Everyone's Blog Posts - PitchEngine Network

The Dopey vs. Smart Side of Social

2010-04-01T19:54:50.000Z

When you call someone a dope usually it creates an offense. When you do dopey things people assume you are a dope. So lets examine the dopey side of social and consider what one might call "dopey" or stupid.

Stupidity, or dumbness, is the property a person, action or belief instantiates by virtue of having or being indicative of low intelligence or poor learning abilities. Stupidity is distinct from irrationality because stupidity denotes an incapability or unwillingness to properly consider the relevant information. It is frequently used as a pejorative and consequently has a negative connotation.

There are plenty of dopey or stupid things people and organizations are doing with social media. Here are my top ten:

Limiting their thinking to "social media" as only a channel for marketing
Not "thinking" how their actions, words and deeds reflected in using social can hurt them
Posting "social job" descriptions which reflects their lack of understanding all things social
Using social to "collect" people to use for selfish purposes
Promoting their brand as "social" while their web site is anything but social
Not looking at their entire enterprise as a "social ecosystem"
Thinking that "corporate social media policies" will solve cultural and relational problems
Using social for public relations without putting the public into those relations
Being publicly arrogant and ignorant which go hand in hand
Trying to measure the rate of change without considering what is changing

The Opposite of Dopey

The opposite of dopey is wisdom, knowledge and doing smart things. Wisdom comes from experience and applied knowledge. Smart things reflect the use of wisdom and knowledge to do things that make other things better. So in order to determine who is using social media to do things that make other things better you have to look for people and organizations who are improving things by using social media. Finding people and organizations who are improving things by using social media goes way beyond looking at short term marketing results from many who are creating those results.

Creating short term marketing results does not reflect the use of social media that makes other things better accept maybe short term marketing results. Short term results can only create long term value if the things you do are systemically aimed and integrated at making other things better. So ask yourself the following questions and your answers will determine whether your intents are dopey or smart.

Are you using social only as an additional marketing channel?
Have you or do you intend to hire someone to "manage" all things social?
Have you identified what problems social will solve or create? Ask Nestle
Is your web presence designed, configured and enabled to be "social" based on the users definition? Ask every brand.
Is your definition of "Public Relations" the same as the "Public's Relations"?
Have you mapped out your internal social ecosystem to the external social ecosystem? Do you know how?

There are plenty of others questions I could add but by now I hope you get the point. Unless you think and view "social" as a systemic dynamic and plan accordingly any and all results will be short term. However, some short term results can cost you dearly in the long term. Get it?

Does "Social" Waste Productivity?

2010-03-29T14:00:00.000Z

While all things social are being touted as innovative ways to "produce things" the reality is that all things social are currently non-productive.

You might say that social is much more productive than traditional advertising and marketing methods. However that is like saying that your car goes faster using higher octane gasoline, it doesn't but it cost more.

Does the increase in hiring people with knowledge about all things social represent more productive? NOT! Does having to create on-line content, maintain all those profiles, keep up with the daily technological advances and follow every word from the most popular represent a gain in productivity? Not!

So we must begin to ask how can we use all things social to improve productivity gains? Your next question is likely why?

Non Productive Activities Hurt Results

We wonder why much of the on-line dialog about social media is about ROI. Everyone is coming up with metrics to justify the investment of time and money to create and manage all things social. Subsequently we see quantitative and qualitative measures used to again justify investments in all things social. Does anyone ever consider the time, energy and money spent trying to define and measures justification of social may be non-productive?

Productivity in Economics is simply the ratio of how much you can produce (Output), based on the resources available (Inputs). This is usually linked to production theory.

Production refers to the economic process of converting of inputs into outputs and is a field of study in microeconomics. Production uses resources to create a good or service that is suitable for exchange.

Production is a process, and as such it occurs through time and space. Because it is a flow concept, production is measured as a “rate of output per period of time”.

Production is more efficient when the same output results from less input. Some economists (in particular Leibenstein) use the term X-efficiency to indicate that production processes tend to be inherently inefficient due to satisficing behaviour. The “rate of efficiency” is simply the amount of (or value of) outputs divided by the amount of (or value of) inputs. If a production process uses 50 units of input (or $5000 worth of inputs) to produce one unit of output it is more efficient than a process that uses 55 units of input (or $5500 worth of inputs) to produce the same level of output. It is said to be 10% more efficient ({55-50}/50=1/10=10%).

While the internet has advanced some productivity in many ways it is still very non-productive. There are 1,000’s of communities discussing KM, SC, Economics etc etc etc. None of which are able to inventory relevant and relative “knowledge assets” and parse them into “smart databases” for use for the many.

We are still stuck with key words and categories which are meaningless. The context of content loses meaning without being tied to a taxonomy or any “onomy” of sort. Subsequently content is for the moment because who has time to read and create a “logic tree” from dozens, hundreds or thousands of “post” wrapped in irrelevant containers.

Things will change soon but until then all of us have to decide what is and isn’t productive in terms of use of our time and individual knowledge assets.

The next phase of the internet will be driven by “knowledge inventories” create by individual knowledge assets” which can be accessed systemically rather then rest in silos of meaningless context which are very non productive.

Re-Purposing Public Relations

2010-03-25T09:46:00.000Z

Re-purpose means to use or convert for use in another format or product. It would seem obvious that the definition and purpose of Public Relations (PR) needs to be re-purposed.

The common definition of Public Relations (according to wikipedia) is the practice of managing the flow of information between an organization and its publics.^[1] Public relations gains an organization or individual exposure to their audiences using topics of public interest and news items to....blah, blah, blah.

Given the impact and growth of all things social the means, methods and knowledge about Public Relations are being transformed and yet most PR professionals have yet to recognize the need for transformation.

Back to Intent

Lets breakdown the two words used to imply public relations. First the word public which means:

Of, concerning, or affecting the community or the people
Maintained for or used by the people or community
Participated in or attended by the people or community
Connected with or acting on behalf of the people, community, or government
Open to the knowledge or judgment of all
The community or the people as a whole
A group of people sharing a common interest

Now lets look at the word relations which means: A logical or natural association between two or more things; relevance of one to another; connection. Looking at the essence of the two words, public relations, and comparing it to current PR practices one must wonder where and when PR lost its way. I didn't see the words trick, capture, spin or mislead anywhere in the essence of the two words used behind the term "Public Relations"

What "Creates" Public Relations?

Public relations, marketing and advertising are all tied together. The related practices have emerged to create mass market appeal using old methods to reach an audience.

When you examine the fundamental meaning of "public and relations" you can see three things that influence human behavior and market sentiment. The three things are people connecting with knowledge of something or someone.

Corporations historically have adopted PR tactics to manage PR for the benefit of the corporation. However the intentions have flipped from institutional aims to the aims of individuals.

People, internal and external, are now enabled to influence "public relations" because they have been given a "voice" that is loud because the signal is not from one but many. People connected with other people "learn" new knowledge about things corporations do, sell and say. If a corporation does things that aren't "socially acceptable" then traditional PR practices cannot drown the noise of "people connected and equipped with the knowledge" of what the corporation has done or intends to do.

Good, bad and indifferent whatever "the corporation" does or intends on doing the "people" are listening and have the power to galvanize many to express an opinion on how the corporations actions impact the "public's relations". More and more people are voicing their opinion, sharing their knowledge and connecting their voice to many other people inside and outside corporate walls.

The conflict comes when corporations try and use "social media" to extend past "marketing, advertising and PR" practices to manage their "public relations". These are dangerous practices because the public now influences relations more than traditional PR practices. Subsequently corporations need to not only change their "marketing, advertising and PR" practices but rather the entire ecosystem of the corporation. Why? Because the foundation of any "corporation" rest with what people know.

Individual knowledge about anything is now everyone's knowledge about everything. Soon everyone's "knowledge" will become easier to find and use. What impact will that have on "public relations"? Intentions can no longer be hidden behind a mask. Just ask Nestle who is in charge of Public Relations.

Brian Solis coined the term PR 2.0 (Putting The Public Back in Public Relations) in recognition of what is needed to make the transformation. Brian is the foremost thought leader behind these emerging dynamics.

Social Fidelity vs. Pretense

2010-03-23T09:29:31.000Z

Everyone thinks they are somebody but not everyone notices. Anyone can be somebody but when they try and be somebody they are not everybody sooner or later notices.

Everyone wants to use their media to get others to notice them. Whether exercising their intellect, fame, position or brand name everybody wants to be noticed.

Media is funny medium in which everyone tries to apply some message, story or analysis to and all aimed at demonstrating what they know or who they know. Media has been and still is used to draw an audience. An audience satisfies the human ego to be known, famous and followed by others wanting to hear and see what somebody has to say or does.

Many enjoy the fame afforded by having an audience regardless of size. Some people create an audience under pretense which means deception or camouflage. Playing to the interest of an audience people and organizations use media to make themselves something they are not. We witnessed Tiger Woods fall from grace when the audience discovered he was not what he and the media pretended he was. We see it in politics when politicians pretend to believe is certain things just to get elected only to act against those beliefs after being elected.

