Showing posts with label Doc Searls. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Doc Searls. Show all posts

Tuesday, February 28, 2012

By what and by whom do we want to be remembered?

Forbes reported this week that 'CMOs must prepare for the next technology revolution’.
The revolution in question is the shift from org-owned CRM (customer relationship management processes) to customer-owned VRM (Vendor Relationship Management - as Doc Searls has pioneered ).

This 'revolution' is, of course, far less tech/tool related than described. It is for more attitudinal and requiring of cultural shift (as often the case, observers confuse correlation with causality).

The basic notion is that the customer gets to own their data and share it with whom they choose to their own ends and benefit (as opposed to the organisation laying claim to customer data). 'Personal' is one example of the output of such a cultural shift in thinking.

All of which surfaces some questions about data ownership that have been gnawing at me.

What is the difference between your actions being recorded in a digital database - and being recorded by our human collective memory?
Do human memories decay faster, do digital ones do a worse job of delivering context (and therefore meaning)? These are the 'technical issues'. They are questions of effectiveness.

By what and by whom do we want to be remembered?
Let's set aside for the moment that memory and data may be different things - that memory may be the story through which we understand the data stored in our and other people's collective memory. In my view that applies equally to data stored in databases; it makes no sense without a story applied to it, derived from experience and with context.

By whom or what is it anything from 'ok' to be remembered, all the way through to 'desirable' to be remembered?
We want our friends and families to remember us. Is this different from data being stored in a database. If so, how and why?
We want our favourite restaurants and hotels to remember us.
We want society to remember us.
We want posterity to remember us.

Throughout history the remembering has been done by other humans, creating context around the data in the stories they tell, write, record and film.

So why not have Google storing your data? Why not Facebook? Why not the brands you consume? Perhaps they can record the source material more accurately than has been possible. The stories that make the data comprehensible, that gives it its context, will still require humanising.

I ask these questions because I think we need to be clear about what the risks and benefits of who owns data really are.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Tuesday, December 14, 2010

Reflections on my first 20,000 tweets

I just clocked up my 20,000th tweet. A moment perhaps to pause and reflect on what's going on here.

According to twitter I've been tweeting since June 20, 2007 but I'm pretty sure I didn't get serious with it until maybe six months later.

In any event, in the same period I have blogged 763 times. That is, for every blog post since I signed up for twitter, I have tweeted 26.2 times.

I tweet so much that Twournal (which turns your tweets into a book) can't cope. All it'll handle is the last 3200 - which I now make available for download should you so desire.

I suspect the same limitations are imposed on the word cloud I generated of my tweets. But then I guess twitter is all about real time, so what the hey?

The rate of decline in my blog posting is huge. In Jun-Dec 2007 AT (After Twitter) I posted 152 blog posts. 2008 saw a roughly similar rate/month (348 for the year). But in 2009 I posted just 159 times. And this year to this point just 104.

This is partially because Twitter has replaced one of blogging's functions for me; microblogging. In those days of 300-plus posts a year some of the posts would have been a throwaway comment and a link to something I found interesting. Now I do that on Twitter - and I can do that anywhere anytime - something which wasn't available to me on blogger.com back in the day (though now is through some useful iPhone apps).

Blogging remains very important to me for a number of reasons:

1. Blogs are the least silo'd of all the social media: Anyone can find one of my blog posts. Yes with google now indexing tweets that is becoming more possible for twitter, but the 'real time results' window of opportunity for discovery is small. Anyone can discover my blog posts any time and from any where. This increases my ability to connect.
2. Blogs have longevity. What I post here remains until either I delete it or blogger.com goes pop. My tweets are gone before you can say "where's my first tweet"? Most tweet recall and compilation services appear only to be able to index the last 3200 tweets you post. Pah - a drop in my trivial ocean!
3. Blogs are your personal url - a home to store and share everything you care about. Neither twitter (with its light weight architecture) or Facebook (with it's silo'd approach) can match them for that. Doc Searls said it best: "Blogs are the single best representation of the sovereign self".
4. Blogs offer more depth and exploration: Most things can be said in just a few words (hence twitter) but not all. Exploration of ideas obviously benefit from interaction but ideas also need a chance to breathe, to wander, to digress. Blogs are good at this.

Tweeting offers something new. We tweet 'the trivial' - the snarky, the wisecrack. Twitter (and trailing along behind Facebook status updates) lowers the technical barrier to publishing what we think - and in its mobile guise particularly - where and when we think it.

For example there are tens of thousands of tweets in the UK every week in which people tell us they are having a drink. I never once wrote a blog post to say I'm having a beer - I've certainly tweeted that I have.

This creates a new value in aggregation - we express our metadata much more readily, systems, brands and orgs can learn from this about what we want, what we don't like, when we want it and where. And all without positing a single question. Market research without the waters muddies by point of view.

People have always said this stuff to their nearest friends 'in the real world'. Now they publish it for all their friends - and for the world to learn from. It's giving orgs the ability to wikifix by gathering realtime expressed metadata that was never available before.

And I'm part of that - moaning about train delays here, download speeds there, reporting on service good and bad - as it is happening to me.

But that's not my motivation for tweeting - at a rate of almost 16 a day - as I'm sure it's not yours.

