What an utterly awful use of a pie chart.
Google’s Management Doesn’t Use Google+
31–40 of 88 posts
Re: Google’s Management Doesn’t Use Google+
#32I like Google Plus, I post many things every day. But I'm among those worried about its future. Out of over 700 people I follow, only around 30 post daily, most posted at one point (I don't follow people who never posted) but don't anymore. I think people have a use for Twitter, Facebook, but G+ is inbetween and doesn't have enough of an obvious use yet.
Re: Google’s Management Doesn’t Use Google+
#33"Management caring deeply about their company’s products and using them every day is almost always a prerequisite of making great products"
..when management is also happens to be in the target market of the product. Quite a broad and incorrect generalization to kick off an analysis like this.
Re: Google’s Management Doesn’t Use Google+
#34This thought: Further, I think it’s reasonable to assume a correlation between private use & public use kills the whole article. No, it isn't a reasonable assumption. If you look at my Facebook without being a friend of mine, you get a picture of me. Five years of use and that is the only public thing I have published. And I am just another dude no one cares about. I am sure billionaire CEOs and board members who hav…
Agreed. Thought I think the fact so much of the management doesn't even have a Google+ account is a much more telling/troubling indicator.
Re: Google’s Management Doesn’t Use Google+
#35Larry and Sergey are probably just posting under pen names. ;)
Re: Google’s Management Doesn’t Use Google+
#36Why, next you'll tell me Zynga execs don't play Farmville, and TV execs don't watch reality shows!
Re: Google’s Management Doesn’t Use Google+
#37This thought: Further, I think it’s reasonable to assume a correlation between private use & public use kills the whole article. No, it isn't a reasonable assumption. If you look at my Facebook without being a friend of mine, you get a picture of me. Five years of use and that is the only public thing I have published. And I am just another dude no one cares about. I am sure billionaire CEOs and board members who hav…
Disclosure: author :)
I don't think what a "normal" person has done on Facebook over the past 5 years is a fair comparison. Facebook didn't even have a public "subscribe/follow" concept til last week, whereas Google+ launched with one. Also, these aren't normal people, they're the leaders/overseers of the company using (or not) a landmark initiative whose leader (Vic Gundotra) clearly thinks that ideally it'd be used for both your private and public interactions. At the very least, it'd look a lot better if they had accounts, tried making a public post (even just to congratulate the team publicly), and looked engaged.
Re: Google’s Management Doesn’t Use Google+
#38I'd bet Google management doesn't click on Google ads very often, either.
Re: Google’s Management Doesn’t Use Google+
#39"Management caring deeply about their company’s products and using them every day is almost always a prerequisite of making great products" ..when management is also happens to be in the target market of the product. Quite a broad and incorrect generalization to kick off an analysis like this.
I'm the author and you're right. I hadn't thought of that, I was just thinking in the narrow space of consumer-y services/devices that have a broad target market. Something like "and being intimately familiar with them" would have been much better.
Re: Google’s Management Doesn’t Use Google+
#40This article is flawed. It is making an assumption that public posts correlates with private posts. "Further, I think it’s reasonable to assume a correlation between private use & public use: if you were constantly posting things on a service and each time you were given the option to make it public or private, surely sometimes you’d make it public, especially as a somewhat public figure wanting to help your own comp…
(I'm the author). Your last point is very true, and the chart tries to make it very clear it's only talking about public posts. Obviously entirely true that they could be using it purely privately, but I still think is an observation worth making that they're not using it publicly.
As far the correlation in general, as I mention in the thread above, these aren't normal people, they're the leaders/overseers of the company using (or not) a landmark initiative whose leader (Vic Gundotra) clearly thinks that ideally it'd be used for both private and public interactions. At the very least, it'd look a lot better if they had accounts, tried making a public post (even just to congratulate the team publicly), and looked a bit more publicly engaged.