Social Fidelity vs. Pretense

Fidelity is a notion that, at its most abstract level, implies a truthful connection to a source or sources. Fidelity also denotes how accurate a copy is to its source. The source of all media is an individual or an institution. If the media produced and propagated by the sources is not truthful or reflecting the true beliefs of the source well one could say that the source is trying to create pretense, which means deception or camouflage.

In human relations anything that is false, pretentious or deceptive will eventually create relational tensions. Depending on the offense caused by the deception the chain that binds relations together usually gets broken.

The Challenge of Fidelity for Marketers

The game of marketing is to get consumer attention to a brand, a product or service or an individual. Getting attention by using pretense may create awareness for the moment but if deception or camouflage is used to trick people into believing something that isn't relevant or true to their needs then there is no basis for a relationship.

In the world of marketing "copy" reflects content used to propagate a message, an ad or image. If the "copy" isn't accurate in terms of what the end buyer experiences then the impression left is one of pretense, deception or camouflage.

In a world connected, transparent and conversing anything that is false pretense will get discovered and shared one to one to a million at the click of a mouse. The same will happen if your "copy" is an accurate copy to its source. Get it?

Smoking Social Dope?

2010-03-17T10:43:03.000Z

Sometimes when you read, hear or watch something you wonder if these people are smoking dope or what. Dope influences the brain and the influence can cause hallucinations.

Hallucinations involve distorted or misinterpreted real perception. Hallucinations do not mimic real perception. Hallucinations sometimes reflect "delusional perceptions", in which a correctly sensed and interpreted genuine perception is given some additional (and typically bizarre) significance.

Now put this definition into context of social media and how and what some people and entire organizations are using it for. Add to the increased demand for hiring people with "social media experience", whatever that is, and you have to wonder just what dope are people smoking.

Using Dope?

In the past and today people use dope to get high, to escape reality and to bury stress. Much of dope use comes from influence of friends and society. So lets put these uses into perspective of using social media and some common behaviors.

To Get High:

Hey our competitors are using it so we need to or we'll look stupid.
Hey this stuff is cool, look how many people are following us.
Hey look at all the traffic we are getting from our Tweets.
Hey our blog got recognition and our rank went up on (name the badge).
Hey, so and so mentioned us and retweeted our post, how cool.
We just hired Joe or Joan Social, now everyone will follow us.
Hey we just discovered a new tool that will accelerate our content....most don't even know about the tool.
Hey, I think we just figured out something about social that no one else knows. Now watch the traffic from this post.
Hey, lets copy Pepsi Refresh and give away money to our followers. After all it is a gift economy. What? You don't understand?
My guess is Facebook will own Google sooner than later. We need to add stuff to our Fan page and get more followers.

To Escape Reality

Money from social media? Watch how much we'll sell this month from Twitter and Facebook. No, we can't measure that but we know that is what is causing sales to increase.
You want more sales well just push out more ads on Facebook.
Hurry up and hire someone that understands this social stuff. Once they are hired we'll make them the face on our brand everywhere and oh yeah make sure they Tweet for me as well.
We need a group in Linkedin, Facebook, List on Twiiter, Community in Ning and we need to get the tech guys to create our own community. Then we can suck all our customers into these places and capture their attention and emails.
Make sure our TV ads tell people to follow us on Twitter. Why? Because we need to collect people. Why I don't know yet but when I do I'll be sure to educate you.

To Bury Stress

Using all this social stuff is well social. I'd rather talk to my friends than do my work.
Honey, not right now I am busy chatting with people I don't know on Facebook.
Oh great, corporate wants to create a social policy to tell us what we can't do on-line. Who really cares, I'll just set up a new profile with a bogus name or slip some friends some juicy information and let them Tweet it.
I like all this social stuff because now I have a voice and no one can shut me up regardless of what I say.
You want me to produce results with this stuff? You simply don't understand the nature of all things social so how can I explain to you that which you don't understand?

Sound familiar?

Maybe not in those specific words but based on the markets demand for all things social and the subsequent activities created one must wonder what social dope everyone is smoking.

Excuse me while I take a hit from my Tweet friends.

Is Social Capital the Whole?

2010-03-15T11:23:11.000Z

With the increase use of social media everyone seems to categorize its use into one dimension or another. Some categorize the value equations as social capital, reputation capital and a host of other names which are attempts to define the emerging value proposition.

These attempts reflect emphasis on the parts rather than the whole. You've heard the expression "the whole is greater than the sum of the parts" which, in my humble opinion, should be how we view all the related knowledge gains being created by all this social stuff.

Brian Solis writes Social Capital: The Currency of the Social Economy: "Digital capitalization is laying a foundation for expanding the need to cultivate and participate, not only in the real world, but also in the online networks and communities that can benefit us personally and professionally."

"Social capital is a strong ally, an elite catalyst for lucrative relationships, and now a metric for qualification, consideration and ultimately success (however you define it). This is a state of human economics that is thoroughly discussed in Tara Hunt’s book, The Whuffie Factor. Our “Whuffie” or social capital and intellectual assets are defined by both online and real world conduct and its “balance sheet” is available for anyone with a web browser to review, assess, and analyze."

"Like any form of capital, Social capital rises and falls with the market and the individual to which it’s governed by the state of the industry and affected by the state of corresponding affairs. As it escalates, however, it unlocks opportunities that are commensurate with the community’s assessment of its value. In the same regard, the community will not support or reward lackluster, opportunistic, also-ran, or hollow engagement in the long term."

"Again, social capital is measured by individual value and collective perception."

What About the Other Parts?

I respect Brian Solis work and his never ending analysis of all things social. Brian's knowledge and expertise is the paragon within the new arena of PR. However PR, and the implied "social capital", represents a part of the whole. The whole can best be categorized as a system of knowledge, past present and future. The "parts of the system" represents each of our experiences, education, interactions and beliefs. Capital is produced when we exchange some or all of our parts when expressed in words, images, video's and threaded in conversational exchanges. Brian's post has sparked awareness that the emerging "social" system is in fact creating a new currency.

If we look at the parts of our human DNA we can see a system of intellectual, social, creative and spiritual capital. The combined iteration of each of these capital components with others, society and institutions creates life's experiences, outcomes. Each of us carriers an inventory of knowledge that are subsets of each capital component. We draw on these subsets when we engage with the world. Not unlike the Encyclopedia Britannica our inventory of knowledge is our "book of life" and we use the contents to produce value on a daily basis, whether personal or professional.

Capital represents the value we produce using our knowledge assets. Our economic paradigms seek to gain a currency from use of our assets. Today the currency is in the form of a weak and weakening dollar. In the future the currency maybe something else but the capital behind the currency has and always will represent our individual knowledge assets. Our social capital is only one part of the whole but the whole is greater than the sum of our parts. Individually we are the parts, collectively we are the whole.

Make sense?

4 Things That Reveal You

2010-03-08T12:30:00.000Z

Every time we converse, post and respond on-line and off we reveal ourselves. The word reveal means to make known, disclose, divulge, to lay open to view, display or exhibit. When something or someone is revealed each of us decides whether what or who is revealed has any relevance to us.

Many of us don’t realize how we reveal ourselves. What we reveal are the things that attract others to us or us to others. Whether an organization or an individual what we reveal are common characteristics that bring us together or separate us.

These common characteristics are transparently revealed in content that is in context to four things that determine who we are, who we want to be as well as who and what we attract.

We are all assets of the human network exchanging value with others. Our value makeup is reflected by four knowledge assets that represents value to the human network. An asset can appreciate or depreciate based on many variables. The primary variable that increases or decreases an assets value is determined by the demand for use.

Do The Assets You Reveal Create Demand for Use?

When we use the term asset we think of things that stores or lends economic value. When we think of the term value many would quickly reference terms of an economic transaction. The human network creates economic value by what we do. We earn money for what we do and exchange the money for other things of value. What we do and the exchanges we make represent "value creation and exchanges" that are and continue to be produced by knowledge assets borrowed, owned or traded between two or more individuals.

Knowledge assets are contained within human beings. The human network reveals four types of capital: 1) intellectual capital, 2)social capital, 3)spiritual capital and 4) creative capital. These four knowledge assets are used to create "value" that is traded with people and things we "value". These four assets which reveal us are defined as:

Intellectual Capital: That which we have learned, understand, know and apply to life experiences.
Social Capital: The relationships we build and our ability to interact with others.
Spiritual Capital: Our sense and faith in a higher power other than ourselves, our intellect and our social capital. This capital is usually referred to as the knowledge of "God".
Creative capital: The insights we see and the possibilities we create. Creative capital is influenced by the internal and external interaction of 1,2 & 3.

We use our knowledge assets and share them with others, organizations, institutions and society at large. We get hired for who we are which is reflective of our knowledge assets. Organizations use and abuse our knowledge assets to their gain or lose. We share our knowledge assets with family, friends and associates. We exchange knowledge assets in the form of conversations, actions and insights.

The #1 influence over economic output is individual and collective knowledge assets of people working together towards a common aim. Imagine if our collective knowledge assets were indexed, able to be searched and subsequently used, borrowed, shared and executed more efficiently. What could happen if we were enabled to identify and connect knowledge assets for collective gain?