Neither is it a desire to gain an audience - just as that's not my motivation in blogging.

What motivates me is the desire to connect with people who care about the same stuff I do.

The trivia is there for two key reasons: First to create that connection with someone else having an 'I know what you mean' moment - or someone who has a solution or a step towards it.
Second, it functions as our rather more sophisticated equivalent of picking the nits out of the next monkey's fur - we maintain our social connectedness through small talk - the weather, the pleasure in a cup of coffee, last night's game or even - to my shame - the X Factor.

Small talk is a very very human thing to do. Twitter is a very very human medium. To succeed in it as business or individual you have to take a very very human approach.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Thursday, June 11, 2009

How will they market the 10th Anniversary Cluetrain?

Ted Shelton brought together a small group for dinner in London last night (for which many thanks) including one Doc Searls.

If you've hung around this blog for any length of time you'll know I regularly reference Doc's ongoing work (particularly re the Vendor Relationship Management) and his seminal contribution to the now 10-year-old Cluetrain Manifesto.

A 10th anniversary Cluetrain is about to go on sale.
Doc told me something I didn't realise about the new edition: It will contain a new chapter each by each of the original co-authors (Chris Locke, Doc Searls, David Weinberger, Rick Levine) PLUS a chapter by the man who has become known as 'the fifth Beatle' of the cluetrain: JP Rangaswami.

JP works at BT in London and writes the exceptional Confused of Calcutta. His insights will be a huge addition.

So: Five new chapters. Updates learned from 10 years of post-cluetrain thinking.

A must buy.

I did warn Doc (pictured top) the world will be watching to see how this book is marketed.

One thing seemed sure from what Doc said last night - there's no online preview of the new elements before it goes on sale in print. It won't even be available on kindle at launch.

Embarrassing oversight? Or a clue to some of the new content of the book?
I'm confused by how it may fit with The Because Effect JP has referenced on many occassions (and with which I agree).

In this example that would play out as 'you don't make money with content, you make money because of it'.

The original cluetrain was (and remains) free to read online.

Perhaps the way for the launch of an updated cluetrain to generate most conversation among converts is to do exactly what we don't expect - a straightforward print-first launch?

Whatever the case the reality is the five authors have done their thinking outloud over the past decade. There may be few surprises for those on board.

But that this thinking has been distilled and decanted into one small book is likely to make it incendiary stuff for a whole new generation.

Who will you do a favour by buying a copy?

The motley crew in the lower of the iphone-rendered images with this post show (amid the blur...) l-r Ted Shelton, myself, John Willshire and Doc.



Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Monday, January 26, 2009

When Clay met Euan

Two of my favourite thinkers are in conversation tomorrow evening -Clay Shirky on the Folksonomy panel. This phot...Image via Wikipedia Clay Shirky (author of Here Comes Everybody -who I had the pleasure of interviewing for a video series on this blog last summer) and Euan Semple - who I'm chuffed to say is part of the BrandoSocial Consult network I've been putting together (disclosure I work for BrandoSocial).

It's virtual so everyone can sign up to attend.

Listen in from 2pm-3pm EST (that's 7pm-8pm UK, I think). Great use of an hour of your Tuesday, in my book.
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Monday, September 15, 2008

Best Practice in Social Media? Best practice being human

The estimable Neil Perkin just tagged me as part of a 'Best Practice in Social Media' meme.
Trouble is Neil has said much of what I would have.

Actually, that's not a problem - it's a great thing that so many of us are converging around similar conclusions: Seth Godin, David Armano, Mark Earls, Jackie Danicki, Alan Moore, Euan Semple and seminally Doc Searls and the rest of the Cluetrain gang, to name but a few...

So yes I'll agree with Neil, once again, that human interactions are critical. (Image by dotbenjamin via flickr)

They are exemplified in notions such as P2PR, Lean-Too Marketing, The Intention Economy (which Doc was referring to more than two years ago, so I'm a late comer on that!) and summed up as best as I know how in this slidedeck:



If you want a case study; try this. The slidedeck above also refers to some great examples of the use of social media.

Quick guide? Well I wrote this for 'how to blog'. Seems much of it is appropriate to all social media.


Time to tag: I nominate: Neville, Christopher, David, Mark and Jonathan
Dan was already tagged by Neil! This meme was started by Mitch.

Friday, August 22, 2008

P2PR theory into practice

Bauer Media (the company I work for) has a neat social media play called ditto.net (I would say that, wouldn't I? I've had a light-touch advice-and-support role throughout).

It's a human sorting engine, enabling crowd-sourced entertainment ranking through the simplicity of voting on lists. For the full story, listen to Colin Kennedy.

Anyways, a couple of months back Community Marketing Manager Dan Thornton and myself got our heads together to think of ways we might spread the word about ditto.net (image by Thomas Hawk via flickr)

What we came up with was a list to rank 'The RockStars of Web2.0'.
(You can read Dan's take on all this here).

We figured the inhabitants of this list would be people equipped to discover it and either be sufficiently intrigued/excited/embarrassed by it to perhaps point it out to the many people in their own networks of trust.

They, like all of us, will only pass on what they think their network will think is cool. That's a basic principle for me for how brands can adapt to the networked world.

