Customer value, not control, is the answer in the digital economy. ~Don Tapscott and Anthony D. Williams in Wikinomics (p.143) Value Shmalue. I have noticed many people speaking of value lately but no one speaking of what exactly is value. I decided that before the word “value” goes to the 2.0 hype graveyard like many others have (see: the cloud, Whatever X.0) I would get to the bottom of it all. I asked my followingers what value meant to them in order to get to some basic tenets of why they valued something. Needless to say this all took place early in the morning whereupon i did forgo sleep to see where this line of questioning led me. I ended up valuing a lack of something in gain of something else, which speaks to the myriad of answers that people gave. The following are my conversations broken down with people based on person and categorized into points each person contributed to the discussion on value. While it is not the end all be all definitive go-to guide to delineate value, it is a start:

HOW IT ALL BEGAN

WHAT WAS I THINKING

nwjerseyliz: I just noticed that most of your Tweets are questions posed back to the original Twitterer..you’re reading & thinking.
db: Oh, liz.. i cant fool you. youre onto me. who am I foolin. im finding value in thinking.
nwjerseyliz: It wasn’t a judgment though, just an observation because most people don’t ask a lot of questions on Twitter (Generalization #358)

A ROSE BY ANY OTHER NAME…

VALUE ISN’T DEMEANED BY MEDIUM

silvakreuz: The value, for me, is the original post, that’s why I RT it thinking some of my followers may find it helpful. I minimize as much @ …
db: So thus in change they find value in you and it becomes a reciprocal value sharing feedback loop?
silvakreuz: I actually don’t see it that way. IMO, I think my followers RT my RTs because they value the content I’m sharing, not who’s RT-ing :)
db: So, the messenger doesnt matter just the content? Is it a balance of both?
silvakreuz: (1/2) For me, it depends on how far the content had been RTd. That may sound a little weird but–anyway, if RTd at level 1 (1 @ sign …
silvakreuz: (2/2) that for me is a balance of both: original tweeter and content. If RTd 2X and above, then content. At least that’s how I see it :)
db: So to you, value comes from how diluted something may or may not be per se. Is this safe to say? Is there value in all RTers?
silvakreuz: (1/6) I’m not sure if diluted is the right term :) but I think I get what you’re trying to say, and where this is going. B4 I continue,
silvakreuz: (2/6) I jst want to make clear that what’s really important here (RTd or not) is the content. We learn, get to know peeps thru it, the
silvakreuz: (3/6) reason y _I_ follow, react, share, etc. I could always copy-paste what one already said without copying the originator in a post.
silvakreuz: (4/6) My choice. The RT button jst makes it easier for me & makes some1 accountable :) Is there value in RTers? For me, not so much.
silvakreuz: (5/6) More on what content is delivered. If I like the content, I share the content. If originator fits criteria of people I like to …
silvakreuz: (6/6) I follow. It is also my way of helping people get like-minded followers :) Sorry. Mouthful.
db: So, because that wasn’t diluted and most likely counted be RTed was there any less value in that 6 parter?
silvakreuz: The content is not devalued if someone insane enough is to RT the 6 parter, if that is what you want to know :)
db: Ah! another tenet. Value isn’t demeaned by medium
silvakreuz: I’m not sure if that applies to everything, but yes, I tend to believe that way :)
db: So there’s value in everything?
silvakreuz: I’m not sure if there _is_ in everything like I said. Since we’re talking abt RTers, there is value in every content, at least 2 d o …

VALUE IN MISTAKES

{Aiming for relationship which isn’t being reciprocated ok for a while if trying diff engagement tactics, but eventually should change strat}
{Obsession with person you know. No. Obsession with famous person. Maybe. Obsession with thing. Maybe as there can be no relationship.}

VALUE CAN BE COMMUNICATED MANY WAYS

jenscloset: I do it all-and value is if you’re saying something that helps someone else-
db: But how do you know if its valuable? Can you measure it?
jenscloset: yep-measure by the response you get from others!
db: Oh! But, what if you DONT get a response? Does it make it any less valuable to them? How do you know?
jenscloset: if I don’t get a response…well, that’s their problem!
db: Hmm, well, do you *always* tell someone that you value them? and i mean ALWAYS. Not just special moments.
jenscloset: nope-if I ALWAYS told them I valued them then there would be less value in it..sometimes you just show value by what you do not say
db: So, value can be communicated many ways. 2nd tenet.
jenscloset: definitely!