Our life experiences shape our knowledge assets defined and then revealed by what we say and do. Collectively our knowledge assets represent the gifts and abilities we have, both the good and bad, which are ultimately shared with others through interactions and future experiences.

The Future Web of Knowledge Assets Connected

Social technology could enable individuals to leverage their knowledge assets for the benefit of others thus creating a giving exchange that provides exponential value. The technological medium will eventually index knowledge assets and create a new economic paradigm when knowledge becomes connected and taken out of silos of information.

The future web will enrich human experiences by giving, sharing, learning, relating and re-enforcing or improving the four things that reveal who each of us really are and what we have to offer and learn from each others.

Is Scoail Media a Bank?

2010-03-05T11:56:45.000Z

If social media were an organization in the traditional sense it would be bankrupt. Yet organizations use it to try and create revenue.

If social media platforms continue to rely on advertising to support them they will be bankrupt. If social media wasn't "free" it by itself would be bankrupt. So how do users insure that social media doesn't go bankrupt? The answer lies within developments that will enable social technology to become an exchange and creation of higher value.

The Social Value Chain

A value chain represents related processes linked together and each process iteration increases value that is passed on to the next "link" of value iteration.

Fundamentally the internet is nothing more than "links" inter-connected yet the inter-connections rest in silo's not connected. When something of value is not connected to something else the creation of new value is reduced, constrainted and sometimes not even realized.

Today the internet, in all its forms, represents a continuous flow of value contained in text, images and video. The value is created by the context of the information stored in different containers. Social media has accelerated the contributions of value however the value is not connected to anything that creates context to value sought nor is it easily identifiable or accessible. While we have search engines that primarily index content that is popular. The relational attributes of these search engines are centric to key words of affinity. Key words of affinity are not enough to create, contribute or sustain a truly functional value chain.

A New Value Bank

When we use the term bank we think of an institution that stores and lends economic value. When we think of the term value many would quickly reference terms of an economic transaction. We create economic value by what we do. We earn money for what we do and exchange the money for other things of value. What we do and the exchanges we make represent "value creation and exchanges" that are and continue to be produced by knowledge assets borrowed, owned or traded between two or more individuals.

Knowledge assets are contained within human beings. The human bank contains intellectual capital, social capital and creative capital used to create "earnings" that are traded for things we "value". We use our knowledge assets and share them with others, organizations, institutions and society at large. We get hired for who we are which is reflective of our knowledge assets. Organizations use and abuse our knowledge assets to their gain or lose. We share our knowledge assets with family, friends and associates. We exchange knowledge assets in the form of conversations, actions and insights.

The #1 influence over economic output is individual and collective knowledge assets of people working together towards a common aim. Imagine if our collective knowledge assets were indexed, able to be searched and subsequently used, borrowed, shared and executed more efficiently. Our intellectual, social and creative capital currently sits in silos of information not being used efficiently or effectively. What productivity would be gained? What innovation would be born? What influence would it have on an economy? What currency could be created in the exchanges?

The answers and the new value bank will soon emerge and when it does all things will change yet again.

Measuring Social Moments?

2010-03-03T12:01:00.000Z

The obsession with measuring all things social is indicative of thinking inside rather than out. Inside thinking focuses on justification of time, energy and efforts all aimed at creating results.

Outside thinking focuses on learning market needs and intents. Do you measure market needs and intents? The irony of measuring all things social is that the measures are put for the moment.

Given the dynamic nature of how people use social technology, how suppliers are advancing the technology and the subsequent dynamics everything is but for a moment. If things are in a dynamic state then measuring a moment becomes irrelevant to what is happening the next moment.

Is Measuring Social Relevant?

Business mindsets believe that measurement of "things" is relevant to managing results. Production cycle times, process variation, employee productivity, sales, marketing etc. etc. are all "things" that most businesses believe they should measure. Most business managers don't realize many important things, that must be managed, cannot be measured. You can't measure everything of importance to management. You must still manage those important things.

W. Edwards Deming once said "Organizations are a means to improve the lives we live." How would you measure whether your organization is improving people's lives?

Brainwashed By Measuring Results

Measurement-based or fact-based management is not new. A form of it was developed during and after World War II when so called "Whiz Kids" became powerful managers within the Fortune 500. This approach to management was oriented to an industrial age that is now in the past but the practices still exist. It strikes us as cold and impersonal, the mind-set of Dilbert's boss.

Today we still see organizations holding on to part of the old mind-set, the measurement part. Measurement mentality continues on as a sacred mindset to justify actions against the holy grail of results. Meanwhile market have become more and more dynamic fueling constant changes largely because of the influence of technology and communications.

A Moment of Measure

The headlines tell us that things are changing rapidly. One day it is all about Google Buzz followed by a new move by Facebook. We chase these developments and look for ways to use these developments to produce results. However, by the time we get around to using something new something else replaces it.

The moment of measure, attention and the subsequent results become irrelevant because of the flood of new developments. Stepping away from measuring the moment can be helpful if not critical to seeing the real meaning in a space that is not stable. The only thing stable is that things will change. Changes in utility, reach and usability changes the measures of value. Obsessed with measures we jump around measuring the impact of changes only to realize new influences are changing the dynamics which changes the result.

The relevant moment of measure is in context to improvement. Without enabling improvement no measure can be relevant or in context with the intent of an organizations effort to improve results. However end results are influenced by actions way upstream. Marketing and advertising actions are downstream. Unless an organization understands and improves the attributes that influence all things downstream then efforts to measure and improve downstream actions become fruitless.

Upstream means you have to start at the beginning of any system. The usage and outcomes of social media are downstream. To fix or prevent a flood you have to go upstream to the source. Measuring how fast or slow the water is rising doesn't address the influences that make the water rise or subside.

Results are but for the moment. Knowing what influences results is a never ending process of learning and improving forever.

This Social Moment is Gone!

2010-03-02T10:53:08.000Z

Numbers drive organizational decisions. Numbers are used to try and determine what and how one can improve a result.

In the world of social media everyone has become obsessed with the numbers. The irony of collecting and measuring social media data is that the moment of measure changes by the dynamic developments that happen every moment. Conversations are dynamic, numbers are static.

Knowledge is dynamic and contained within each person. Our experiences, our conversations and relevant relations changes our knowledge. That is if we approach people with a willingness to learn what they know or don't know. Doing so requires listening which in itself is a knowledge funnel.

Listening to Moments?

In business things change moment by moment. Adjusting to these changes requires a agile thinking about the meaning of changes that ultimately drive the end result. The end result of a business is represented by value obtained from the value given. Value of products, services, relationships and processes are consumed by buyers. Buyers get value when their intents are fulfilled beyond their expectations.

Expectations of buyers change and when they do a business must change how they fulfill new expectations. Unless a business is listening to the marketplace, their employees and the end buyer they cannot hear the changing expectations. Not hearing means you are not likely able to meet the expectations satisfactorily.

Social media is nothing more than a channel of communications. Technological innovation has fueled communications and the subsequent "media" is no longer controlled by the few rather by the many. Conversations change and it is the rate of change that represents dynamic moments with meaning. Measuring a point in time may reflect that moment or past moments of dialog but not future moments. To change the future you have to understand the past. However, the future is not merely a reflection of the past especially when dealing with a dynamic system changing moment by moment.

Listening to the Future

Listening to the future is a predictive model of outcomes, actions and subsequent results of the moment. If we measure moments to determine the effectiveness of past actions the results tell us little about the future. If, on the other hand, our measures are centric to probable future outcomes influenced by previous moments then we can use data to predict future moments. The problem with determining or influencing future social media moments is that the "system" is not stable rather dynamic and filled with special cause variation. Any good statistician will tell you that trying to measure an unstable system is only relevant if you understand and can measure root cuases.

So what are the root causes of social media moments? The answer is people's intent. Understanding intents will lead you to measure the things that can fulfill or constrain intents. Said things have nothing to do with use of social media by suppliers rather it has everything to do with a suppliers ability to fulfill the buyers intent. Which by the way changes moment by moment.

The "Boss" Wants All Things Social

2010-02-25T12:27:21.000Z

The term "Boss" implies authority, power and control over people who do the things the boss wants done. In a tight job market people are thrilled to be hired to do a job. In a growing job market people are chased to do a job based on their experience, education and specialty skills.

Job openings with the titles of Social Strategist, Social Media Manager, Community Manager, Social Technologist and all other things "social" has exploded in the last two years and continues to grow. With more and more brands and agencies figuring it is time to "take on" all this social stuff the demand for talent to execute "all this social stuff" is increasing. At the same time the "pool" of talent has limited supply of people who have the relevant knowledge and experience to truly understand "all things social".

Do "Bosses" Know What They Are Asking For?

Chasing "all things social" without relevant knowledge does not insure that the chase is aimed at the right things or the right people. If the Boss wants all things social do they really know what they are asking for? Unless they understand the strategic implications of "all things social" and what their intent is in using all things social then hiring people to do all things social isn't going to insure the accomplishment of relevant objectives that enhance business performance.

