The risks of scaling too late vs. too early

It is never too early to start planning for future growth. Once you’ve ascertained whether you’re building a library or a coffee shop, you can start designing adaptive strategies.

We conducted some research into our customer base and we discovered three early signals that seem to show up consistently in customers with communities that struggle:

  • No clear use case / basic launch direction
  • Lack of stakeholder alignment / clear ownership
  • Lack of early progress (things stall post-kickoff)

If these key things aren’t addressed from the beginning, they become a leading indicator of downstream failure.

If you address them too late, the community becomes increasingly fragile and at risk of early fragmentation. See Community Fragmentation: When Growth Becomes Your Obstacle.

The risks of moving too early aren’t as high and tend to manifest as:

  • processes that are more complex than necessary
  • member’s experiencing unnecessary friction
  • a heavy staff workload
  • ghost towns
  • the lack of meaningful data for reporting

Further reading
The Community Lifecycle: From Launch to Legacy

The community that I reference in the article above is a good example of a community that had breaking processes due to insufficient scalability. Our moderation protocols weren’t scalable so we took the opportunity when we moved from vB to Discourse to revisit them. It was the right move.

Does anyone else have a story?

6 likes

Thank you for sharing this type of research results. Obviously, this forum is a great example of a vibrant forum community and an excellent example of Discourse forum software be used properly. As the manager of a small and still growing community, there is a lot to learn from the example set here.

Your willingness to share experiences gleaned from your customer base is especially useful and appreciated

4 likes

I have a fun little story about scaling way too late one of my communities of 1.2 million members.

SkyscraperCity is one of the largest, if not the largest community dedicated to architecture, urban environment, and metropolitan structures in the world. Each area of the world with any significant level of urban development and associated larger structures has its own section. Naturally, it’s got a massive amount of pictures shared within it, because, well, the members of that community really, really like to show and tell on the skyscrapers being discussed.

The problem didn’t emerge in the place where you’d think it would.

The problem wasn’t scaling image handling and attachments late. That was going to be a known factor, and the platform was built to handle.

The problem happened as the number of distinct metropolitan areas grew, and with each individual new category, subcategory, sub-sub-subcategory based on continent, nation, state, and finally city, of which there could be any number of neighborhoods. The information architecture for the community had scaled beyond the platform’s ability to cope with each of those areas becoming active. It was buckling under the weight of all those categories, and performance had slowed to an utter crawl. It was downright painful to navigate from page to page, let alone make a post!

The specific platform was an older XenForo custom build built on node trees for categories, it wasn’t designed to handle hundreds and thousands of individual categories as part of the structure. The way it was built, each node occupies a good amount of resources, and so the more nodes at a certain point, the less stable the platform. Nerd that I am, the way I described it to the community for visualization was likening it to a particular episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation, when they discovered that warp engines were poking holes in the fabric of space/time a little too frequently, weakening the space in an area which was highly trafficked.

The zillion categories (sub-sub-sub-subcategories and so on) were causing “damage” to the platform stability the same way hundreds of warp drives being activated in and around a popular area of space was causing that area to collapse.

The solution was not dissimilar to the Federation’s, in that you throttle back and cap the punctures. So we ran a fulsome revision of the information architecture, merged a bunch of the lower level categories and even some of the higher ones, and the system stabilized.

Of course, this issue doesn’t show up with Discourse, since Discourse treats categories leagues better as first-class containers, rather than one big honkin’ structural tree. Mycelial network or transwarp conduits, if you will. But this is definitely one of the most prime examples I have of scaling too soon, and not exactly where you’d think the hit would come.

1 like

Great example! Thanks for sharing it.

I’ve seen similar cases—not in communities I have managed but in our customer base. One huge brand that I won’t name came to us, looking to migrate their community to Discourse. They provide navigation software and they had sub-categories for every single geographic location they serviced.

At the time we were concerned about the load on the admin functions if they had thousands of categories. We refused to build deeper layers and tried to convince them of the power of tags, but they wouldn’t budge. We walked away on the deal because it was never going to work in a way that we believed was sustainable.

Designing scalable IA is so important.

1 like