VALUE IS SCALABLE DEPENDING EXPERIENCE

AKFirecracker: I think there can be. Authors I like produce books I buy, but we don’t interact. Value is derived on both sides: $ for them, :) for me.
db: So then on some level value is reciprocal? Both are getting something.. but how to be sure both are valuing it?
AKFirecracker: Well, I guess I meant directly reciprocal versus non. It’s not true for every book published…just a thought.
db: I’m just looking for value. Tell me your thoughts on value on those subjects. Where does it exist & with who?
AKFirecracker: Value can be relative, depending on the view of the giver/recipient. Value to me (reader) might be greater than his/hers (author).
db: Ah! Another tenet. Value is scalable depending experience.
AKFirecracker: With that, I take my leave. Thank you for such a great compliment. See you soon.

VALUE IS RELATIVE AS WELL AS SUBJECTIVE

davidlink: I think #value is too subjective to define. It’s like asking “what’s the best food?” Is flavor enough? Or must it provide good nutrition
davidlink: The definition of #value is unique to the person answering the question. To me, some twitterers can provide value with a conversation.
davidlink: But other people that I follow, I don’t care about conversation, I just want some of their info, or their insight, or their jokes.
db: Ah, you’ve hit upon a tenet. Value is unique to the person. That’s a big one.
davidlink: And as far as RT-ers, yes, I think they are valuable. They can serve as a filter. They only pass along the GOOD content.
davidlink: So if you trust someone else’s definition of #value, then their role as a RTer is in-turn valuable to you.
db: Ah! Another tenet. Value is relative AS WELL as subjective.
davidlink: That’s right. “One man’s trash is another man’s treasure.” And vice-versa.
db: So, if you value someone enough you trust their value? Would value be a feedback loop?
davidlink: Something like that, yes. Haha. Example: @mayhemstudios is one of the best RTers for me. He always passes along useful content. #value
davidlink: But ‘useful’ isn’t the end-all-be-all. I can find value in simple conversations as well.
davidlink: Oh, I definitely don’t think that it’s a loop. I may value @guykawasaki. But chances are high that he doesn’t give a crap about me.
db: But do you know that for sure? Must value be the same amount to be shared?
davidlink: Want another tenet? Value isn’t consistent. And it isn’t permanent.
davidlink: I’m sure that these “feedback loops” do/can exist. I just don’t think that they exist inherently.
db: Now wait, but CAN value be permanent? Hmmm
db: But does value NEED to be inherent?
davidlink: It can probably be permanent in a few cases. @cnn for example. That may be a permanent fixture of value for some.

VALUE HAS A DEFINITE PERMANENCY

db: WHAT I’M DOING: Part of what I’m trying to do here is to find out what questions to even ask @lisahickey
lisahickey: HINT: I have no answers.
db: Ma’am i refer you to said tweet 29 minutes ago: http://twitter.com/db/status/1130429053 ;D
lisahickey: Oh, that so reminds me of a really cool thing I saw on how we learn. I will have to dig it up and post, thank you.
db: I’m gathering I was valuable to you there.
lisahickey: You are always valuable to me. Even though, as you say, value is “subjective, relative and sometimes fleeting.”
db: Ah but I did say value can be permanent too. ;D thank you. I value you too.
lisahickey: But in your case, I think the value has a definite permanency.