Rather than bung them all a basic press release, we stood out of the way so they could (at least in some cases) make the discovery themselves.

And in a recent meme (emerging after we started this) that discover-it-yourself approach to PR seems to ring the right bells with the likes of Scoble, Arrington and, most explicitly, Steve Rubel (Does the thrill of the chase make PR obsolete).

We hoped they might even investigate beyond the list they appeared on - more discovery of their own. We trusted they were bright enough to make their own decisions about this - they certainly didn't need us to either lead them by the hand or tell them what to do.

Some I did contact directly, using networks of trust I have built up over time. That's the more traditional side of PR in a networked context. But others discovered ditto through P2PR - friend-adapted-pass-on.

Dan and I both blogged and tweeted about the intitial gathering of the list. We hosted posts where our own networks could contribute suggestions before the list for ranking got created on ditto itself. That stirred a little initial buzz.

And when the list went live, he and I posted and tweeted again. We didn't take it, or ourselves too seriously. Neither did those we contacted directly in the good old fashioned way.

And one way or another the list, and ditto.net, got pointed to by and on Stowe Boyd's /Message (that one really was down to my personal network - I also blog at /message!), by Joseph Jaffe, Euan Semple, Jonathan Macdonald, Richard Millington and, today, by the legend that is Doc Searls.

(Dan's list is way more complete than my own).

And that's without tracking the twitter retweeting (of which there has been plenty) or other social sentiment measures.

Even Jason Calacanis has involved himself in a discussion about it - after discovering (there's that magic word again) that he's languishing at the bottom end of the list!

On each occasion, the conversation continued. And continues. This isn't a boom-bang flash-in-the-pan firework display, it's the release of a (spin-free, upfront) message to be spread in the way the adhoc communities of purpose who discover it choose to adopt and adapt it. It's up to them if they find it useful and how they find it useful.

P2PR is working right here, right now. We haven't done the marketing to them, they choose to do it to themselves.

From broadcast PR to P2PR
View SlideShare presentation or Upload your own. (tags: new networks)

Thursday, July 17, 2008

Mobile operators. Take a seat before you read this

The VRM project had a bit of a bash this week.
The key learnings from it are brilliantly summed up by Chris Carfi at the Social Customer Manifesto in The Principles of VRM

Among the implications of these Doc Searls pointed out is:
"A free customer is more valuable than a captive one".

What's your relationship like with your customer? Do you like to think in terms of capture, lock-in, owning relationships?

Take a look.
Mobile Operators (among others) are advised to sit down first.

Doc speaks:

Tuesday, July 08, 2008

How to blog

I was recently asked to jot down a few thoughts on How To Blog and it occurred to me I'd never taken the time and trouble to write down what a lot of us take for granted.

There are lots of people who don't blog (oh yes, I do recognise this) - lots in your own organisations. This then is intended to give a little steer and big shove of encouragement.

And, as always, it is far from complete. It's the story so far, and it's one compiled from doing it and learning from masters - many of whom you'll find listed under 'Recommended Blogs'. And it'll get updated, thanks to your comments.

This isn't intended to explain why you should blog or what you might get out of it. You only have to look around this blog to see the connections blogging has forged for me, the ideas and opportunities that have grown from those, the relationships I could only have established from this little piece of me online. If you have the time.

If you don't, consider two things:
1. Doc Searl's assertion that blogging didn't make him rich, but it did make him valuable
2. The following video, the very excellent blogs in plain english Worth 3mins of your time because it just might change your life...



This then is not about the tools, it is about the attitudes you should try to carry with you as you expose yourself to the blogosphere...

12 Golden Rules of Blogging (...so far)

1. Speak in an authentic human voice: your own.
2. Write about what really interests you. Don’t think of broadcasting to an audience, think of having a conversation with a small group of people. Expect them to join in.
3. Don’t even try to answer all the questions you raise.
4. Worry less about quality and more about relevance.
5. Be brave. Say what you think.
6. Link out. Point at other stuff you think is good. This is how networks of trust are formed. Find other bloggers who are interested in the same things as you. Visit them regularly, add them to your own blogroll. This not only serves you well, it also serves those who visit. They are interested in what you are interested in - that's how they found you.
7. Only share things with your community if you think they will find them useful. They’ll think less of you if you don’t (if you just spam them with product plugs, for example…) This is neither in your or your company’s interest (if you happen to be considering blogging as a tool of marketing communications).
8. You don't have to be a writer. Pictures, slidedecks and videos work fine, too.
9. Post on other people’s blogs – you'll create stronger ties with members of your network of trust and allow their readers to discover you and your blog. Don't worry - If they don't find you relevant, they won't stay. Encourages feedback on your own.
10. Be useful. Don’t just link to your own stuff or sites you plan to promote, do it because it’s relevant or useful.
11. Be honest. People will see through a con, no matter how clever. It only takes one of them to find you out and they’ll tell everyone else. Best bet: Don’t try to fool anyone. If you don’t have the answers, say so. People sharing your purpose will help you find the answer.
12. Respond to comments on your own blog as fast as you can and with humilty – join the conversation, it belongs to us all.

Seriously, what are you waiting for? Start one now.

