One of the more powerful concepts that i learned in the last few years is the notion of “familiar strangers.” The term comes from Stanley Milgram and it refers to the people that we see regularly in a non-intimate fashion that we develop a sense about, but never directly interact with. A good example is the person that one sees on the bus every morning. If that person fails to appear, we notice. What is cool about familiar strangers is that when we see them out of the context of non-interaction, we will immediately interact with them, because there is a presumption of shared knowledge. The further we are from our normal interaction with this person, the more likely we are to connect. Thus, we are likely to treat our bus buddies in New York as close friends if we run into them in Italy.
Underlying this behavior between familiar strangers is the function of multiple contexts in common. In common social introductions, we proceed through a ritual of figuring out what we have in common – what people/institutions/cities/interests we have in common. We do this to develop a common grounding. Likewise, when we see someone in an additional social setting, we feel as though we have exponentially more in common with which to bond.
The power of the familiar stranger is ringing loudly in my head right now because i continue to talk with folks about LinkedIn. I fear that too many of the social software folks don’t realize why context is essential for giving folks a reason to interact, to connect, to bridge one’s social network. People are not simply motivated by what they need or could give, but by what fundamental reasons they have to connect… Introduction rituals are essential for connections and to properly do so, one needs more contextual information than a limited version of one’s resume. Social negotiation, even in the professional realm, is not limited to strictly business… it is inherently social.