The general repsonse to the Circle system within Google+ has been positive but there is an underlying worry that they may not work. Whether because it is a departure from behaviour on other networks where lists and groups seem to have failed, or because they may not be sustainable when the number of friends becomes larger the concern is there.

Dave Winer posted that Google+ Circles are bound to fail because it is human nature to start with the best intentions when organising and categorising our data and friends but, after a while, we become lax and this falls by the wayside. This may well be the case elsewhere but Google+ has a key difference: you are made to add a new friend to a Circle when you start following them. This is the way you follow people rather than being an afterthought.

Admittedly, people could cop out and just put all their friends in the “Following” circle but being made to think about that choice at the very beginning makes us far more likely to stick with it on Plus.

Sarah Perez over at ReadWriteWeb argues that Circles may not be sustainable because of the numbers involved and because our relationships with those we follow may change necessitating a re-ordering so that everyone sees what they are supposed to see.

AJ Kohn has written an excellent, extensive look at Plus and warns of the dangers of excessive “friending” due to the simplicity of the system and that Circles may not be a “best fit” for reading (rather than sharing) because of the multiple interests of those involved.

Following

The argument that we are more likely to follow more people and may have to resort to a “people I don’t care about” Circle is made redundant by the incoming stream. Following is asynchronous by design and we can utilise the incoming stream to vet people sharing with us before even considering whether we should add them to a circle. This is a master-stroke by Google in my opinion and sets Plus apart from other networks in this regard.

Some may say that, within a week of being on Plus, they are already following more people than they have during years spent on other networks. Is this just as a result of a clever, easy to use system? Are we so shallow that Circles has encouraged us to abandon our previous behavior? Probably not.

Perhaps people are following more as the engagement is better and not out of an uncontrolled urge to use the pretty circles. The current lack of aggregation in Plus (who knows if it will stay that way) means that all shares are explicitly intended for the Plus audience and the quality of those shares is generally better as a result.

Twitter has a nice simple single click system, you just hit that follow button – no circles to worry about and no decisions as to where you want to place people in your friending hierarchy, but we dont get out of control. If it is too easy to follow people on Plus then, by extension, we should all be following thousands on Twitter but the reality is nothing like that.

Early adopters

We are currently in the “shiney new toy” stage (and what a toy it is) during which we generally see a high volume of interaction as the early adopters push the boundaries in order to discover what the service is capable of, what it can’t do and where the bugs are.

Early adopters are, by our very nature, outgoing and vocal. We are often media types, bloggers or social media big hitters with a narcissistic streak – it is no surprise that we see an initial explosion on a service such as Google+. We generally make a lot of connections but, as AJ says, we are not the normal user – what may work or not work for us will not apply to those who join in the long tail.

Once the doors are open to all I would doubt that Joe Public would act even remotely like your average early adopter.

Content is King

Circles alone are not the answer to an effective network. The old blogging mantra says that “Content is King” and this is equally the case on a service which is all about sharing.

AJ Kohn is correct when he says that conversation happens around pieces of content, or social objects. These social objects become the online equivalent of topics discussed during water-cooler moments – connecting us, giving us something in common, something to share even if only for a short period before going our separate ways. This is why Sparks needs to improve (and fast), topic filtering needs to be greatly improved and our options for sharing to Plus need to be extended.

This does not mean that G+ needs to enable content aggregation but a bookmarklet to “Share on Google+” is a step in the right direction so that we can be away from the service but still share content – a more natural experience. Android users already benefit from an extended sharing model due to the extension created by the native application and Places check-ins from Google Maps but, for others, we need something for those without an app who call the browser home.

Implicit v explicit

Although Circles appear more flexible than options on other networks they do still fall in to the trap of being explicit groupings when the world doesn’t always work like that. As I mentioned previously we drift in and out of implicit social circles throughout our day without even realising it.

Plus is designed to better reflect our offline behaviour but Google needs to find a way to take advantage of implicit connections based around social objects – temporary topic based circles – that may be completely unrelated to our existing friends lists.

While it is currently very easy to find people, subject discovery will only thrive once full search is implemented and Sparks has a bigger (and better) data source to pull from.

I believe that we should also not be limited to sharing a topic with our circles but should have a option to share our thoughts with others talking about the same thing – perhaps a temporary circle “who is talking about x”. This could be the basis for some kind of trending topics architecture or merely a way of advertising that you want to talk to others about your given subject – Plus could then hook you up with others or show you existing threads related to your topic of choice.