Asking for something you don't understand and thinking you can find people who understand to deliver you something you don't understand is a set up to failure. Failing is an expensive attempt at something you think you need but don't understand what the need is or how to fulfill it. Bosses who fail to first understand will have a difficult time being understood by the people they hire who they think understand.

If you don't first understand social then how can you be assured that you are hiring people who proclaim they do. Most people who proclaim they understand social are saying so in context of using social. There are a lot of people who know how to use social but few who really know how to help an entire organization become social.

Using social will pass because people are becoming tired of being used. Social will pass from using to being and subsequently the market will follow the few who get being and do so with an intent to better serve the buyer. Serving buyers has been and will always be the right thing that drives business results.

Hiring people with a "social something" title isn't the secret sauce that makes your organizational social. Only those with authority, power and control over people can make the changes required for the entire organization to be social. Subsequently using social to reflect your intent becomes everyone's natural and never-ending job. Delegating that responsibility to someone you hire with a "social" title but who does not have authority, power and control over the organizations intent is a waste of money. Worse yet it will backfire on you because while they will use social for your intents but the marketplace will soon discover that your intent is not to be social. There is a big difference and it is transparent.

Before hiring people to use social bosses need to learn what it means to be social. That requires a totally different knowledge and skills set than just using social.

Why Social "Conductors" Will Win

2010-02-19T11:01:47.000Z

In the previous post we discussed why producers will lose. Now we will contrast why conductors will be the winners.

The optimum business model is one of embracing the "conductor" role aimed at providing people with "ideas, information and knowledge" they in turn can use to produce what they want with their community of friends and followers. Giving people the "right instruments to create their own communities" of conversations will ultimate lead to production of commerce.

A producer tries to "pull people" to their business. A conductor enables people to find the people, products and services they want, need or desire. A producer pulls people to their web site and the people are confronted with an anti-social experience and tricked into a "capture, control and frustrate" process. A conductor ensures that people are enabled to access, collaborate and share information seamlessly with no tricks, no intents to capture, control or frustrate people trying to use something to their benefit and the benefit of others.

What Does Win Mean to a Conductor?

Social conductors are focused on helping and enabling people to win. That is the overriding mission of their organization. Unless people can win then the organization will never win. Unless the community can win then there is no value to be conducted thus no role for the conductor. A social conductor is obsessed with finding ways to let people, markets and communities win.

On the opposing side is a producer who deems wining as meeting their goals, increasing results and subsequently everything evolves around those objectives. The relationship between a producer and markets is marketing driven vs. relationally driven. The producer looks at markets as places to get vs. places to give. The rules of the game of business are different for producers vs. conductors, they oppose each other.

The social conductor wins when people win and they focus on creative ways to facilitate wins for people. communities and markets. They know intrinsically that lasting results come from satisfying people beyond their expectations and respecting their relationship with people, internally and externally. The conductor views social technology as a new frontier to serve more people. The producer views social technology as a marketing medium to reach more people with their proposition.

The social conductor doesn't worry about results or measuring social media rather they focus on measuring whether they are acting as the conductor on behalf of people. Social technology enables the conductor to do more with less and everything is done for the benefit and value of people. The conductor is focused on creation of value that people can use and measurement is centric to value improvements.

The social producer worries about results and measures everything they do with the aim of getting more by giving less. The differences between the conductor vs. the producer is what creates a win for the people they serve.

Given these scenarios which would do you think will win the most?

Is Pepsi a Social Conductor?

2010-02-11T12:06:55.000Z

A social conductor is an individual or organization that enables people to use their organization to achieve wants, needs and desires. The opposite is a social producer who uses people to create direct benefits to their organization.

Pepsi Initiates the "Conductor" Model

Time Magazine states :To Pepsi, and to companies around the world, the days when mass-market media is the sole vehicle to reach an audience are officially over. Instead of pouring millions of dollars into a Super Bowl commercial, Pepsi has started a social-media campaign to promote its "Pepsi Refresh" initiative. Pepsi plans to give away $20 million in grant money to fund projects in six categories: health, arts and culture, food and shelter, the planet, neighborhoods and education.

People can go to the Pepsi website refresheverything.com — which can also be accessed through Facebook and Twitter — to both submit ideas and vote on others they find appealing. Among those on the site now: "Help free healthcare clinic expand services to uninsured in rural TN" and "Build a fitness center for all students in Hays, Kansas community." Every month, the company will offer up to 32 grants to worthy projects.

"This is such a fundamental change from anything we've done in the past," says Lauren Hobart, chief marketing officer for Pepsi-Cola North America Beverages. "It's a big shift. We explored different launch plans, and the Super Bowl just wasn't the right venue, because we're really trying to spark a full-year movement from the ground up. The plan is to have much more two-way dialogue with our customers."

5 Elements of the Conductor Model

The conductor model leverages five elements of interaction with the marketplace. These are:

Attention: They do things that create attention from the marketplace. However the things they do draw attention to people's ideas, wants, desires and needs rather than direct attention to themselves. They build social capital by doing things that people can participate in and benefit from. They provide content that is in context to people's intentions rather than the intentions of their organization. The Pepsi campaign will and is drawing the right attention not just for one event rather 24/7 and 365 days of the year. Main stream media is discussing the Pepsi move away from Super Bowl to the above social media campaign and will likely report the results continuously.
Awareness: Social conductors draw attention to people and things that are social. Such things could be anything that people desire, want or need and the conductor enables people to easily access information that is in alignment with their intents. By raising awareness of issues of importance to people conductors are in fact raising awareness to their brand. Main stream media and the participants are likely to discuss the Pepsi campaign and the blogosphere will explode with commentary for a long long time.
Affinity: Social conductors create affinities to people by enabling people to interact, support and communicate relevant information that is important to people's wants, needs, desires and intentions. By creating such affinities the social conductor is indirectly creating an affinity to themselves for the value created by the experience and interaction they enable.
Audience: By creating attention, awareness and affinity the social conductor builds an audience who relates to the conductors actions, intents and value created on behalf of the audience.
Action: The social conductor enables people to "act" on their desires, wants, needs and intention thus becoming the enabler of action on behalf of the audience. Being the enable builds trust and confidence in the conductor. Something every brand and individual aspires to accomplish.

The social conductor model is well socially oriented and aimed at giving people tools, content and experiences that enhance an individuals or other organizations objective. The results produced by a conductor come from the results that produce for people. Enabling people to produce results comes back to the conductor in ways typically not measured or considered.

The bottom line grows because of the context of being a social conductors that people appreciate. Such sentiment creates a transaction of appreciation which translates to a transaction for the conductor. A social conductor draws in support from the audience because of its intent rather than its marketing. On Twitter, Ashton Kutcher reveals to his nearly 4.5 million followers that he can barely wait for the voting to begin for the Pepsi campaign. Pepsi just may have started the race for organizations to learn how to become social conductors.

You decide.

Social "Production" Mentality

2010-02-08T10:33:07.000Z

With all the emphasis on social media ROI you would think that companies believe that social media is a production line in a factory.This mentality is reflective of how management thinking is still in the industrial era.

Production thinking is about producing something for consumption by the masses. The results of "production" are reflected by subtracting the gross revenue from the cost. Thus the emphasis is placed on selling more to make more. To enhance sales opportunities companies adopted marketing strategies and tactics.

The process of marketing has been focused on reaching the masses using numerous forms of media. Marketing has been designed to create attention and awareness of an offering targeted to a specific audience. Marketing followed "production thinking". The more we market the more sales we'll "produce".

The model of "production thinking" creates environments in which "people" are used to "produce more" at less cost. The aim is to make profits from producing more and production is enhanced by optimizing people, processes and technology. Management methods to optimize production evolved around measuring anything and everything with the aim of finding out how effective people, processes and technology are at producing a results. The problem is the "production model" is that the people part has changed while the model for using people has not.

Now Measure Social Media Production

The internet has changed a lot of things for people and business. Every evolution of the internet creates yet another change and business tries to apply old management methods and thinking to these changes. The problem is that most of the changes brought on by the internet are centric to how people and markets interact. These interactions are changing how business ought to manage people and markets. People and markets are no longer for use rather both are now the users. The change from being used to being the user means "production models" for business are no longer viable rather the model for has shifted to a "conductor model".

The term conductor means a person who directs an orchestra or chorus, communicating to the performers by motions of a baton or the hands his or her interpretation of the music. Conductor also means a substance, body, or device that readily conducts heat, electricity, sound.The "conductor model" for business is more about enabling people to conduct commerce, internally and externally, rather than management trying to "produce" commerce with a "production mentality".

Now reflect on what the social web, and all this social stuff, is creating. The fundamental change is that people are being empowered to "conduct" their own commerce, whether buying, selling or simply conversing. The term commerce deals with the exchange of goods and services from producer to final consumer. The social web is self organized orchestras formed by conversational threads that readily "conduct" ideas, information and knowledge threaded throughout the internet and propagated on most any device.

The optimum business model is one of embracing the "conductor" function aimed at providing people with "ideas, information and knowledge" they in turn can use to produce what they want with their community of friends and followers. Giving people the "right instruments to create their own orchestras" of conversations will ultimate lead to the creation of commerce.

