were wildly successful. Businesses with smaller audiences need to be very cautious around community endeavors (a best practice that we still caution potential customers with every day). Unrealistic audience size projections as well as poor promotion are the two most common reasons for Community failure.
Call it the result of hasty enthusiasm of our little company back then in 2006, but our initial community instance failed to ignite. We had not reached a level in our B2B high-tech business to supply a large enough audience for a community to be successful. Fortunately, our business grew over the next two years, and with it, so did our potential to have a thriving community.
There was a colossal amount of work to be done back then for our company, and we all wore many hats as we were still a small, bootstrapped startup that wanted to cast a big shadow. Our community instance that had began in 2006 had no named business stakeholder, no Community Manager, and no real business objectives before it morphed into the Lithosphere as we know it in 2008. One could say that for 2 years we labored simply to help Lithium the company grow into the oversized shoes that were the beginnings of the Lithosphere Community.
We had folks like @AdamA and @DougS join the company on the developer side during that time. We had @KrisS join our moderation team too (he has subsequently gone on to become an absolute ace on our support team). @AdamN had been one of the earliest contractors and moderators at Lithium going back to the early 2000s. He has since became extremely active on the Lithosphere, especially once he got a degree in Computer Science and became a full time employee working as an engineer within our services team. Adam was the first person to reach 200 Accepted Solutions.
@RobbL was the first Lithium Customer Success Manager (CSM) in 2005 and my first manager here at Lithium. You can now find Robb sitting on a beach enjoying retirement, but he’ll occasionally resurface to do some contracting work for us in the training and education department. There are so many others that came along from 2007 through 2008 that are part of the Lithosphere’s story too. It is a shame that I cannot name them all. What cannot escape being noted though is how there were a select few of us that desperately wanted our small community to turn into something more to serve our customers, as we now had a potential audience size to make a community really live and breathe. Of course, to make that happen we needed some internal governance and direction to get us there.
First, Marketing stepped-up with a budget for redesigning the old 2006 Community instance and coordinated with an agency for a design. Kudos have to be given to a former member of our Marketing team. One of the hardest working people ever to grace the halls of Lithium, Ei-Lun Yokomizo. She left Lithium a few years ago to help raise two beautiful kids with one of Lithium’s founders, Kirk Yokomizo. Lithium <3’s the Yokomizo family!
Ei-Lun was instrumental in coordinating the launch of the Lithosphere as we know it, but I have to also give a lot of credit to our first Lithosphere Community Manager, Scott Dodds. Scott had come out of our Lithium CSM academy that @RobbL had put together, and with help from our former Chief Community Officer, Joe Cothrel, Scott evolved into leading a new Best Practices team. Who better to be a Community Manager of Lithium’s newly reborn community than a Best Practices team leader? That was Scott, for sure! He has since gone on to apply his Community expertise to other companies and remains a friend to many of us who are still here at Lithium a decade later.
The idea of finally getting to use our very own Lithium community instance as a showcase B2B high-tech business solution immediately gained traction with Lithium’s customers. All eyes were on our Community to see what the company that sold them this business solution could and would do with this tool. In parallel, an internal rallying cry started. Lithium’s Engineering, Customer Success, and Support team members joined in on building and iterating upon the community too. However, with all this enthusiasm of both customers and employees alike, we were still missing something. If our community was to be (re)christened with a new look and real operational ownership, it needed a name!
The committee charged with the (re)launch consisted of Ei-Lun, Scott, and myself. We put our heads together, collaborated with a few other passionate employees via an internal naming contest and landed on “Lithosphere” ( as an aside, credit should be given to @TashinaK for coming up with the actual ‘Lithosphere’ name as an entry in our naming contest that was subsequently chosen as the victo r). Our Lithium 2006 community instance was officially (re)launched with the new Lithosphere name in 2008. The somewhat musty community instance that had been idling slowly down the road since 2006 got a UI redesign, received real operational ownership within our company, and was bequeathed the requisite best practices of proper promotion and user guidelines. A new infusion of users (our very own Lithium customers!) moved in quickly to participate. It was truly a EUREKA moment for our company.
I was 2+ years into my Lithium journey in 2008, and my obsession with getting customers help now had a new vehicle. Prior to the Lithosphere (re)launch, I had spent most of my days fielding emails from both customers and fellow employees alike about best practices and the innards of our technology. If the questions (and my incredibly thorough) answers via the email medium did not contain sensitive information, then why weren’t these email dialogues not happening on our community? The shelf life of an information-dense email is very short — and these conversations seemed better suited to live in the Community. So I did something very bold. I started replying in email, to both Lithium’s customers and my fellow employees alike, with the same response whenever they would ask me a question. I would tell them, “ ask me on the community, and I will answer you there. ” Initially, I received some pushback from people I was corresponding with when I dropped that line on them, but I continued to enforce this new way of communicating with me.