Monday, June 09, 2008

Recommending the thoughts of JP Rangaswami...

JP Rangaswami (one of my personal recommendations in the Rock Stars of Web2.0 list) has been considering the idea of twitter 'tweets' as recommendations.
I've had my own musings about marketing in this medium. Among others.
JP's take is to define what makes a recommendation different from an advert.
He says:
  1. The tweet must be unbiased, it must be about an entity that is in no way connected financially with the tweeter
  2. The tweet must be clear in signalling something sufficiently positive about the entity
  3. The tweet must be actionable, it must link to somewhere that the tweetee can do something about the recommendation
  4. Most importantly, a tweet becomes a recommendation when the tweetee decides it is one
He says his fourth point is the most important. I'd argue it could stand alone. It stands out and alone because it is the one that is all about how much you trust the recommendor. Trust is what transforms what might otherwise be seen as an advert into a valued recommendation.

We build that trust on a whole super-structure of metadata. The ability of one factor to bring that house of cards tumbling down will vary from instance to instance (and it is a precariously constructed structure, one which requires we don't lean too heavily on its walls, or over load it by piling card after card on top).

Yes it helps if there is no financial connection between you and the product or service you recommend if you want me to trust your recommendation, but not as much as it matters that I trust (or don't trust) your opinion in the first place.

I'll take the chef's recommendation in his restaurant, for example. I'm particularly likely to take it if he knows my taste. And I'll take a friend's recommendation on the right mobile phone package for me - even if he works for one of the operators. I trust him to do the right thing for me more than for the organisation he has a financial interest in.

I'm not that fussed about number 2, the clarity issue. In the conversational mode of twitter you can always ask for clarification. A recommendation would typically require this.

Even number 3 is of low importance to me. Adding links is a kind of nice-to-have, make-life-easy function. But we have google. And we like to control our own user experience. Direct links are fine if helpful - but lead me to your checkout page on amazon and I might gag.

No, for me, point 4 is king: "a tweet becomes a recommendation when the tweetee decides it is one".

The tweetee makes that decision based on whether or not they trust the tweetor, and whether or not the tweetor is talking about something they are interested in today.

In fact, the most effective manifestation of this is when the tweetee is the tweetor (sorry!) ie the person wanting a recommendation is seeking a recommendation. I ask my network of trust which small wifi-enabled decent-sized keyboard device to buy, they tell me the asus eeepc.

And it is this that led me to the idea of Conversations of Intent

It's very much inline with Doc's VRM (I believe) and also with JP's conclusion:
"It is the “follower” who imbues the “tweeter” with the “recommender” tag about a particular class of social object."

So here I am sharing the thoughts of JP Rangaswami, Doc Searls, Hugh MacLeod and Mark Earls. You can choose to treat this as recommendation. But only if you trust me.

Marketing is not something you do to people.

Wednesday, March 26, 2008

Social Shopping? Think Conversations of Intent

Social Shopping seemed to be all the buzz at last week's AdAge conference in New York. I wasn't there, but my self-selecting trusted news filter (that'll be blogs and twitter) kept me up to date moment by moment.

And as I mentioned in a throw-away line previously there is some sense in this because it combines the social tools/media/networks where all the 'eyeballs' happen to be, with the intention to buy (which is demonstrably lacking from most 'social networks').

Example? Bloomingdales in New York offers booths in which you can get a snap taken of you in the clothes you are thinking of buying. Does my bum look big in this? The wisdom of the crowds will pass judgement thanks to pictures sent instantly to your friends.

This kind of real time validation of choice has its place, no doubt. But it seems little more than a surface scratcher against the many opportunities which arise if you look at your consumer as someone rather more than a spending machine ( think converged buying/selling/marketing/creating/designing/inspiring individual).

I've been talking about two key elements of marketing recently: Conversation and Intention.

We often talk about "cutting through the clutter" and the "battle for attention" created by the proliferation of channels.

I'm thinking it is now less about the battle for attention and more about Conversations of Intent. Being the place where intention is expressed could be incredibly valuable.

My posts about trying to buy a car illustrate part of this, the part where I am expressing intent (apparently into an echoey void, as it happens - but there are fixes for that).

My post about buying an Asus EEEPC illustrate another part, the part where I am not only expressing intent, I'm seeking advice and navigation.

In both cases not one single advert was clicked. I had conversations (in the case of the car I tried and failed to initiate one with dealers... they have a long road to travel).

Both beg questions about the traditional role of the (even in-context, related, uber targeted) ads, especially online.

The value has been created by the fact that conversation within trusted networks is enabled.

All very Facebook Beacon, you may argue. But there is a crucial distinction. The initiation of the conversation is with the person who intends to make the purchase. It is a Conversation of Intent. And that's more in tune with Vendor Relationship Management thinking, as proposed by Doc Searls.

Social networks - any group within them - only create value you can easily measure when they self-organise with purpose. Groups that just have a bit of a chat don't create that instant value - the members don't even click on those carefully targeted ads. (They do, of course, create a longer term 'social ties' value which may be activated when 'the purpose' dawns on the group...)

