Analysis of the Zuckerberg Lacy Interview

J,
In his write-up he asks:

"Does something interesting happen around 45 minutes to cause a spike, or is that a conincidence?"

As I recall, the session was billed as 45 minutes discussion and 15 minutes of Q&A.

If that is so, then it may also pay to understand the psychology of waiting. This is especially important since the audience may have a large representation of folks who are part of the new un-conference trend that posits that the crowd has as much if not more to contribute to dialog than the traditional expert at the podium.

So at the 45 minute point, the psychological issues of waiting may have kicked in, here is a listing of some of these items pulled from an obscure HBS case note called the psychology of waiting lines published in the early/mid 80's. (find it on the HBS sight, useful for experience designers, a conference session is an experience.)

1. Occupied Time Feels Shorter Than Unoccupied Time.
2. Anxiety Makes Waits Seem Longer.
3. Uncertain Waits Are Longer than Known, Finite Waits
4. Unexplained Waits Are Longer than Explained Waits
5. Unfair Waits Are Longer than Equitable Waits
6. The More Valuable the Service, the Longer the Customer Will Wait
7. Solo Waits Feel Longer than Group Waits

It does not take much imagination to map some of the above into the dynamics of the session and the role twitter may have played to reduce the negatives of the wait.

If Twitter was around in the 60's, would Kitty Genovese have lived?

Interesting stuff this social thing.