In terms of social networking, I think public networks are more important and usually more successful than intranets, but what you can achieve through social networking is of differing importance to TEOs (see the latest post on wananga for example).

The original post in the series went into more depth about the limitations of my approach, but in the end the series is just giving one perspective, while illuminating sector practice at the same time.

You need to be aware of the audience for the website in question before judging it’s efficacy. A site that might work for us, as interested outsiders, is unlikely to be as valuable to other parties such as staff, students and less interested outsiders who are coming to the site for the first time.

So, from that perspective, I think you may be giving undue influence to Facebook et al. If used well social networking is a valuable resource for a defined community (such as staff or students for instance) but much less valuable if you are not part of that community.

Many people are looking not for interaction but the find core, basic info as quickly as they can. (I’m thinking in particular of potential new students here.) If those people are the website’s core audience then all the x-factor stuff and social networking may actually be distracting. And “basic” may be a strength rather than a weakness. It may be that you don’t necessarily want them to come back, but to leave having already got everything they need?

Also, if a institution has a well-managed private intranet then Facebook etc may well be redundant in terms of value.

Cheers, Stephen