Within twitter, those I follow and who follow me have a certain level of trust in each others ideas and opinions - it's writ large in how you go about deciding who you will follow. You find them interesting because they are interested in things you are interested in...

When I ask a question of that group another self-forms within it - one which is available right now (there's that value of synchronous communication and the value of those in a group who are willing to drop everything to help out that Stowe Boyd references).

What we end up with is a self-forming group which, by its very actions, defines a value-creating purpose.

The purpose in the case of my EEEPC purchase was to help me buy a small wireless device. It could as easily have been to find a good hotel, restaurant, car, piece of software, or to force down the level of tax on UK petrol!

And this all happens in a very fine conversation enabler ( conversations of intent, after all, require the easy ability to initiate conversation).

The self-forming group of purpose has three other important elements for 'social shopping'.
It has to:

a) be interested in me
b) be interested in what I'm expressing intent about
c) drop everything (no matter how briefly) to join in a conversation about it right now.

These may be the key factors in enabling the social shopper, provided we allow the 'consumer' to take the lead - for them to initiate the Conversation of Intent.

Monday, March 17, 2008

Doc Searls explaining the Cluetrain Manifesto 10 years on

I've added this to my vodpod (see left col) but in case you miss it there, here's your chance to see Doc Searls talk about the Cluetrain Manifesto 10 years on. Gotta get a clue!


Wednesday, March 12, 2008

A picture of the intention economy - and a second experiment in VRM


Well, here's another of my poorly-put-together diagrams. It came to me after my testing of a one-man-vrm in trying to buy a car.

It's pretty clear that tools, and simple ones at that, which can connect these two intentions are available. Put together shrewdly we may have a way of helping the vendor side catch up with the consumer?

Rather than search for myself, (and/or deciding for myself)which are the most likely candidates, I thought I'd try a little more VRM (vendor relationship management) - this time aimed at the people who should be best equipped to pick up on my clear intention! That is, if you're pitching tools which can do this job, the least you should be able to do is be alerted to my intention to find you, from this posting alone (though I will twitter away, too).

So please, either email me your suggestions for good tools which could help, or just post your thoughts and suggestions below. Thanks

Monday, March 03, 2008

I want to buy a Toyota Yaris. An experiment in VRM and word of mouth

I want to buy a Toyota Yaris... really, I do.

After reading the previous post, there may be some who a conclude from the supermarket analogy that it makes life easy for me to show up at one place where the prices are good and I can get 'all I need'. And therefore I'll back the jack-of-all-trades model.
(Worth noting, however, that you're getting all 'everyone' needs at the supermarket - you are being served as part of a mass, the lowest common denominator...)

I get where you are coming from. Who needs the hassle of chasing round the internet?
Doc Searls' Vendor Relationship Management project at Harvard has a response.
Brief description: "(providing)... customers with tools for engaging with vendors in ways that work for both parties."

This should mean that if I mention that I want to buy something in a blogpost, facebook status update, twitter feed etc - then that is the right time for the supplier to reach out to me.

Yes, if I had google adsense on this page a supplier would be reaching out right now (and they may well be where this post appears as an rss feed elsewhere). Trouble is the google adsense advertiser would 'reach out' with a 'broadcast' advert - one which didn't answer the particular questions I will raise. They wouldn't start a conversation with me. It would be down to me to click-thru and trawl through options, likely as a result of some bland white lie such as 'best price'.
No one would have recommended the click receipient to me, either. Trust?

What else could we expect our vendors to do? Well, clued-up service and product suppliers need not wait for the VRM project to do everything for them. They have proto-tools available now, if only they look around them.
They have google alerts, rss feeds, rss aggregators, etc etc. How many are actually using them?
So I'm going to test to see how well and if any are using them.

There's a prize at stake, of sorts. The winner gets to sell me a car.

I want to buy a Toyota Yaris - and I'm going to blog about this fact (and twitter a bit) to see if this simple piece of disaggregated content gets picked up by someone savvy enough to sell me one.
It's also a test of word of mouth because it's possible that the dealer (owner?) with the car I want isn't clued up... but he might know a friend, or a friend-of-a-friend who is.

So let's begin.
I'm in the UK.
I want a low mileage Toyota Yaris in either T3 or TR spec, registered late 2006 onwards (new shape one). Must have aircon of some form. Ideally 1.3 petrol but will consider 1.0. Probably go for the five door. My wife prefers silver (and it will be her car). Ex-demo would be ideal. Will consider new if you can do the kind of deal that makes me accept the ludicrous VAT costs involved.
Don't need to do part-ex.

Over to you.

Friday, February 29, 2008

Doc Searls on the value emerging from all that time you waste blogging...

Doc Searls gives us another example of the Because Effect:

"I make zero money
with blogging. (No advertising. Love that.) But I make more than zero because of blogging. Not enough to make me rich, but enough to make me valuable. And far more than I would make with advertising alone.

"And the value I create isn’t just for me. I see what I do here as a positive contribution to the world: open prose that’s like open code: simply useful. Or, in other terms, NEA: something Nobody owns, Everybody can use and Anybody can improve.

"At its best, anyway. Some of what I write, I’m sure, is useless. But most of the time I’m at least trying to do something helpful. I think all the best bloggers, like the best programmers, the best builders, the best Wikipedia contributors, all try to do that. Whether they sell it or not."