Maybe we could find people based on their sharing patterns, +1′s or interests in their profile. We may currently be able to search Twitter for our interests but there is then no direct link to any discussion about that topic – Plus could immediately step in and fill that gap.

Discovery

We must avoid getting completely hung up on circles – they are not the Holy Grail of social but a workable solution to a particular problem. We must refrain from trying to modify our behaviour to fit a problem which, for the most part, does not exist. Circles are a useful way to restrict the visibility of data to a select group whilst publishing it in the same location as everything else thus avoiding the need to use multiple platforms – just as with the way I argued Blogger could operate if integrated deeply in to Plus.

Most of what we share in our day-to-day use of social networks is very general in nature and is therefore best suited to being shared publicly. We have the flexibility of Circles but do not need to constantly use them.

Whilst we ourselves are keen to have better discovery, so are others. If everyone were to share to just their Circles then all we would see on our profiles are blank Posts tabs – hardly conducive to good discovery and communication; we would have no incentive to follow anyone as we would be unable to see the type of content they enjoy.

There must be a balance

We may not be using Circles 90% of the time but they offer us choice, they offer us that flexibility and they offer us an element of control which we can use when we need it.

The user base of both Skype and Facebook is huge. They are big names, well known names. Known far outside the geeky underbelly of social media.

They are trusted names.

Combining the two adds to that trust. If Facebook and Skype trust each other enough to jump in to bed in a big way then that reaffirms and magnifies the trust placed in either (or even both) by the end user.

Most people are only going to want to video chat with one person or, at least, one location – (think grandparents on the other side of the world) and, as most video chat is likely to be between loved ones, they are probably already connected on Facebook.

Experience

It is always said that the reason Apple products fair so well (especially the iPhone and iPad) is because of the user experience.

If Facebook video chat is as easy as two clicks to connect then the experience shines through. Combine this with the fact that it looks nice, a clean video overlay, and there are going to be a lot of very happy Facebookers.

Hangouts on Google+ will attract a different – probably  significantly smaller – demographic. Co-workers, media employees, school kids working on a joint project, maybe even gamers not having to resort to a paid service such as Teamspeak ( 10 World of Warcraft guild members, audio only, during a raid anyone?) Once the novelty wears off I can’t see too many casual users diving in.

More than enough

Facebook may not have group video but they do have something: video chat is live now – not in field trial – and it is available to all. That’s more than enough for anyone.

Mashable broke the news that Google will be re-branding Picasa and Blogger to bring them in to line with Google+ – although this has yet to be confirmed. Whilst it is not really a surprise for Picasa, considering what is already happening, it is a big move for Blogger.

Picasa is already docked with the Plus mothership but we can expect the integration to go a lot deeper. As to whether Google will want to use G+ as the entry portal remains to be seen.

Google Blogs

Speculation is bound to occur over where the change in direction will take the newly named Google Blogs? I immediately had a few ideas but we will have to see whether Google stops at a re-brand or – as would make more sense – take things further and adds a degree of integration.

Here is what I feel could happen:

1. Blogger blogs will be closely integrated with Plus profiles
• integration could well see a Blog tab appear in the G+ interface showing your last few posts
• new posts could be automatically fed in to your Plus stream
• blog posts could inherit permissions from Circles
2. Comments could be cross-location
• if blog posts are on a Plus tab or fed into your stream then it would make sense for commenting to be shared and synced across all locations

Not just public

If blog posts inherit the Circles permissions system then, rather than simply post to the world as normal, we could effectively host multiple, private blogs in the same location by only sharing specific posts with certain Circles.

Whilst the bulk of our posts could be public individual targeted posts could be restricted to just a subset of our readers, perhaps family members or even staff were we to be running a company blog. The possibilities are both interesting and exciting.

Look out Facebook

If Plus effectively become a comment hosting system internally within Plus then there is nothing stopping Google from opening it up via API to other platforms à la Facebook comments in order to compete directly with those of the social network.

In contrast to Wave and Buzz, Google+ appears “too big to fail” as Google know this is most likely the last shot at getting taken seriously in social and have a lot invested in it; the question is how far do they want to go?

After the launch of Buzz I have believed that Google could make a successful stab at social as long as they played to their strengths; I have since posted a range of thoughts detailing what I would like or expect to see from a social network or service from the search giant.

