1
* LinkedIn Alternative Graph Proposal 1/1/08 1/1/09 1/1/10 1/1/11 1/1/12 1/1/13 0 1 2 3 4 5 Daily Number of Members (2-Week Moving Avg) 3.2 5.3 1.1 Average: 2.3 New Members &New Requests (Avg. Daily Request toJoinvs. Members Accepted) 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 Total CulmMembers Total Members (Culm. Requests toJoinvs. Members Accepted) Existing Graphs I propose refining the graphs LinkedIn uses to display data about the growth of a LinkedIn group. The current version, above, shows just the number of members addedon a particular date. This can be misleading if groupowners take a long time to addmembers after the date of the request to join. How about showing boththenumber of mem- bers actually added, plus thenumber of peo- plethat request tojoina group? This comparison reveals useful information. It gives prospective groupmembers a sense of howlong it takes a groupowner to addpeople, which indicates if the groupis actively managed or not. The shorter the lag time between re- quests andacceptance the more actively the owner processes requests to join. In the topgraph, rather than use the daily total, I use a rolling daily average. This makes it easi- er to see the growth trendover time. Preparedwith Tableau by: Bruce E. Segal [email protected] Color Key for BothGraphs Members Added to Group Requests to Join Group

BESegal Linked In group Statistics display sample 9-11-13

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

I propose refining the graphs Linked In uses to display data about the growth of a Linked In group. The current version, above, shows just the number of members added on a particular date. This can be misleading if group owners take a long time to add members after the date of the request to join. How about showing both the number of members actually added, plus the number of people that request to join a group? This comparison reveals useful information. It gives prospective group members a sense of how long it takes a group owner to add people, which indicates if the group is actively managed or not. The shorter the lag time between requests and acceptance the more actively the owner processes requests to join. In the top graph, rather than use the daily total, I use a rolling daily average. This makes it easier to see the growth trend over time. Data Viz Prepared with Tableau

Citation preview

Page 1: BESegal Linked In group Statistics display sample 9-11-13

* LinkedIn Alternative Graph Proposal

1/1/08 1/1/09 1/1/10 1/1/11 1/1/12 1/1/13

0

1

2

3

4

5

Daily Number of Members (2-Week Moving Avg)

3.2

5.3

1.1

Average: 2.3

New Members & New Requests (Avg. Daily Request to Join vs. Members Accepted)

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

Total Culm Members

Total Members (Culm. Requests to Join vs. Members Accepted)

Existing Graphs

I propose refining the graphs Linked In uses todisplay data about the growth of a Linked Ingroup. The current version, above, shows just the number of members added on a particular date.This can be misleading if group owners take along time to add members after the date of therequest to join. How about showing both the number of mem-bers actually added, plus the number of peo-ple that request to join a group? This comparison reveals useful information. Itgives prospective group members a sense ofhow long it takes a group owner to add people,which indicates if the group is actively managedor not. The shorter the lag time between re-quests and acceptance the more actively theowner processes requests to join. In the top graph, rather than use the daily total,I use a rolling daily average. This makes it easi-er to see the growth trend over time.

Prepared with Tableau by: Bruce E. Segal [email protected]

Color Key for Both Graphs

Members Added to Group

Requests to Join Group