Like so many others who have participated and/or sponsored community initiatives, I wanted our community to help mitigate everybody’s heavy reliance on email when collaborating to solve problems. So many customers and Lithium employees would complain to me about not being able to find the prior emails I had written them with extremely thorough answers to their questions, so why not have my dense content be available in a more centralized place? Why was I answering the same questions over and over via email? I have asked so many of our customers and Lithium employees to join me on my Lithosphere journey over the years. I thank you all that have ever indulged my broken-record email response; “ask me on the Lithosphere and I will gladly answer you there”.
And why would they not want to come along? After all, navigating a community is no harder than using a table of contents in a book, and the threads of conversation read just like a theatrical play or cinematic screenplay. The true beauty of community is found in a simple rhetorical functionality, a seemingly spartan feature-set, and finally, the mechanics of pedestrian gamification principles that underlie Rank and Reputation for all community members. It is, in my opinion, the heir apparent to the printing press insofar as enriching one’s own knowledge is concerned.
Because of my ‘ please ask me on the community instead ’ technique that I was gently applying throughout the day, I became the first Lithium Oracle ( i.e. – I accrued 100 Accepted Solutions on the Community ) in 2010. I received a plaque from our Lithosphere Community Manager which hung prominently on the wall in my home office for a few years. There have now been close to 20 Lithium Oracles ranks bestowed since then. It is a rank that is harder to achieve than many people think.
A few years ago I decided to move away from answering questions on the customer side of our Lithosphere community, as there were now 5 active Oracles helping our customers there, and instead focus on gathering Accepted Solutions over on the (private) employee side of our community. Helping out over there makes me feel like I have more of an impact on our playing field, because the more I help Lithium employees, the more they can help our Lithium customers. There are many collaboration tools found in the workplace these days, but I still adhere to the mindset that community forums are the most effective for maximizing the distribution of knowledge and expertise. Some would say that I’m still kind of a web 1.0 guy, but hey, I met my wife on a message board in 2003 and we’re as happy as can be, so go figure. I’ll wear that web 1.0 jacket as a badge of honor!
In my opinion, the Lithosphere community has matured and evolved just like Lithium the company has over the years. Sure, anybody who has been on the Lithosphere for a while knows that the community has had its fair share of clunker designs and layouts over the years, so there will always be room for improvement. Stumbling every once in a while is when we learn how to improve things, right? But I’ve never been more bullish on our community, our employees, and our customers’ communities than I am today. This place works pretty darned well, and I am very proud to have been riding shotgun the whole time. Happy 10 th Anniversary, Lithosphere! You do your job, I’ll do mine, and perhaps we shall have a little bit of fun along the way.
JakeR, Senior Business Value Engineer
... View more
It sounds like you have a bit of a challenge on your hands, @mvanpelt. But there are a few layers to it that I think can be unpacked:
1. There is an business operations facet, which is that you would like to shift employees over to the Lithium system for their discussions. Cutting the cord on the old system (i.e. Microsoft Teams) is the first and most effective way to go. It might be a bit of a cold shower for a few folks, but sometimes the 'cold turkey' approach is the best way to change behavior. But there is some real opportunity here. The gamification system (i.e. - "rank and reputation") found within Lithium software can be configured to accommodate and accelerate employee participation. If I were you, I would definitely leverage it for employees (as well as for customers too)
2. There is community best practices facet, which is that you want both a very clear mission statement for the community, as well as guidelines for the participants (with an additional distinctive set of guidelines for employees). A mission statement for employees might be something like:
Internally discussing product and services on the community will not only help inform your fellow team members, but downstream, the Community Management team can then curate and transfer those conversations to the customer-side of the community (assuming the content is customer-facing) . Conversations that start here, can be cultivated to help our customers!
3. Lastly, there is a potential motivation challenge for participants. If you really want to step up in that area, which I strongly suggest you do, try to get leadership on board with employee recognition and rewards when employees provide stellar long-lasting and consistent content on the community. This is actually a lot harder than it sounds. Even the most mature communities with very accomplished Community Managers struggle to form these types of programs. But, IMHO, it is the crown jewel of employee gamification / incentivizing when it comes to community
I hope these suggestions are useful for you.
... View more
I am really glad that we're being very transparent about the judges (and perhaps even the judging this year). Though I am an employee of Lithium, and not an actual contestant, it was always my opinion that we could have done better with announcing who the judges were and explaining their qualifications in prior years.
Thank you to the people in Lithium who made the decision to be more open about this. And thank you in advance to all of the judges. I know there are always a lot of contestants, and every single one of them always has a compelling story.
Lastly, good luck to all of the contestants!
... View more