Absolutely. And it's how all value will be created before too long.

Monday, September 17, 2007

When the vanguard becomes the frontline (the network comes with them)

There were some brilliant minds in London and all at the same time last week.

Ajit Jaoker organised a dinner for ForumOxford members to hook up with Howard Rheingold.
Stowe Boyd, JP Rangaswami, Euan Semple and Doc Searls all got together in various combinations.

If you don't know who these people are - or about their work - it's time you got yourself up to speed. Really. Not next week. Today.

I'm not listing all this for the sake of name-dropping.

The point is these people have been at the vanguard of thought about the seismic changes we are all undergoing - in social, economic, political and business fields.

They have represented the bleeding edge. And as Alan Moore likes to warn, people with a message from the future don't often get a warm welcome from the status quo. "Pioneers often get shot," as he puts it.

But I get the feeling the bleeding edge, the pioneers, are increasingly becoming the frontline.
They aren't out on their own anymore. The status quo is finally learning to embrace them and what they represent.

These guys all do work with bluechip companies. The bluechips aren't shooting them any more.

And if your organisation still thinks their thinking is all a bit "out there", it's time for a serious reappraisal of what you consider the norms.

I met Stowe a fortnight back. I met Euan last week. I hope I'll catch up with the others in person soon. I'm aiming to introduce Alan to Euan very soon. The connections have all come through blogging first. We are an example of a self-forming community of interest in action.

This community understands the power of the network. It lives by it.

I'm reading Systems Thinking (Creative Holism for Managers) by Michael C Jackson at the moment. It's a hard slog. But here's a gem that's kept me going:
  • "Everyone can talk to everyone and should"
  • "Everyone is responsible"
  • "Network extensively"
I'll just corrupt that last one, if I may (sprinkle in a bit of co-creation...)
  • Network extensively - with purpose

Wednesday, September 12, 2007

Don't just witness the network. Be part of it

This article is not necessarily intended for regular readers of this blog. You guys get it.

This is intended as a primer for those new to the network - those who still need convincing. Forward it to your boss or anyone else you think it might help.

It's aimed at those working in traditional media companies. But you are welcome to use it as you will. Crib bits, share bits. Attribute where it's fair.

And if you create something better as a result - great. Do us all a favour and share it!

A version you can download is available here.



There’s a powerful explosion looming. It could wipe out everything we know.

Some of us see it coming. If only we could warn someone.

Sound familiar?

Sometimes I feel a little like the Japanese fellow from Heroes. Only, not as cute, obviously.

Hiro can bend time and space. I can’t claim that.

But he’s seen the future, he’s seen a threat and he’s doing his best to warn those who can make a difference. But he’s speaking a language few of them understand.

Now that is familiar.

Today, I hope to teach a little Japanese, so to speak…

In Heroes there’s a moment of super-evolution kicking-in.

Perhaps art is imitating life? There’s little doubt in my mind that the changes in media and in business in general happening right now are not evolutionary – they are revolutionary.

But revolution is how evolution has always happened.

Need an image? Think of the fosbury flop. Once, every high jumper tried to leap a little higher over the bar by honing their scissor kick. And everyone knew what they were doing. They knew how to do a scissor kick. They just had to work a little better and harder to make incremental improvements.

That’s often what we demand of our business planning. It’s what ‘The City’ likes. It’s what The City ‘gets’. Incremental improvement. Get a little better, a little faster… a little higher.

But the breakthroughs – the great leaps forward – come when someone works out how to alter what they are doing. And the rest of us wonder what the hell that high jumper is up to as he turns his back to the high jump bar and starts to leap… backwards… and higher than ever before.

We’re witnessing a world in which self-forming, non-directed, communities of shared interest (and purpose) are winning. We are witnessing a world of edge-in rather than centre-out control. We are witnessing the death of mass media and the emergence of global niches.

We should be more than witnesses. Because all this adds up to the biggest change since the industrial revolution – and not only for media. It’s also the most radical of shake-ups for how services will be developed and served, how products are created, how value is built – how the business of business is done.

And in pure information-control terms, it’s the biggest shift in 500 years. Information – not money - is what makes this world go round.

But the good news is that you don’t have to be first to win. The good news is that it’s not the fittest that survive – but the most adaptable.

Provided we are willing to learn, to adapt, we can do more than survive. We can go from strength to strength.

What characterizes the new world we see emerging?

It is inhabited by what Alan Moore refers to as the We Species, what Stowe Boyd calls the Edglings. These people are nodes on the network. They are constantly connected to groups of their choosing and creation. They expect to co-create, rate, share, shape, design, engage - participate.

In this world there’s no need for mass media. Mass media is about the lowest common denominator – pleasing as many people as possible for as much of the time as possible.

But the possibilities are now much greater. Now there are tools available which allow anyone to please themselves – and their self-selecting groups of shared interest - all of the time.

Mass Media was always about offering you a load of content you didn’t want (literally in the case of magazines) stapled to content you did.

Where digital content applies, now the user can choose exactly the content they want, and only the content they want.