To adopt the "conductor model" for business means you have the recognize that measuring social media ROI is more about measuring your ability to enable people, internally and externally, to use you rather than you using them. Measuring your ability to be used is a lot different than measuring how you use people to use your stuff. To optimize in a world gone "social" it is wiser to think as a conductor rather than a producer.

Conductors measure the synchronization of efforts aimed at giving the audience of people more than they expected. They don't measure the results of people producing rather what they produce for the people.

Front Page Coverage - That's What I Want!

2010-02-06T16:24:48.000Z

Does everyone in business seem to think all you have to do is call the local daily paper and they come out to do a page one profile of your business? With all the downsizing, it’s hard enough just to get the media to open your emails or take your calls. Getting a front page story just because you want it: priceless.

I was talking with a prospect once who tossed this off as if it was no big deal, “of course we’d like to have the paper come down, meet our principals and do a profile of our business.” Another one wants to become a “rock star-type celebrity” in his industry.

Well, I’d like to win the lottery, but at least I know I have to buy a ticket first in order to be in the running.

Got any thoughts on this subject?

Yay! I Just Got Fired! True Passions, Here I Come!"

2010-01-27T18:26:09.000Z

Yay, I just got fired! Woot!

Most people don’t usually send a message out to the whole world announcing this, nor are they usually excited about it. But, really, the day I got “Trump-ed” was the best day of the rest of my life.

Read the rest of the post here.

Don't do status quo either? Join me here.

Chasing Social Media Results?

2010-01-07T12:02:33.000Z

As 2010 begins a new year it seems that the marketplace is consumed with measuring the return on investment from social media activities. The demand for measurement of ROI will distract the marketplace from learning new methods to create ROI or it will create new leaders who focus on the "intent" which produces an ROI.

In an article in Mediapost titled 2010: The Year Social Marketing Gets Serious Laurie Sullivan writes: "Marketers will need to start justifying social marketing plans with business cases, objectives and metrics, as the medium moves out of the test phase."

"Forrester Research released a list Monday of social computing prediction for 2010. The report suggests that companies that create social councils -- cross-functional teams aimed at sharing ideas about social media -- will begin to get serious about budgets and structure for these groups. Expect the teams to become strategists. Efforts will likely include policies."

"The report also suggests that an increasing number of marketers will adopt listening platforms to monitor social media, Twitter will become more profitable or get acquired, Facebook will take a hands-on approach to protecting members, and incompatible mobile devices in siloed application will shatter the social experience."

"Forrester Analyst Augie Ray says in 2010, those who hold the purse strings for budgets will want to see results. "It's the year social marketing gets serious," he says."

Input+Process+Output=Results

Engaging in the marketplace of conversations has become main stream, expected and simply the new method of how markets should operate. Since the process is still new many are trying to apply old methods and old thinking with the ability to engage with many for difference purposes. Markets are now trying to measure the benefit of engagement and screaming for an ROI on the investment of time and expense.

The irony of current behaviors is that the intent is transparent. Marketers want to produce results from us and don’t realize how transparent their intent is to the new marketplace. Intent is the real measurement of effective engagement and the measure of intent is reflected by how well you serve the market of interest.

The focus and demand on results is akin to playing tennis by watching the scoreboard. Demanding measures for results is typical of old management thinking without taking the time to understand that which creates the results. Being consumed with marketing elements of social technology is silo thinking. Unless any organization learns to "connect" communications and understand the issues that impact the sentiment of communications then all "intents" to create a result will be misguided.

The banking industry chased results. They got the short term result only to create an collapse of our entire economic system then they had to be rescued by we the tax payer. The irony is that using "social media" to create results is reasonable but using it wrong may created the wrong result. Wrong results and measuring the wrong thing will create long term rejection with no rescue.

Input into communication processes creates output which leads to a result. Social media input represents thinking about the intentions of the marketplace you want to reach and serve. The intentions of the marketplace may be and usually are different than the intentions of the supplier. To influence end results means suppliers need to match their intentions with that of the buyer. Notice that buyers typically do not market anything rather they express wants, needs and desires reflected within their conversations.

Try measuring the ROI of your intent. Maybe 2010 ought to be focused on serious thinking about intent. Chasing implies you are not leading. Lead and you can influence others to follow.

A story of crowdsourcing on Flickr

2010-01-06T21:00:00.000Z

From my blog A Ton of Bricks: http://tonofbricks.wordpress.com/

The Flickr platform – part of the Yahoo company – has exploded in the last year, with the addition of social bookmarking and RSS feeds. The ability to integrate into Facebook with the widget MyFlickr and photo editing functions has also expanded its reach. But how are others using Flickr to engage in business conversations?

A “soft” case study
Interestingly enough, I read a recent blog post by prominent blogger Jay Baer, from Convince and Convert fame, on how one photographer has been using Flickr to “soft” crowdsource.

Jay interviewed Tyson Crosbie, a photographer out of Phoenix, Ariz., about how he used Flickr to crowdsource his photos among his audience. He decided to use the platform to allow users to vote for their favorite photograph for his clients – providing the client with another valuable source of feedback (example).

According to a quote from the Convince and Convert blog post by Jay, Crosbie said:

“I initially began the soft edit crowd sourcing process as a way to better educate myself and my clients about photography,” says Tyson. “Sometimes clients select photos that they probably would not have, but the positive feedback from the community can be influential.”

An online community
Crosbie was able to build his brand and develop a powerful online community because he engaged in a fun and interactive conversation. Not to mention that beyond the fact that users were discussing what they liked, the photography was getting more exposure, hence more business for Crosbie. It helps that he adds his logo and name to the bottom, right-hand corner of his photos for further brand recognition.

It all comes back full circle when done right and Crosbie, in fact, did it right. He said:

"There are dozens of people who comment on the photos. Some are professional photographers, but most aren’t…If they know the subject of the photo, they are more likely to comment, and some people just love the process and participate regularly."

How does this help me?
There are so many social media platforms out there, and they all serve a valuable purpose, but utilizing the right one based on your objectives and strategies is imperative. Flickr can be a great tool when you want to share content, specifically photos, with your friends, consumers, co-workers and so on. It also allows you to tap into a whole new audience by letting people speak their mind about the topics presented to them, as well as generating potential revenue from the increased brand reputation.

As an example, Crosbie actually builds the “soft” crowdsourcing fee for his photography into each project. This is a way for him to create extra value to the customer and provide another unique selling proposition (remember that term?) to his audience. He has even built a reputation around shooting avatars for Twitter users. Now that’s a niche to be in!

Jay mentions about Crosbie that:

"Business portraits for use in social media and elsewhere make up a large portion of his commercial photography work, and he charges $500 for that service – including the soft edit crowd sourcing process."

This can be of help to you by keeping one thing in mind; that with the right strategy and creative mindset, you can use Flickr to build your personal or business brand in new and innovative ways.

Social Media Monitoring and Measurement – A Customized Recipe.

2010-01-04T20:52:34.000Z

This post was originally published on December 1, 2009 at Kane Co Conversations.

A few weeks ago, Jennifer and I had the opportunity to participate in a master class with one of the PR industry’s most widely respected thought leaders, Brian Solis.

Among the plethora of smart ideas he presented, one topic was near and dear to my heart…social media monitoring.

Since I joined Kane Consulting, I’ve researched and experimented with the slew of tools that have been created to automatically monitor and measure conversations taking place across social media, and quite frankly, was coming up short.

I began creating my own systems – using one tool here, another there, going straight to the source here – hunting, pecking, uncovering, and analyzing gobs of data until it started to paint an accurate picture. And, generally after days of research for a particular client or project I’d be asking myself – is this worth it? Am I supposed to be putting this much time into all of this? Am I missing a better solution?

Well, my methods were validated as I sat in my seat listening to Brian Solis deliver his presentation.

Social media measurement is not standardized. It is customized.

Here’s where we come back to strategy. The how and what you monitor and measure must be in line with your strategic goals. And, one client’s goal or definition of success is not the same as another client’s.

We can run numbers and data on just about anything, but if it’s not in line with what you’re trying to achieve, so what and who cares?

The answer to “so what” and “who cares” is where the customization comes into play. It’s where the work begins. Where meaningful benchmarks are set; goals are established, and the distance between is measured and evaluated for progress and improvement.

Think about the end product, combine the right ingredients, taste, tweak, repeat.

This is the piece that no tool, no matter how sophisticated, can do for us.

Want it done right? Go to the source and do it yourself.

The online world is full of various social media search engines. As with any technology, some work better than others. They are quick, convenient, and can give us gobs of data.

Guess what, folks… these engines are no Google (and even Google is still working to perfect their own social search solution). The exact science behind social search is still being defined. Take a closer look, and you’ll see that each engine has its own algorithms, and will return results differently. If you want to use social search tools or software to click and create a report, be prepared to go through the results with a careful eye before passing it along (unless of course, you don’t anticipate anyone else reading it or using it to take any action, in which case, you better re-think your strategy).

Another tip I gathered from the PR master class with Brian Solis is that the most accurate data is found directly at the source. (This is no secret, right? If you want to know what time your friend’s party starts, do you ask the friend, or a search engine?)

