At the end of 2012, Mark Zuckerberg paid Spiegel and his team a visit. The purpose of the visit was to scare the bejeezus out of Snapchat by threatening to crush them with the rollout of Poke. Of course, we now know that Poke was a monumental flop, while Snapchat rolled along quite nicely, thank you. Several months later, Zuck flew out to meet with the Snapchat team again, taking a decidedly different tone this time. He also brought along a very big checkbook. Snapchat said thanks, but no thanks.
So, how can a brash start up like Snapchat beat the 800-pound gorilla in its own backyard? Why was Poke DOA? Was it a one-of-a-kind miscue on the part of Facebook -- or part of a trend?
Part of the answer may lie in how we feel about novelty vs familiarity in the things
we deal with. As I said in my last column, we go through three stages when we explore new landscapes. We move from navigating by landmarks to memorizing routes -- and finally, we create our own mental
maps of the space, allowing us to plot our own routes as needed.
If we apply this model to navigating a virtual space like the online social sphere, we should move from relying on landmarks (like Facebook) to using routes (single-purpose apps like Snapchat) and finally, to creating our own map that allows us to switch back and forth between apps as required. Facebook wants to jump from the first stage to the last in order to remain dominant in the social market, by becoming a hub for all required social functionality. But if the Poke story is any indication, we may not be willing to go along for the ride.
There’s a subtle psychological point to how we learn to navigate new landscapes and then gain mastery over our environment. With this increased confidence comes a reluctance to feel we’re moving backward. We tend to discard the familiar and embrace novelty as we gain confidence. This squares with research done on novelty-seeking in humans.
Humans are natural foragers. We have built-in rules of conduct when we go out seeking things that will improve our lot, whether it be food, shelter or tools. Ideally, we look for things that will offer us a distinct advantage over the status quo with a reasonable investment of effort. We balance the two: advantage against effort. If the new options come from an overly familiar place, we tend to mentally discount the potential advantage because we no longer feel we’re moving forward. Over time, this builds into a general feeling of malaise towards the overly familiar.
Time will tell if Evan Spiegel was prescient or just plain stupid in turning down Facebook’s offer. The question is not so much, will Facebook prevail, but if Snapchat will end up emerging as a key part of the social landscape on a continuing basis. That particular landscape is notoriously unstable. It’s been known to swallow up many, many other companies with nary a burp. Perhaps Spiegel should have taken the money and run.But then I wouldn’t be betting the farm on Facebook’s chances of permanence, either.