This disaggregation leads to one-to-one relationships between relevant content and relevant selling opportunity. Advertising is no longer about reaching the maximum number of any-old eyeballs. Now it is about reaching the optimum number of the exact right eyeballs. And if there’s no need for a mass audience for advertising eyeballs, what role is left for mass media?

Interruptive ads on TV aren’t working, we’ve stopped looking at the banner ads on websites and we tune away the moment an ad appears on radio - if we are still putting up with our listening choices being made centrally for us!

Now we are seeing that it’s more important to be famous for 15 people, than for 15 minutes.

This world is awash with content – slashing its value in and of itself. Its value does not reside in broadcasting it to the masses – its value is revealed only by the long tail.

Quality rules are changed. Relevance trumps ‘quality’ if that quality is judged by someone essentially irrelevant to you.

What does the We Species want? To engage with self-forming communities of (global) niche shared interest (purpose).

It wants Facebook, LinkedIn, MySpace, Bebo, Twitter, txt… social networks are the fastest growing business opportunities on the planet.

Most of the world’s top 15 sites are engaged networks of sharing. None are broadcast, centre-out models. And it’s been this way for more than the last five minutes…

We Species is a communal, social, animal. We Species is a participator.

We always have been. Now we have the tools to roll back the oddity of the last 50-or-so years of being ‘entertained’ in silence – of being broadcast at.

Audiences (that which we were) consume content.

Communities (that which was formerly known as the audience) co-create, comment on, rate, review, engineer, design, market, share, buy, sell, create value (YouTube, Blogs, eBay, MyNuMo)… are in charge.

How do we engage with this networked world, with the communities we wish to be part of rather than the audiences we want to broadcast to? How do we find our place?

Perhaps the new role for media is to be the creators/facilitators of platforms for self-forming communities of shared interest.

Focused on their interests, we should provide tools to allow co-creation and aggregation of content, products and services.

We see communities working together to create content right now. And we’re seeing the emergence of communities creating services and products, too.

And I believe (see Why Media is the New Business Ecology, below) this puts media in the very best position of all business types as the 21st century finds second gear.

In the networked world community – not OUR content – is king.

The network creates, responds, controls… creates value.

There are new rules:

1. Serve the community first

2. Niche global NOT mass.

3. Two-way flows – NOT broadcast

4. Networks NOT Silos

5. Power of the node over power vested in hierarchies

6. Adhoc, self-forming communities over directed teams.

7. Persistent conversation trumps ‘capturing’ ID.

8. Real-time, niche-community-focused, user-generated information over News

9. We should all act as shared contributors to and users of common pool resources.

10. We should learn to cherish Group Forming Network Theory (Reed’s law).

Great things happen when you engage with the network. Value emerges in rarely-predicted ways…

Blogs are a great example.

Some regard them as the best illustration of all of this giant leap we are undertaking.

They represent the greatest shift in the control of information since Gutenburg rocked up with his movable type.

Until that point information was centralised and restricted. The Church published The Book. You were lucky if you could even read it, let alone own a copy.

With the arrival of the printing press books could be produced cheaply and distribution became much less controlled – much less centralised.

The result was an explosion in new thinking generated by new routes for the exchange of information. Mash-ups for the masses.

Now blogs have arrived, lowering the technical barrier so that anyone can publish their thoughts, their views, their ‘information’, on the internet.

Doc Searls says: “I can’t think of anything that demonstrates the sovereign nature of the self better than a blog.”

And if blogs were just like books – this would be a radical transformation in information control and in self expression, too.

But they are more than this – much more.

Blogs offer two-way flows of information between the author and the readers who respond.

They create trust through recommendation and reputation.

They enable decentralised, self-forming communities of interest.

They have zero hierarchy or silo restrictions.

Bloggers share connections with one another. They come together through the interest they share. They form networks – communities with a common purpose. They introduce each other to things they didn’t know they needed to know – and to people they didn’t know they needed to know – and all the things that these new participants in their community of interest know.

The mash-ups and mergers of ideas that result create new emerging value.

They are much, much, more than electronic never-ending books.

And they work to create real value. Conferences get organised, products and services get invented and marketed, new ideas emerge. Job offers happen.

Opening up your network – which successful blog networks do – will help you understand and it will help you win.

Goldcorp in Canada shared its mining data with the internet – and turned itself from a $100m company to a $10bn one. Nokia’s ‘connecting people’ mantra transformed it from a cellphone maker to a major media powerhouse. Facebook students bagged themselves £144 a year in profit just by joining a group to protest against proposed overdraft charges. Regarding itself as a series of widgets anyone could distribute made youtube the phenomenon of web2.0.

How do you personally get to grips with this world?

The best way of learning usually involves a bit of doing. I’m going to advocate the same.

Mostly because, as Alan Moore is fond of saying,: “That which we create, we embrace.”

So, be a node. Don’t just witness the network in action. Be part of it. Leave an impression on it. Add a little of yourself. Participate.

If you’re doing nothing on the network right now, start. Just touch the network maybe three times a week: write a post on a forum, add a comment on a blog. Write a blog post yourself? Rate someone’s review. Play with facebook. Suck it and see!

And please don’t say you don’t have time. Getting a fundamental understanding of how the network functions is critical for you to take your value-sharing place on it. It’s critical for your future and for your own and your network’s productivity.

