Community management target audience: define and test it

Choose the next action by locating the uncertainty: who qualifies, what members need, which differences alter delivery, or who has approval power. Treat each answer as provisional until it can be applied consistently. The branches below turn those uncertainties into decisions while keeping audience size, member need and organisational authority distinct.

If a boundary determines who may take part

If entry depends on a rule, write the condition so two people would reach the same decision. A professional group may require current registration or employment in a field; a customer community may require an active account. State the actual test instead of relying on a loose idea of belonging.

For an England-focused offer, specify whether the boundary means residence, employment, service availability or the organisation's location. The UK business activity, size and location release reports business counts by activity, size and location, but cannot show which employees have the task, would join or would benefit. Do not turn a UK total into an England estimate using population share.

Rule of thumb: define eligibility and the geographic boundary in terms another person can apply.

If people can name an activity but not a reason to join

If people describe what they might do on a platform but not why they would participate, redirect the definition towards a need.

Posting, attending or reading are possible behaviours; none explains why participation matters. A person might seek a private introduction, a searchable answer or a facilitated meeting, so identify the task and the circumstance that makes peer contact useful.

A relevant circumstance could be looking for a peer in the same profession. Check whether that need reflects prospective members rather than an assumption about how they should take part, using the audience research guide. Do not make platform behaviour, such as willingness to post, the definition of the audience.

Rule of thumb: state the member's reason to join before choosing an activity.

If a proposed difference could change delivery

If a characteristic might alter recruitment, facilitation, moderation, content or measurement, test its effect before keeping it. Experience, language, access needs, confidentiality, available time and the consequence of a wrong answer can matter. Profile details that do not change the offer add complexity without helping decide who belongs.

Research should not rely only on people who already contribute. Include people who left, stayed silent or used direct support, and note which recruitment routes still fail to reach. The Government Digital Service and Home Office account of user research recommends involving actual or likely users and considering people who might otherwise be excluded; that public-service method does not prove a commercial segment is valid.

Check reach as well as eligibility by recording recruitment routes, required permissions and groups still absent. If every route reaches the same small circle, the sample may not reveal meaningful variation. Paid panels can widen access, but their membership and screening also shape who is represented.

Rule of thumb: keep a distinction only when it changes research or delivery.

If members and approvers have different needs

If members and approvers are different people, name each role and need rather than forcing them into one profile.

Staff may use an employer community for learning, while leaders in learning, communications or human resources authorise it. A buyer role may control spending, while members judge whether participation is worthwhile and safe.

A buyer may ask for reports identifying individuals, while members may expect confidential peer discussion. Treat that mismatch as a design and privacy question, not something to settle by assuming one group's needs can be ignored. Check what counts as personal information when deciding how information will be handled.

Rule of thumb: describe members and decision-makers as separate audiences when their needs differ.

If the boundary still depends on interpretation

If colleagues could classify the same person differently, turn the definition into a testable statement. Include the member task, eligibility, geographic boundary, relevant variation and exclusions. Keep estimates of audience size separate from evidence that the need exists, and connect each part of the statement to supporting interviews or records.

Use this check before recruiting:

For example, a peer community might serve people responsible for day-to-day moderation of online member communities for charities serving people in England, who need advice about difficult member behaviour. Current moderators of those communities would qualify; people handling only general communications or advising a charity as a vendor would not.

Turn the answers into a testable audience statement, then use it to recruit five plausible cases through different channels. If researchers cannot decide whether someone qualifies without interpreting words such as ambitious or engaged, rewrite the boundary and review it when the offer, rules or service territory changes.

Discourse and Circle are examples of platforms a team could assess against access, moderation and confidentiality needs. Treat the comparison as a requirements check, not a product ranking, and specify any facilitation or moderation as a service requirement. The platform comparison should follow the audience's needs rather than determine them.

Rule of thumb: revise the definition if five plausible cases cannot be sorted consistently.