Sure, it takes a little more time. And yes, you’ll need to dump the data into your own spreadsheet, weed out things that don’t apply and then run reports by hand. But, as far as I’m concerned, it’s worth the extra effort to have the most accurate data from which to measure progress and make strategic decisions.

Social "Intent" Is Transparent

2010-01-04T10:26:19.000Z

2009 brought a surge in the number of brands using social media. In 2010 we're likely to see more frequency in use of social media and experimentation with different approaches and methods. However the overriding issue brands should ask themselves is "what is our intent?".

Why Is Intention Important?

Intentional actions and communications illuminates the factors which influence people's judgments of whether an action was done for the suppliers benefit or the buyer. In other words the intent is considered social if the message is in context to the buyers needs, wants and desires.

The historical intent of advertising and marketing methods have been focused on creating a result, a sale. However since the web has become "social" marketers will have to change their intent or suffer "side effects", both intentional and unintentional.

What Are The Side Effects?

In marketing, an adverse effect is a harmful and undesired effect resulting from a campaign or other communications to the market. An adverse effect may be termed a "side effect", when judged to be secondary to a main effect, and may result from an unsuitable or incorrect message or impression, which could be due to a lack of thinking through "social implications and side effects".

The social web has increased the implications of not thinking through the effects of communicating the wrong things and the implied intent of communications. Lets consider two examples:

Verizon ran an ad implying their network was bigger and better than AT&T (The map with red beads). AT&T responded with an ad that implied Verizon's ad was misleading and not factual (the ad with all the Verizon beads falling). Verizon's ad could be considered "anti-social" whereas it tried to belittle its competition by propagating misleading information into the marketplace. The intention of the Verizon ad was to position itself as superior when in fact the side effects of the ad made their intentions appear misleading and anti-social. AT&T is suing Verizon for misleading the market.

Sub-Way ran an ad campaign titled "$5 Dollar Foot Long". The intent of the ad was simple. Promote value using a short jingle that gets attention. The ad was originally suggested by a store manager in Florida. Corporate marketing rejected the suggestion, as did their ad agency, yet the store manager ran the ad locally. The response was overwhelming. Subsequently Sub-Way corporate ran the ad national. The end results, $3.6 Billion in additional sales! The irony is the original ad idea came from a store manager and not the marketing department or the agency.

The important point is that in both cases the intent was to create results, increased sales and brand awareness. However, Verizon's ad created "side effects" that hurt the brand. In other words their intent was wrong to begin with and subsequently they hurt themselves in more ways than can be measured. Sub-Ways ad created intentional side effects, increased sales and brand awareness. In both cases the intent was transparent to the marketplace.

For individuals and businesses the use of the social web makes your intent transparent. Whether running an ad or simply engaging in conversations. The purpose of an ad is different than a conversation but both should be aimed at intentional benefits for the receiver, not the sender. The intent of all media needs to be aimed at the value the content provides to the marketplace of conversations. Not doing so could be very costly in more ways than you can imagine.

Social Reality: Their Purpose or Ours?

2009-12-29T10:57:15.000Z

When we encounter people and organizations the initial experience speaks volumes to their purpose. Our first experience with people and organizations is with their media. Media now reflects intentions that are immediately transparent and if not designed with a "social element" the experience reflects an anti-social purpose. Anti-social experiences are not relational.

What Is Your Purpose?

Purpose reflects a person or organizations thinking aimed at achieving a goal in a given system, whether human or machine. Its most general sense is the anticipated result which guides decision making in choosing appropriate actions within a range of strategies . Purpose serves the intent of ones actions which are reflected in subsequent communications that relate to said actions. In today's eco-system of social media one's purpose is detected by the context of the content people and organizations propagate. Content attracts us to a destination, your site, and when we get to your destination the experience better reflect our purpose, not yours.

What Is Our Purpose?

When people search for information, products or services the purpose is to meet a need or desire. Needs and desires are motivations to "find something". When we think we've found something trying to up sell us with pop up ads, forced registrations or "capture techniques" is not in line with our purpose rather it reflects your purpose. Unless you purpose reflects ours there is no basis for a relationship. When there is no basis for a relationship we move on looking for solutions matching our initial purpose.

Brands and marketers need to wake up to the social reality that the intent of your media needs to be aimed at serving our purpose not yours. In a world where time and attention are scare it would be beneficial if the marketplace learned that serving our purpose is the foundation for a potential relationship. Transactions are motivated by service. There is a marketplace waiting to be served and that ought to be your first purpose.

Our rules of engagement are aimed at serving our purpose, not yours. What is your intent?

Young PR Pros On Watch

2009-12-11T16:38:53.000Z

As the PR industry evolves, the bar moves up a notch in distinguishing class act professionals. A talented bunch of key contributors in the PR evolution were honored at a PR News awards luncheon at the National Press Club in Washington, DC on December 1.

Thankfully, I was included in that bunch. This year's PR News 15-to-Watch Award recognized two groups of 15 PR pros, agency and corporate/nonprofit, under the age of 30 as the new breed of up and coming industry leaders. The event also saluted winners and honorable mentions of the PR People Awards and the Hall of Fame Inductees.

All award winners are featured in the PR News All-Stars Issue. Congratulations to everyone. I am in good company. Each of you are awesome!

Bitten by Boorish Behavior

2009-12-09T20:30:47.000Z

Our reality entertainment fueled and social media infused culture had made competition for the spotlight considerably more intense. Pop artist Andy Warhol most likely never imagined the depth of desperation some would regress to achieve their fleeting 15 minutes of fame.

Consider parents Richard and Mayumi Heene who tricked the nation into believing their six-year-old son was in harm’s way trapped inside a renegade balloon. And then there is the tale of social and political impostors Tareq and Michaele Salahi who crashed a White House state dinner as part of a play for a reality television program.

Although a disturbing trend, I assumed this boorish behavior was the domain of rogue individuals seeking unearned attention. That was until I stumbled across this story (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=4724195) of a semi-professional basketball team tricking its community into buying game tickets.

Utah Flash Brandt Andersen owner acknowledged in his blog (http://dleagueutah.blogspot.com/2009/12/mj-vs-b-russ-challenge-didnt-go-like.html) that their promotion of an appearance by Hall of Fame player Michael Jordan “didn’t go like any of us had hoped.”

Perhaps that would be because Michael Jordan never confirmed his attendance at the event. He never even acknowledged the invitation.

The lesson here for organizations employing social media marketing is that the tenets of acceptable corporate citizenship always apply. Be honest and transparent. Respect your customers, employees, investors and vendors. And never sacrifice your reputation for a little bit of interest and fame.

Marc Hausman is president and CEO of Strategic Communications Group (Strategic), a public relations consultancy based in Silver Spring, Maryland. Read more at http://www.strategicguy.blogspot.com.

Which "Marketplace" Works Best?

2009-12-09T10:34:17.000Z

Markets represent consumption. If "consumption" changes then it is logical to assume that the marketplace is changing.

According to Wikipedia: A marketplace is the space, actual or metaphorical, in which a market operates. The term is also used in a trademark law context to denote the actual consumer environment, ie. the 'real world' in which products and services are provided and consumed.

Is The Marketplace Changing?

The consumption of products and services from the "commons" is what fuels an economy. Without consumption the economy slows down and subsequently the activity of the "marketplace" is impacted. Umair Haque, from Harvard, writes "The commons can be managed from the bottom-up for a shared prosperity — given the right institutions. That conclusion challenges orthodox economics from both left and right leaning perspectives; it suggests that, yes, markets can organize production and consumption efficiently — but only when supported and nurtured by networks and communities."

Notice Umair's last statement: markets can organize production and consumption efficiently — but only when supported and nurtured by networks and communities." The old marketplace has been supported and nurtured by "closed networks and communities" which are influenced by the few. However there is a "new marketplace" that is supported and nurtured by "open networks and communities" now influenced by the many.

A New Marketplace?

In case you haven't noticed nearly every market globally has been disrupted by a "shift" in economic realities. The behavior of every market segment has changed. Again Umar Haque writes: The Zombieconomy isn't a buzzword. It's not an event. It's not (really) about banks. It is the state of our economy today.

20th Century business is unable to grapple with the challenges of the 21st Century. Vast swathes of the economy are paralyzed and crippled: inhabited only by zombie companies. They are the economic living dead: unable to create authentic value.

Despite trillions in investment:

1) Wages are deflating.
2) Unemployment continues to grow.
3) Underemployment is growing faster than unemployment.

Zombie corporations are why the numbers above are happening. Those numbers mean: our so-called economy was a house of cards built on McMansions, Hummers, and $5 lattes. Now that the bill for them is coming due, we're discovering just how radically unnovative they were.

Sounds to me like the old marketplace isn't working very well. However there is indeed a new marketplace forming amongst the commons which is fueled by a new kind of economic influence, conversations. The new marketplace is being built by "uncommon thinking" rather than common thinking of the old marketplace.

How does it operate? Is it better than the old marketplace? Watch the video below and you decide.

John Byrne Aims To Change Media!