VALUE IS DEPENDENT UPON THE NATURE OF THE RELATIONSHIP

honeypenny: @db what kind relationship?
db: @honeypenny For value to exist does the nature of the relationship matter?
honeypenny: @db in a way it does. You can love someone without them loving you back, but in friendship, that would be hard..
db: @honeypenny But do you value either any less? Can you compare either’s value to each other? Should you?
honeypenny: @db hahaha! I value friendships more unfortunately.. :P

VALUE IS A FEEDBACK LOOP

VALUE IN LIFE IS VARIETY & THAT’S THE BEAUTY

frankidurbin: it varies by day and depends upon the person. Just like offline relationships. There are professional peers, pals, thought leaders etc
frankidurbin: some days on twitter the collective whole seems to find value in the chat. Other days we dig so much deeper. The variety is the beauty.
db: Hmm, tell me more. On certain days do you only value certain things from certain people? What are the requirements?
db: Ah! We may have stumbled upon a tenet in value: “The variety is the beauty”. Do explain. Value in variety? I’m intrigued
frankidurbin: I think the cocktail party analogy comes into play again. Some days those in the steam seem playful, some days we are all business…
frankidurbin: it’s the sheer variety of the collective mood online that offers a glimpse into the pulse of those around the world at that moment=value
db: Take it outside of this microcosm of social media, where does value live? at a party? how do you define value?
frankidurbin: so back to the cocktail party analogy, if you don’t like the mood work the room. Mingle. Ask. Engage. Meet new people or dig deeper.
frankidurbin: value in life is variety in thinking. We shrink if we don’t grow. If we don’t ask. If we don’t learn. If we don’t seek. We need variety.
frankidurbin: how about you? How do you define value?
db: i dont.

VALUE INTERACTIONS

db: Right now, I find value in this. ? http:// blip.fm/~1o8r2 RavenJon: @db Nice! I’m downloading it now. http://zi.ma/7effa5 (iTunes Link)

db: He found value in my value & spurred him to find value: RT @RavenJon: @db Nice! I’m downloading it now. http://zi.ma/7effa5 (iTunes Link)

silvakreuz: RT @db: Thinking Visually http://tinyurl.com/7bvxov (expand)

db: Is this value? RT @kyleplacy: RT @db: Where is value? Is it in a RT of an RT? @jeremyjaymes & @silvakreuz seem to believe so (I also agree)

GENERAL QUESTIONS I POSED ON TWITTER ABOUT VALUE

Where does value come from? From a fictional space poker game account that has St. Jude’s as biolink? @StaciJShelton found value in it

Do you engage? Do you ask questions? Do you just chat? Is there value in just chatting? How DO you define value?

Is there value in a non-reciprocal relationship?

Does value come in layers? Face value? Internal value? Both?

Is there value in deception? In well planned deception? What if it was a device? Would you still value it?

CONCLUSION I CAME TO IN TWITTER

There can be value in differences in disagreements in the opposers.

Value is amorphous. Value can be decided upon but can not be grasped exactly.

Value is subjective. Value is relative. Value can be reciprocal or solitary. Value can be fleeting or permanent

WHAT IS VALUE?

CrazyOnYou: @db Value has to be perceived to exist. It follows that as perception changes, so does value (quantitatively and/or qualitatively).

{UPON SEARCHING FOR THE PROPER CITATION, I FOUND MORE}

CrazyOnYou: I think the best you can do is try to provide value and then listen (both for the feedback that you *do* get an that your *don’t* get).

db: It’s all so amorphous. You can’t grade value. Everyone has different value systems. Even trying to do so is futile.

CrazyOnYou: True, but “value” is subjective. I derive great value from people whose views are different from mine. Others may not.

CrazyOnYou: You may not be able to measure the rock, but surely some of the ripples give you clues?

My last Tweet before I finished the conversation:

I value all of you. Now i must depart. Til later kids.

CONCLUSION