Stowe Boyd asks us to think of attention (ie demand on our time) as being more about flow than focus.

  • Don't listen to industrial era or information era (the last stage of industrial-ism) nonsense about personal productivity...
  • The network is mostly connections. The connections matter, give it value, not the nodes.
  • Time is a shared space -- your time is truly not your own
  • Productivity is second to Connection: network productivity trumps personal productivity.

This belief in the power of the network and his willingness to subsume personal focus to it is based on the simple notion that:

I am made greater by the sum of my connections. So are my connections.

At a corporate level, it’s my belief that we need to activate the network internally: Allow adhoc, non-directed, self-forming communities of shared interest.

I believe we have to figure out the tools to bring people of shared interest/passions together within business organisations to create ideas they will embrace. These will result in teams of people that no one has directed to get together – working on projects that no ‘boss’ has ordered the construction of. These will be a better fit with the needs of the residents of the networked world.

We must learn to make our internal silo walls permeable – and those around the organisation itself.

If Nokia is comfortable inviting emap, Disney, Yahoo et al to talk mobile advertising with it – why isn’t your organisation opening its doors?

Shared ideas create emerging value for all those taking part. This is the lesson of the network.

Jouko Ahvenainen of Xtract says: “Today’s great phenomena are born in networks where shared passion creates action.”

We see examples again and again: it’s even transforming politics right now with Barack Obama’s facebook groups, youtube channels and blogs threatening to trump all the cash old-style politicians are throwing at the American presidential race.

Centralised control, centralised power, is being disintermediated where ever the network touches it. A new ecology dawns.

There’s a powerful explosion looming.

You can be part of it – or you can be blown away by it.


Investigate further:

Thursday, July 12, 2007

Can't make money with content? Make money because of it.

I read the following on 'Confused of Calcutta' (see recommended blogs, left)

"When something that was originally scarce starts becoming abundant, something strange happens. You find that you start making money because of that thing rather than with that thing. That’s the Because Effect." Click here to read it in its original context.

Based on Doc Searl's original thinking, is there a clue here as to what to do with all the expert-created content traditional media companies are heavily geared towards producing?

When it was scarce we made money with it. But now that great content is abundant, we have to move to making money because of it.*

In the case of Prince and his Mail On Sunday new album giveaway, he understands that great content (music files) are abundant. The scarce resource he has is his concert tickets. Because he has an abundant thing to give away, he is working on the theory that this will engage a level of fan commitment that leads to the purchase of concert tickets (and, presumably other merchandise).

What is the equivalent in the world of traditional publishing models?

There are authors (eg Cory Doctorow) who offer their complete novels for download and sharing. And they see the sales of actual books rise as a result.

I'd guess people who read the downloads become fans, who then evangelise others to buy. And some of the original downloaders decide that even though they've read the download, they want to own the product - to put on their shelf - to have and to hold. The content is abundant - the product itself is scarce.

So where does that leave your thoughts on what to do with all that content your media company is producing? Could a free DVD or download activate people to go the movies? Buy merchandise (games, toys, go to see the next film in the series..?) Maybe?

And where does this leave periodical publishing? Could it be as simple as putting all your content online as the initial draw for the formation of communities of shared niche interests (aggregation of vast audiences... if you must), leading to the opportunities of "We Media" (Communities Dominate Brands)?

The challenge here is working out, or even recognising, what the scare resource we have to sell is? Perhaps its experiences, events, engagement marketing opportunities, co-created services and products that will emerge as values from the network of the community we'll be part of.

New rules apply. Persuading your stake holders of the value of these may be the toughest part of all.

* Corrected with the kind assistance of JP Rangaswami - 'Confused of Calcutta'

Monday, November 06, 2006

Big ideas about ideas

I keep regular tabs on the musings of Doc Searls.
This recent work (Ten Ideas About Ideas) is an interesting take on how being open about your ideas will make them the best they can be.

The problem for the doc, I guess, is that the bottom-line is often shouting loudest with its 'keep it a secret' message. How else will you retain your competitive advantage, it will insist?

But that secrecy can be infectious. How many hold back on ideas within organisations, hoarding them to play their cards at the right moment, in order to score a competitive advantage politically/internally?

I'd like to think the company I work for is pretty open internally. But I also know it could be better. This blog is one of my responses to that.

Have a read of doc's ideas about ideas.

If it makes you feel just a few per cent more collaborative today, job done.

Wednesday, October 11, 2006

Today’s most interesting:

Here's my must-reads/need-to-knows for today:
1. Doc Searls on this amazing bit of multi-platform integration in the Danish newspaper industry. And on the battle for the web.
2. Carphone Warehouse buys AOL UK - to grow 'ad and content revenues'.
3. Google launches against Office - spreadsheets and WP users can share (google docs), send to blogs and chat via.
4. Ann S, Moore on transforming Time Inc for the digital age.

The above are drawn from feeds and recommended blogs which appear in the left column of this blog. Got something to add? Post it below.

FasterFuture.blogspot.com

The rate of change is so rapid it's difficult for one person to keep up to speed. Let's pool our thoughts, share our reactions and, who knows, even reach some shared conclusions worth arriving at?