2009-12-04T14:05:26.000Z

The old line media is struggling with all things digital. Free content surrounds them, declines in advertising revenue and amateur journalist stealing readers from the professional journalist employed by the big media.

Debates about free vs. paid content are everywhere. Rupert Murdock is trying to block WSJ content from Google. All the major media players are trying to make their content "social". It seems as though everyone is running around trying to adjust old models to marry new models. Well maybe not everyone.

Business Week Gets Bought and John Byrne Wants to Compete

Silicon Alley Insider reported Ex-Business Week Boss Byrne: I'm Launching A New Company To Kill Business Week. John Byrne stepped down as the head of Business Week's online operations just a week ago, and he's already talking about his next venture on his blog.

It takes dead aim at old media companies like Business Week:

From John's Blog we read: What makes you so sure you or anyone else can succeed at this game?

I have three fundamental beliefs that inform my thinking: 1) Print advertising will never come back. There are just too many options for advertisers today and too much pressure on rates. Sadly, success in print will be measured in single-digit declines, forever. 2) Online advertising will never offset those declines nor save print. There’s far too much competition online and far too much available inventory; and 3) Users will not pay for content, unless they’re convinced it has immediate and tangible value. Very little journalism meets that standard today. Do we really need 57 versions of a story on Bernie Madoff pleading guilty?

If you agree with these absolutes, they can liberate your thinking about what’s going to happen next in media. Why? Because they tell you that nothing less than radical transformation is needed to survive and to thrive in the analog space. And there’s precious little revolutionary thinking among the traditionalists. That’s why newcomers have great advantage at this time of transition. The great management guru Peter Drucker said it best: "The problem in our lives is not the absence of knowing what to do, but the absence of doing it.” I’m going to do it.

Do You Believe Him?

I had the opportunity to meet John while at Business Week and engaged in a discussion about all things digital. I've met lots of business leaders and smart people in my life and you can always tell which ones have the depth of thinking, the sincerity of heart and the willingness to lead. My impression of John Byrne is that he is indeed one of those rare people that after meeting him your mind and heart says "follow this guy because he is an impressive human being and with lots of relationship capital."

That being said I suggest we watch what John's new venture will do and if my first impression are right he will do what is unexpected and unusual. Which is exactly what the media business needs right now to survive.

While some won't survive, John is likely to be one of the few that leads the industry into business as unusual.

Drinking The Social Media Kool-Aid?

2009-11-30T10:33:21.000Z

This post may seem harsh but is meant to expand our thinking, mine included. Bear with me.

It seems that popular bloggers and communities are creating a "cult like" following of readers who buy into published perspectives.

People follow popular post and bloggers who have the most re-Tweets and highest traffic. Popularity does not show that the perspectives are right rather it shows they are popular. While some post may provide enlightenment and value to readers many do not truly reflect insights that aid people and businesses in thinking through the changing dynamics of today's marketplace.

Social Media Kool-Aid

Social media is getting a bad name because most organizations think of it as "just another marketing channel" rather than taking the time to understand that communications and relationships drive, influence and produce everything: the good, the bad and the ugly.

Drinking social media kool-aid is largely an influence of what perspectives are the most popular. These perspectives reflect the knowledge, or lack thereof, that gets "published" and consumed in the marketplace of conversations. If all we publish focuses on "marketing results" then the marketplace will just copy and follow what others do to produce results. Copying isn't learning or creating new knowledge that can be applied systemically. If you haven't noticed yet old school thinking about marketing isn't working very well. The same thinking is being followed within social media.

Remember Jonestown?

Jonestown was the informal name for the "Peoples Temple Agricultural Project", an intentional community in northwestern Guyana formed by the Peoples Temple, a cult from California, United States, led by Jim Jones. It became internationally notorious when, on November 18, 1978, 918 people died from drinking the Kool-Aid laced with cyanide per the instructions of their preacher/leader Jim Jones.

How could 918 people believe one mans perspective and ended up dieing because they believed it? Because those people were lead by Jim Jones personality, the influence of his communications and the message he propagated to his "cult" of followers. Sound familiar? Several teenagers have committed suicide based on the influence of communications expressed to them on Myspace. Folks, use of social media is very serious stuff! Be careful what you follow.

Listening to and following the wrong influence can hurt your reputation, your business and possibly your life. I lost an 18 year old son four years ago this week because the wrong influence created from communications and relationships that led to his death. Try swallowing that pill! I do everyday!

What Matters?

What matters most to us individually and to entire markets is learning and understanding. Learning can be as simple as listening. Understanding requires us to put perspectives into context of intent and rationale. Then and only then can we choose wisely whether to follow and participate. Intent and rationale should be in context to purpose and meaning. Many conversations are centric to selfish purposes and have limited meaning. Selfish purposes have an intent to serve the one communicating rather than those listening.

Yes, we can learn a lot from the market of conversations but we learn most from the right conversations. Which ones are those? Those that bring new knowledge and enlightenment to your thinking. You have to decide whether to follow the crowd or think on your own. Your thinking can be enhanced by a few rather than the many or what is popular today.

Sometimes following and believing what is popular can hurt you and your organization. This is especially so if the many you follow and believe are drinking the kind of Kool-Aid that is laced with the wrong perspectives.

What do you think?

The Power Of Social Distribution

2009-11-20T10:30:37.000Z

In the old days (and they are still around) media was "pushed" upon the masses and shaped our attitudes, beliefs and perspectives on everything.

Today our attitudes, beliefs and perspectives on everything are being shaped by a different kind of media. This new media is created by we the people and shared with those we have an affinity with.

Unlike the previous power curve of old media new media creates a different, more expansive, powerful and influential curve. The curve has to do with "virtual relationships" formed by the context of ones content with audiences who have an affinity to our conversations. The attraction comes from the "human voice and not institutional" offering perspectives about everything and anything which draws others who seek related context of issue at the top of minds. Whenever and where ever they seek information, knowledge and relationships is driven by the reach and connectivity provided by the internet.

The Power Of Distributed Content

If the knowledge you create (content) is in context with your markets interest then you just increased the probability of a relationship which may translate into a transaction which is what you ultimately want. The difference today is how you get what you want is by giving others what they need, when they need it and enabling them to find it at the click of a mouse or from their friends. If they can’t find it or their friends aren’t suggesting it well then you lose.

The internet has now become the place to be found and to create value people are seeking. To not be able to understand and use it effectively is akin to saying “I don’t care how our market behaves”.

How Markets Are Behaving

Good content that attracts an audience is a powerful force that enhances personal and organizational branding and the markets sentiment about your brand. Doc Searle has said "markets are conversations" and over time his statement has been verified by the power of social technology. Everyday that goes by the market of conversations grows in influence and leaves no industry or institution untouched by the growing influence. The problem is that most markets yet understand the dynamics, the process or the reach technology affords the market.

Some Simple Examples of Social Distribution

Social distribution represents a new market dynamic in which your content finds an affinity with an audience and the audience distributes it to their audience of followers.

On LinkedIn my direct connections represent a reach of over 4,000 first degree and second degree is 1,212,100+ and third degree is 13,858,900+. My indirect connection through groups represent over 200,000 people first degree. Do the math on 2nd and 3rd degree, it is huge. That is only on LinkedIn!

Now lets look at some single post from this blog and consider the impact of social distribution. One post titled 5 Things You Must Ask About Social Media in one week received over 60 ReTweets, 526 click-through and had a potential visibility to 215,760.

Lets look at one white paper titled "Social Media Directions" offered as a download. In one week 5,640 people had downloaded the white paper. Now consider the 1st degree connections of those 5,640 people then consider that their 2nd degree connections equated to more than 2 million people!

Social distribution has become the most powerful force ever to influence markets and how they behave. To ignore it is means your business will be ignored or worse yet negatively influenced by it. Do you now understand the power of social distribution?

If you say no then you are behind the market. If you say yes then lets see how well you understand it.

Social Media: Our VOICE Speaks Volumes

2009-11-18T07:30:00.000Z

When it comes to Social Media, we seem to talk a lot of about a humanistic approach; the process of humanizing every customer touch point when communicating with others. There are many ways to bring a “human touch” to the process of every day networking with social media.

Below are just 5 areas where we can pay attention to hear what is being said even if we are not meeting face-to-face with those we communicate with daily. Subtle cues are important, and when we are aware of them, we can learn so much. My last post talked about the important of “listening.” Today I talk about what’s not being said and note - it really does speaks volumes.

There is a VOICE behind the following if we take the time to pay attention to…

1) the choice of our words
2) the tone of the words
3) the pace (speed) of the conversation
4) the frequency of the conversation
5) the emotions behind the words

CHOICE of words: Are we choosing words in social media networks that reflect out brands? Are we choosing words that engage others? Are we really sharing and learning, or are we pushing and selling? Keeping these questions in mind as we create and uphold our VOICE online (and off) will help us shape our words more attractively so others can gravitate towards us. Like moths to a bright light, this is how communities are formed. Target the sentiment that you want your audience to experience. This can be done by choosing words that represent our audience. As Brian Solis, Principal of FutureWorks says, “Sincerity extends beyond the mere act of creating a profile on Twitter or forming a fan page on Facebook or a group on LinkedIn. Relationships are measured in the value, action, and sentiment that others take away from each conversation.”

