Defining SILO Theory

Silo on FlickrI’m used to thinking of silos as great assemblies of storage, sticking out of the ground holding corn or wheat. Alternately, nuclear missiles.

There’s a lot of gyp given to the iPad and iPhone and similar devices for being in “silo” settings. Essentially, this should mean that anything contained in a given application on one of these devices is inaccessible to any of the other applications.

It makes a certain amount of sense – but it’s a limited view of what the term could mean, not just for computing, but for collaborative theory, user interface design, and all kinds of other human operations.

In short, it’s all about:

Single Information Leverage Option

Offering once choice in a given setting, or reducing decisions to Do or Do Not, often yields some of the best results for businesses. We’re all familiar with decision paralysis brought on by many slightly varied options. Siloing your information can actually help people make decisions and give your actions traceability. The fall-back for this is, of course, that you’ll polarize people. But at the end of the day, if you’re catering to people who either cannot decide, will not decide, or don’t align with the way you can best serve them – how effective is anything you do going to be? Diluted options lead to diminished returns.

Social Imperative, Limited Observation

Controlling the number of people who have access to information is powerful. Being in on a secret often gives us a sense that we’re both privileged, and responsible for how this information affects the world. This is a good thing, isn’t it? Yes. But it’s also a dangerous thing.

Creating any kind of social imperative – whether the onus is based on sharing or keeping a secret – builds a weakness based on opposing action. Building a movement in public is vulnerable to squelching – though that’s getting far more difficult these days. Building a reputation in secret, or through limited, in-crowd involvement creates vulnerability through that one person in the inner circle who just can’t hold their tongue.

Stream In, Leak Out

This is the real Chuck Norris secret of information control; With any SILO theory, total control if information is not necessary; what’s important is rate of control. Think about what silos are for in farming – gathering resources to controllable spaces for intentional distribution. The strength isn’t in being an end-point, it’s in being a way-station.

If you think you’re effectively siloing your content, your users, or your pretty containers never let them leave, think again. You’re not a SILO in the intentional, controlled sense; you’re a cul de sac.

No one wants to be a cul de sac; we need to start re-thinking SILO theory in design, content and communication. How are you handling your privileged position as a director of information?

Photo by eirikref

Other Posts You Might Like

No related posts! Nothing quite like this one.

Stay connected!

Ian M Rountree runs on the Genesis Framework

Genesis Framework

The Genesis Framework empowers you to quickly and easily build incredible websites with WordPress. Whether you're a novice or advanced developer, Genesis provides the secure and search-engine-optimized foundation that takes WordPress to places you never thought it could go. It's that simple - start using Genesis now!

Take advantage of the 6 default layout options, comprehensive SEO settings, rock-solid security, flexible theme options, cool custom widgets, custom design hooks, and a huge selection of child themes ("skins") that make your site look the way you want it to. With automatic theme updates and world-class support included, Genesis is the smart choice for your WordPress website or blog.

Check out Genesis now!

  • http://writelife.net/ Bill Wren – Writelife

    Single Information Leverage Option: I've complained about excess options for years. Example: I buy shoes at a small local store: good quality but fewer options. Big box places: I never know where to start or even what I'm looking at.

    Social Imperative, Limited Observation: Now you're in the area where problems arise — human behavior. See my comments to follow.

    Stream In, Leak Out: This is the area of intent. Are you trying to manage the distribution or manage the end user?

    In the end, you make a nice distinction — I agree. And it goes to the business of intent. However, the problem you need to be aware of is the second one, behavior. Regardless of the intent, perception can kill you. You may have the best intentions but a negative response can result and spread quickly. It may be a false accusation (about your intent) but once it starts spreading it can make you the bad guy. I think this is beginning to happen with Apple. So part of the “handling” has to do with communications, and that is no easy task.

    • http://ianmrountree.com Ian M Rountree

      Absolutely agree – perception cannot be managed, except by publishing and defining intent. And even then, it's diminishing returns again.

      I feel like it keeps coming back to the amount of specificity (or lack thereof) in your content. Apple is weakening its position by weakening its specificity at the same time as it's strengthening the control aspect of its silos.

      This is the major weakness of any kind of reputation management; Being willing to polarize people isn't the same as being willing to pick your audience carefully.

      • http://writelife.net/ Bill Wren – Writelife

        Yes. I think what is happening with Apple is that, as it succeeds, it is losing focus of its core base in an effort to “grow the business.” I worked for a company that had a huge core of customers but decided it wasn't the base they wanted. They self-destructed by going after a younger base, alienating an older core base, and ending up with no base at all. The irony is that the older base has now changed, is more tech savvy (which they wanted) and gone off to greener pastures, where they were wanted.

        I think Seth Godin talks about this kind of thing somewhat when he says he ignores his critics. He knows who his audience is and it is them he caters to. Others are secondary – not excluded, but they come only after his base.

        • http://ianmrountree.com Ian M Rountree

          And that's the winner, isn't it? Or part of it. Making sure that a definition of “primary base” is not meant to be “exclusive audience” but secondary concerns. Letting people know you're not locking the door, just trimming the fat, is far different from total exclusivity.