Process flow for People Invited to Network and Private Group

[Jeff Bean]

I've got a problem with the process flow when someone is invited to join both the network and a group. The process flow stops before the new member has joined the group.

Only resource I can find on this issue is it's similar to a discussion last year here.

The network requires approval on joining. The group is private (haven't tested it with a public group). Here's the flow:

1. The inviting member provides an email address for a person to invite to the group who is not yet a member of the network. The email invitation is sent to the invited person.
2. The invited person receives the invitation message. It invites them to "check out" the group. When they click the link, it takes them to the network sign-up page. (I'm dealing with that misdirection with the language editor.)
3. Invited person creates network profile. (Admin approves.) New member receives notice that network membership is approved. Message says you can sign-in - no mention of group (again, I'll try to fill that gap in the language and mention the group).
4. Invited person (now a network member) clicks the link and it takes them to the main page.

So the problem is the process flow stops before the person who was invited to the group ever becomes a member of the group. After all the email messages are done being sent, the new member is still not a member of the group. They've never been directed to it. And being new to the network and to the sign-up process, they have no reason to think they're not a member of the group yet. If they think to navigate to the group, they'll find their invitation on the group page.

I would think the process flow should continue until the invited person is a member of the group they were invited to. Either their network sign-up serves as an acceptance of the group invitation (okay solution) or at least whenever they sign-in they are taken directly to the group page until they accept or decline the invitation (best solution).

(It would be helpful if the "My Groups" page also showed groups each member has open invitations to. At least they would be more likely to click on that and maybe find it.)

So it seems my solution is having to shoe-horn in a whole lot of text-instructions into the two email messages about what they need to do to actually accept the invitation they've been given. (I would very much like to redirect to a page where I could explain all this, but because I'm using member moderation that's not available.)

Is this they way it's supposed to work? If not, I'll do a support ticket. If it is, I guess this is a feature request to complete the process flow. Until then, I'd appreciate any suggestions from the community for a workaround. 

[Shalini Bahl]

Hi Jeff, were you able to figure this out? I am having teh same problem.

[Jeff Bean]

Shalini, I forgot I had posted this here. Later I posted another discussion on the same issue. Take a look there for all the gory details.

Upshot is Ning recognizes this is a bug. Apparently the invitation email locks-down after being used only once. The problem is they designed it to be used twice: once for the non-network member to join the network, then a second time to join the group. After the person is invited uses it to join the network, Ning's messaging tells them to go back to the invitation email and click it again, but their system has already locked-down that invitation and it won't work again.

They have not seen fit to advise when, if ever, this bug may ever be fixed.

I suggested in the interim that they at least change their messaging. Ideally they'd advise people how a non-network member must be invited to a group:

1. They must first be invited to the network and join;
2. After they have joined, the inviting person must ask the new network member to connect as a friend;
3. The inviting person then sends an invite to the new network member to join the group.

That's a whole lot of low-tech, high-touch process, for sure. I'm going to lose a lot of folks who won't go through all that, even if they knew it's what they need to do. It won't help trying to educate them as long as Ning continues to provide them with wrong information. (Note that steps #2 and 3 could be replaced if the new member were instructed or inspired on their own to navigate to the group themselves and ask to join; that's a lot to expect of someone who wasn't already a network member.)

In the very least Ning shouldn't continue to tell people to use a link twice that they've designed to only work once. It's wrong, they know it, but they won't change it.

This is a problem. Ning knows it. Ning has diagnosed it. They know what the solution is (allow two clicks and don't lock-down the link). They haven't implemented the solution. Ning won't advise when they might see fit to do that.

As you maybe can tell, I'm ramping-up to put the heat on Ning again. I've got two networks I want to launch at the new year and this will be a significant problem for me. If you are having the same problem it might help if they knew that.

Jeff

[Shalini Bahl]

Thanks Jeff! This is what I got back from Ning:

hanks for reaching out. In short: no non-members invited toa  group are not automatically added to the group. Here is what happens:

1) Non-Member receives invite to group
2) This invite lets the person join the network
3) Once the person joins the network, they see the group invitation in their sign in/ sign out box on all pages of the network
4) Member clicks on that invite to go directly to the group and join

This invite is a two step process because non-members cannot join groups; only members can join groups. I'd suggest inviting people to the network first and then send a group invite once they join. Or you can send a message in the group invite to tell people where to find the invite link once they join. Hope this helps.

This seems simpler than what you noted. Is what Ning saying not how it really works or do you have it wrong?

[Jeff Bean]

What you describe Ning saying would be an improvement. If so, they've done what I suggested as an interim solution: changed their messaging and accurately describe it as a two-step process. I haven't tested it yet but will soon.

I wish they had told me they had done this after all the back-and-forth we had about it. Thanks for letting me know!