TONE of words: In literature, the tone of our words is the mood. What is the tone we are setting? How is it effective or ineffective? If we remain flexible in our tone, and are consistent in social media networks, there will come a time when we really hit our mark (our true vocal tone). Arthur Samuel Joseph, Vocal Expert to the Stars, says, “… you have the right, without requesting the permission from another, to be yourself.” I believe this to be incredibly true in our social media networks. Being in our best “self” and communicating often can bring out our best tone. It doesn’t mean we are going to be perfect all the time. Sometimes social media can be trial and error, even with our best efforts. If we happen to make a mistake in the tone on a live webinar or the written word in our communications, we can openly admit it. The act of this admission itself gives honor to our social network connections and can keep them around (building trust), rather than jumping ship. Do you know what tone delivers the best results to your key audience? If not, listen to your target market more and check out your media monitoring platforms like Radian6 and Vocus to see which posts give you better results.

PACE of words: Is there a positive synergy in your exchange with others in social media? In other words, is there a nice exchange of giving, listening and learning about each other? If so, that’s a connection - and depending on the point of interest of the connection, that connection could be a customer. Being pleasantly persistent, sharing information, asking questions says you truly want to get to know the other person. Obviously, we don’t want to do this all up front. Would you ask someone to spend the rest of your life with you at the first introduction. Maybe? Maybe not? There is a strong probability that the majority of us may not. Many of us would like to get to know a person before any long term commitments are made. I believe the that the "pacing" of our social media conversations are similar. I believe that "pacing" conversations in social media inch by inch builds layers in our connections over time, and with enough history, we will eventually build the trust that earns conversations over and over again. That my friends, builds a relationship.

FREQUENCY of words: How frequent are you in using social media once a day, once a week, once a month? Content may be considered king to only some; however, our frequent social media updates help to create a foundation of stability that brings dignity and dedication of our work. Others will take notice. Frequency builds community and helps us be proactive in against any crisis that can take place. Conversely, when we enter into a conversation online and drop the ball, others will notice of that as well. So after first doing much listening in social media, don’t forget to talk frequently, listen again, and then talk some more, then repeat it all over again. It does work.

EMOTIONS behind our words : It was Maya Angelou who said, “Words mean more than what is set down on paper. It takes the human VOICE to infuse them with deeper meaning.” Our emotions in any given moment can come through in our words through our VOICE in social media. Throughout our blog updates, daily updates, comments and other information we share, there can be times where a meaning of a phrase can be misinterpreted. It may be wise to check in with our own “self” before a comment slips from our lips or before the “send” key is hit - our reputation, our company’s reputation, or our client’s reputation can be affected.

We have one VOICE and who says we cannot make a difference? Indeed we can. May our VOICEs continue to make in today’s consumer generate media (CGM). Let’s turn up the volume on our conversations and continue to share more and learn more from one another.

What Is The Market's Intention?

2009-11-16T14:04:54.000Z

Marketers act as thought we are all cattle waiting to be herded into a transaction. It seems as though the prevailing thought about all this social technology is that it enables organizations to "herd" us into their community and they use trick of the trade to do so.

Ever consider what is the intention of the large social networks? Facebook wants our traffic so they can sell ads to the marketers. The market still fails to understand that we don't want ads rather we're looking for conversations that have an affinity to our own intentions.

What Is Your Intention?

Doc Searls writes: My thinking out loud about what came to be called VRM began with The Intention Economy at Linux Journal, which I posted from a seat amidst the audience at the 2006 eTech in San Diego. The money ‘graphs:

The Intention Economy grows around buyers, not sellers. It leverages the simple fact that buyers are the first source of money, and that they come ready-made. You don’t need advertising to make them. The Intention Economy is about markets, not marketing. You don’t need marketing to make Intention Markets.

The Intention Economy is built around truly open markets, not a collection of silos. In The Intention Economy, customers don’t have to fly from silo to silo, like a bees from flower to flower, collecting deal info (and unavoidable hype) like so much pollen. In The Intention Economy, the buyer notifies the market of the intent to buy, and sellers compete for the buyer’s purchase. Simple as that.

The Intention Economy is built around more than transactions. Conversations matter. So do relationships. So do reputation, authority and respect. Those virtues, however, are earned by sellers (as well as buyers) and not just “branded” by sellers on the minds of buyers like the symbols of ranchers burned on the hides of cattle.

The Intention Economy is about buyers finding sellers, not sellers finding (or “capturing”) buyers.
In The Intention Economy, a car rental customer should be able to say to the car rental market, “I’ll be skiing in Park City from March 20-25. I want to rent a 4-wheel drive SUV. I belong to Avis Wizard, Budget FastBreak and Hertz 1 Club. I don’t want to pay up front for gas or get any insurance. What can any of you companies do for me?” — and have the sellers compete for the buyer’s business…

I also believe we need to start viewing economies, and markets, from the inside out: from the single buyer toward the surrounding world of sellers. And to start constructing technical solutions to the buyer’s problem of getting what he or she wants from markets, rather than the seller’s problem of getting buyers’ attention.

Doc is a man who sees a system of complexity and tries to make it simply, useful and meaningful. His original work, The Cluetrain Manifesto, was based on the theme that "markets are conversations" and he has worked to build a new system (VRM) which truly enables a new way for markets to run.

Markets were born out of consumption. Consumption fueled the industrial economy which created behemoth institutions, large amounts of capital and greed. Market leaders believed their methods, their products and their power was the reason why the market existed.

The information economy fueled broader market awareness from which markets became smarter, more informed and "connected". This information was fueled by and from communications enabled by emerging technology. Information then created new knowledge for market consumption. Knowledge was then propagated through relationships formulated on-line and off-line. The aggregation of consumer conversations enabled by technology fueled awareness of market methods and intents. Consumers found influence from relationships and have begun to "opt out" of the old methods created by the markets.

Social technology has created a transparency of intent. Intent is a relational attribute that reveals motive. The "markets of conversations" are no longer motivated by old methods used by the markets over the last 40 years. As Doc has said so well "The Intention Economy is built around more than transactions. Conversations matter. So do relationships. So do reputation, authority and respect. Those virtues, however, are earned by sellers (as well as buyers) and not just “branded” by sellers on the minds of buyers like the symbols of ranchers burned on the hides of cattle."

Markets willl no longer be herded into a transaction.

Stay tuned for Doc's new book "The Intention Economy".

Why You Shouldn't Use Social Media

2009-11-04T11:24:13.000Z

Using social media just because everyone else is does not mean you should, at least not yet.

Before jumping into all the chatter and all the advertising organizations would be better served by asking themselves a series of questions. Finding the answers to the questions will require you to "think" about critical issues which will have serious impacts on the use of social media.

First you need to understand what it should be used for vs. what it shouldn't be used for. To answer these questions you must think about how effective are your current communications, internally and externally. Why? Because communications is the essence of an economy, your economy, and unless you master it you will indeed hurt your economy.

Think About Your Communications

Keven Kelly writes Because communication--which in the end...... is what the digital technology and media are all about -- is not just a sector of the economy. Communication is the economy.

This vanguard is not about computers. Computers are over. Most of the consequences that we can expect from computers as stand-alone machines have already happened. They have sped up our lives, and made managing words, numbers, and pixels quite extraordinary, but they have not had much more effect beyond that.

The new economy is about communication, deep and wide. All the transformations suggested in this book stem from the fundamental way we are revolutionizing communications. Communication is the foundation of society, of our culture, of our humanity, of our own individual identity, and of all economic systems. This is why networks are such a big deal. Communication is so close to culture and society itself that the effects of technologizing it are beyond the scale of a mere industrial-sector cycle. Communication, and its ally computers, is a special case in economic history. Not because it happens to be the fashionable leading business sector of our day, but because its cultural, technological, and conceptual impacts reverberate at the root of our lives.

Results Are Fueled By Communications

The blogosphere is filled with commentary on how to get an ROI from social media. There are dozens of tools to use in measuring your social media campaign and its effectiveness. However measuring the output of social media is like playing tennis by watching the scoreboard, you will loose the game.

Social media is a way to communicate. Unless you know how to communicate in relational terms rather than marketing and advertising terms your result will be failure, wide open and transparent for everyone to witness. Learning to communicate in relational terms goes against everything most people have learned in business. Subsequently before using social media organizations must unlearn and rethink everything they previously learned and thought about relative to communications and market relations.

Using social media effectively demands mind-sets and capabilities that are unfamiliar and sometimes even counter intuitive to many business managers. It requires building trusting relations with your market, internal and external, rather than enforcing top-down out dated policies. Business managers should allow themselves and the entire organization time to unlearn and rethink everything before they "jumping into" social media. Most are following those who haven't unlearned and rethought how, where, when,who, why and what they communicate which ultimately produces results, good bad and indifferent.

Results are the end result of how well and what people and processes communicate. You shouldn't use social media until you know how well and what your people and processes communicate to all markets, internally and externally. Using it without knowing this is like jumping out of a plane with no parachute. Splat!

What say you?