Sometimes I’ve been right, others not so right but it’s finally nice to see Google come out with something that, at last, places them on the playing field.

History repeating itself

A lot of what we’re now thinking about Plus is exactly the same as was thought about Buzz when that launched and how it took the torch from Friendfeed. Seeing as the steam component of Plus is essentially a reworking of Buzz this is hardly surprising.

It’s like stepping in to a time warp back to the launch of the earlier service, take this quote from my previous post:

“With a service such as Buzz we must remember that users want control over what they see. The search and filtering functionality suggested by Robert Scoble, as mentioned before, is a natural progression for Buzz and I can imagine a number of his suggestions being implemented before long. The ability to find all items that a particular person has commented on or to ignore items from a particular source (e.g Twitter) would be ideal additions and vastly improve the usability of the service.”

Sure enough, Robert is banging the same drum with Plus and rightfully so. While some lessons have been learnt from its predecessor it also seems that Plus has taken a few backward steps on things that should really have been there from the outset.

Outside of Gmail

The one big thing I have been advocating is that until Google found “a mainstream, standalone destination it will only be a social bit-part player” – getting people to stick around rather than sending them elsewhere (as with search results).

When Buzz began I said it made sense in a way that it soft launched within Gmail in order to take advantage of that existing user base but that it really needed to be made available outside of Gmail – at least as well as being integrated – in order to appeal wider. Plus has certainly met this wish whilst not losing a lot of the integration that being a component of Gmail offered its predecessor.

Additionally, Buzz has the disadvantage of being tied to your Gmail account which made no sense if Google were serious about the service gaining mainstream acceptance. Luckily, this has been rectified and a Google+ account can be created with an email account although it makes sense to use Gmail due to the advance integration afforded us.

Based on all the evidence so far Plus is definitely getting people to stick around. Perhaps it’s “shiny new toy syndrome” but certainly my Twitter usage has suffered greatly since being on Plus and I was never a big Facebook user anyway. Others are saying similar things.

Profile is home

While we all debated as to whether Google would release a full social network or a “social layer” which sat on top of all existing services I said:

“I feel that, with some careful work, Google could build on its Profile system and integrate the services you use into one coherent offering despite them being independent applications.”

Needless to say, it is a relief that Plus has grown from, and replaces, the previous Google Profiles system with photos, videos, your +1s and Buzz posts all available as tabs in addition to your Plus posts. This feels like just the start and Google have promised more.

Integration, integration, integration

I had originally suggested that, perhaps, if everything was included as components of our Profile then we would need a public version of the profile (for others) and a private version for ourselves so that we could manage our services. The new Google navigation bar has done away with this need as we now have full access to our Plus notifications from anywhere which includes the ability to view posts and comment without even visiting Plus itself. Google is looking to hook us in and having the permanent distraction of out Plus notifications means we are more likely to nip in on a more frequent basis.

This integration across the whole Google ecosystem – by enhancing the functionality of everything we already do under the Google umbrella – means we get a better experience and are encouraged to do more. And, because everything is to be linked, we are more likely to dive in to other areas we had maybe not considered. All in all a far better solution than a monolithic profile.

I like it

I suggested that, unlike even Orkut or Buzz, +1 could be the first offering to really cement social in the mind of Google users and now, within the context of Plus, the +1 makes even more sense and is as simple to grasp and use as Facebook’s “Like” button. Additionally, use within the service will familiarise users enough that they will be more likely to use +1s in search and on other sites even though they are currently two very different beasts.

Before Plus establishes itself further this disparity must be rectified.

Fighting the good fight

I stated previously:

“Google must accept the fact that no-one will come in and beat Facebook at its own game. Facebook OWNS social, period!”

It is undeniable that Facebook currently rules the social roost and Google+ will likely not persuade 700 million Facebook users to up sticks and move because Facebook provides everything they currently need – if it ain’t broke… Users have a lot of time and effort invested in their community and the act of trying to move this and recreate it on a new service is impractical.

Perhaps, however, we are looking at a paradigm shift. We may instead see a co-existence with Facebook with the different services offering different things to different people. Those who do not currently use Facebook for one reason or another may be enticed into Google+ because of its connections to other Google services.

Where next?

Whilst being a surprisingly solid and fleshed out service already there are a number of areas that need to be addressed the biggest of which, considering that we are dealing with Google, is search.

