There is a lot of talk these days about "community". My dislike of the term may come from being a sociology major where things like "network theory," "social reinforcement" models, and "group dynamics" were analyzed to understand the behavior of individuals, individuals in groups, and the collective as a whole. More likely it comes from what Babson calls the "Buzzword Blending Syndrome" - people addicted to incorrectly using business jargon.

In the span of a year discussions have changed from a pre-web 2.0 use of sociological applications to improve operating metrics, resolve holes in a business model, etc. to a web 2.0 "Community" centric conversation. While is remains unclear what people actually mean when referencing "community" (my best guess: people interacting through conversation), the difference in conversation style is key. In the former, one starts with a problem and builds a solution to solve it. In the latter, we start with a solution ("Community") and try to find a problem it can solve. (Lets hope it's solving a problem anyway.)

When I started my first business I was told one thing consistently: starting with a product and finding a market for it is not the ideal path. Yes, some succeed this way but they are harder to find. Start with the problem and build the solution from there. This solution may or may not involve "Community".

The more companies out there creating "community," the harder it is for each additional "community" to be successful. People only have so much time in a day to be active contributors and the percent of the user base that actively contributes is small - possibly growing but small nonetheless.

Whether you're starting from the bottom up (problem to solution) or from the top down (solution to problem), if you don't tap into the basic sociological principles that motivate/drive/control individual behavior in and out of groups, it will be a challenge keeping your "community" alive as opportunities for consumer engagement continue to rise.