Admittedly, Google have already announced that search is coming for Plus and that they did not want to release it until it was ready so it will be interesting to see what they can do with it. Personally, I would like more than just search within Plus.

Search integration must be a two-way affair using the site content and +1s to improve search results on the main Google page and the primary search database to provide a wealth of data back to Plus. We have the rumours that Plus data will replace the now expired Twitter deal in real time search so, if this is true, it is a big step in the right direction.

Sparks is the intended poster child for bringing external data in to Plus but, at present, this does not draw on a sufficiently large data source or provide enough functionality to be as effective as intended.

The other area where Plus can be of great use is in the collection of both data and social behaviour. Google has a ready-made data collection mechanism available in the goo.gl URL shortener. As I have said before:

“The real power for Google comes in linking services and utilising the data you generate so another huge lost opportunity in the shape of goo.gl. Better integration of the URL shortener would make it more usable – why not wrap urls with goo.gl as Twitter does with t.co? Just as with Twitter, this could be presented as a ‘security feature’ (protecting us from dodgy redirects) whilst – at the same time – providing Google with a wealth of click-through data.”

As Google+ is all about sharing just imagine the data and trends that will be recorded just from normal use of the service.

A new era

After a history of false steps it was never certain that Google would ever compete on the social stage but I maintained that:

“With the right person leading the way Google should be able to regain control and create a comprehensive social policy and … turn Buzz (or a descendent) into a world-class offering.”

We are now seeing that descendent emerge from the shadows of its parent.

Image by R_rose

There are many that felt Google couldn’t do social, that they just didn’t get it; the disappointments of Wave and Buzz seemed to back this up. Social layers and the +1 button gave the impression that Google was taking a piecemeal approach to social and would not arrive with a cohesive strategy.

How wrong could we be?

Plus definitely feels like a new start. For a “field test” it is a remarkably mature offering which goes way beyond the simple stream of status updates. I won’t go in to details here as the features within Plus have been covered in-depth elsewhere but, suffice to say, the likes of Hangouts and Spark are big differentiators and there is more to come.

We may be adding the same people to our Circles that we connect with elsewhere but the very act of adding them to a specific Circle at the outset (rather than adding them to a list later) sets Google+ apart. If you are using the service as it is envisioned then adding every friend and making every share is a very conscious decision as to the intent behind that action.

There is obviously the choice of just throwing everyone in your “Following” Circle but it’s what else you do that which makes it interesting.

A daunting prospect?

Perhaps having to add people this way from the beginning may seem a little daunting to some – with the likes of Twitter we are not used to dividing up our “friends” in this way and Facebook groups are tucked away and under-utilised. I wonder how many will just use Following with the best intentions of filling their Circles later but never get around to it or, as Scoble says, may never even need to distinguish between their friends.

For those with small, focused followings Google+ probably isn’t the place to be. Facebook and Twitter serve the instant social gratification needs of the masses perfectly well and the majority will neither need, nor ever use, more advanced features like multi-person video conferencing.

Personally, I can see a number of use cases where Plus will come in to its own. I instantly had the idea of creating a Circle called “The Wall” that I can use as a sounding board for posts, ideas etc. I can throw things at the wall and see what sticks with the members of that Circle being real-time editors or quality control.

Feature rich and fully formed

Google may be calling this a field test but Plus feels far from it.Yes, there are a few niggles nere and there such as muting alerts for posts not always working and not being able to edit your posts in either the mobile site or Android application but, from the time that I have spent using the service so far, it is amazing how feature rich and “whole” it all feels.

It is obvious that a lot of man hours have been spent developing Google+ and it is a miracle that it has been kept under wraps with barely a sniff of what was being planned leaking out.

Plus may not be for everyone and it may not entice those firmly entrenched on Facebook to jump ship but it will, without doubt, change the social space for good. Teams can be more productive, people can connect in more natural ways without fear of those connections spilling out in to the public domain and the technology involved will force others to step up or go home.

We have already been advised that the current tools within Google+ are just the beginning. Rumours of games and a Quora-like questions feature are abound and discussion has already taken place about a crossover between your social circle and your interest circle.

I have been advocating for a while that Google needed to create a cohesive, wide ranging offering based on its profile system; Plus is so much more than this and far beyond a traditional social network - the competition could suffer as a result.

Lead image by Leo Reynolds