Blog Post 1/8/2010

On my ride home from the office I was listening to a radio broadcast where the announcer mentioned that the show could be followed on Twitter. This wasn’t a particularly odd thing to hear, nearly everyone and everything is somehow on Twitter these days. What I thought about however was:

What would be my reason for following the show on Twitter and how has my Twitter usage changed over time?

In the past I might have wanted to “converse” with the shows producers and such but now I would mostly be looking for a convenient way to receive relevant information from them that ties back to the programming they already deliver. You see there is a natural progression that we seem to be following with social media that I think is worth further investigation.

History

Here’s the back story that evolved in my mind as I thought about that shows Twitter stream. In the early 1990’s people like myself learned Hypertext Markup Language (HTML) so that we could create websites. Many of these sites were very nice – most of them however were pretty crude and served as a very text heavy place for our personal stories. Hand coding websites like this wasn’t for the faint of heart even though it was significantly easier than most programming languages.

Then came blogging software. Those of us who were constantly hand-linking HTML pages and trying to keep track of our site-maps now had a nicely packaged solution. Gone was much of the HTML coding – hello WYSIWIG! With this new level of ease came along a whole new level of participation.

With the explosion of new online authors that you wanted to follow and the ability to easily comment on what those authors had to say brought about a need to connect with others; to build relationships between the authors and the readers.

The comments field became a battleground for many authors and organizations who worried about what they might hear from their audience. Unfortunately, if you chose to close the comments option your organization was even more likely to be targeted as old-fashioned and disinterested in what its supporters (and detractors) actually wanted or thought. That was a quick way to losing your support base. The catch-22 was that not having an online presence also has turned into a quick way to lose your support base.

Thus it became the norm that a blog must allow comments and that the comments moderation should be done only in extreme situations and with transparent reasoning. For the most part the users of the comments should self-moderate which didn’t always work out so well.

This was the norm for some time until about a year ago when both Twitter and Facebook really took over as the place to be in a Web 2.0 world. You see, these sites are a million times more accessible to users than even blogging software which means that another user explosion took place on both platforms. Since these are the places most people are having their conversations blogs themselves don’t “need” to have comments sections. By shifting the conversation away from your blog site and onto one of these other platforms you are increasing your possible audience exponentially.

This brings with it a number of other issues but for this conversation those are not directly relevant.

Today

Now frankly I’ve skipped a lot of details in the description above but I think you can sort of get the gist of where we’ve been.

Today we find ourselves in a very immediate stream of information. Just a year or so ago when Twitter was really blowing up there were some rules to the game, primarily that even the most well known organizations needed to be very informal in order to attract audience. Those same players, just a year later, are now able to once again act in a very push-information way on Twitter without suffering any great ill-effects.

This is because ultimately what sustains audience is sharing relevant and interesting information. Similar to traditional media, once you understand your audience (and understand how to track their shifting interests) you can significantly cut back on informal bi-directional communications and increase your push of quality information.

The road map that gets your organization to that point in any new platform appears to be:

1. Require very timely and personal involvement on the part of the major players of the movement (e.g. get your staff using the tool very informally),
2. Build a foundation for community through little to no administrative hierarchy (e.g. let your staff and close supporters create content without a lot of supervision), and;
3. Establish your “true believers”; those participants who will carry the torch as much as, if not more, than your own organization.
4. Finally, reward the most engaging participants and move into a more push information format as you migrate to the next platform.

Remember, this isn’t a single beginning to end track. With each new platform the same process repeats and currently only shows success due to a constant re-invention with each next platform. In other words, once you’ve built a successful outpost on the moon you make it self-sustaining and then start sending the harvest to Mars so that you can colonize there – and on and on.

Bridging Between Online and Offline

The most interesting component to all of this is the fact that, as we move into these social media networks that are more targeted like Facebook we find that we have an even greater opportunity to mobilize people locally. This is because of the ability to more easily make physically local connections and to use rewards and events much in the traditional way to further energize (and provide content for) the online networks.

Blog Post 12/14/2009

Something that has been discussed ad-nauseum about using social media/lifestreaming best practices is the idea of being on your best behavior while being yourself. The thing is that until living online becomes a standard social practice across the populace there will continue to be newcomers to this realm. 

For this reason I want to provide one more case study to consider.

Standing on your stage

We all have personality traits, beliefs and our own sorts of moral compasses that provide the basis for how we act and interact in society. Online these very things are amplified, err, AMPLIFIED!

You see –

• Online we are essentially on stage, given a spotlight and a microphone to speak exactly what we want to say.
• From that stage we don’t have to (and sometimes can’t) get the kind of feedback we get in an intimate, face to face setting. Anything said doesn’t have the chance to be softened by physical cues, inflection or even peer intervention.
• What we say on that stage remains constant – the internet never forgets.
• Online everything is reproducible and re-link-able meaning that, not only does the internet never forget but when you hurtle words on the internet you are not rubber, you are glue; those words stick.

Intention

A business owner who I know is often found spouting off about his extremely conservative  political viewpoints. On several occasions his posts have become divisive amongst people who follow him and care enough to comment. Like so many statements made when a core belief is attached to a “team” (in this case the Republican party) the ensuing replies are not conversational but instead controversial.

The business owner’s lifestream quickly turns into an ugly “my team is better than your team” diatribe.

I’m not picking on this business owner’s politics. We are all entitled to our beliefs. However, refer back to the internet as a stage. Choosing to use your stage and microphone to make an inflammatory statement such as, “I will keep my guns, freedom and money….you can keep your change!” will do nothing but inflame your followers.

Of course if this business owner happened to be a gun dealer then perhaps that is exactly the type of statement that would bring his clients out; that may be a good marketing plan. In this case study though the interesting twist is that this person owns a business that purports to provide environmentally friendly products in a B2B scenario.

Surely there are politically conservative individuals who support environmental ideals, right? Unfortunately  you won’t find that here. Following along the business owner’s lifestream he makes comments suggesting that his concern for the environment is less than genuine; he refers to “riding the [environmentalist] wave to make a buck.”

Honesty

As a potential client I must look at all of this information and consider the business as a whole, and the person who runs it.

Whether or not I am offended by the political statements of the business owner becomes secondary.

 I am concerned about what is at least a disingenuous attitude towards environmentalism if not out and out dishonesty. I get this by comparing what is on his lifestream and what he has his name signed to as his business mission statement and policies. If the owner is willing to be dishonest at the core intentions of his business how trusting should I be of the product he is offering?

Integrity

Living online, whether you are a business owner or just an individual, provides an amazing opportunity to engage with people you may never have had the chance with in the past – however there is a price to be paid for that opportunity.

Whatever you do online must be done with integrity and thoughtfulness. When you live recklessly online you stand to suffer repercussions.

I’d like to end this with someone who’s integrity and environmental concern I don’t believe there is much room to question, Ralph Waldo Emerson, who said; “A little integrity is better than any career.”

Blog Post 12/7/2010

Recently I’ve been talking with people about organizational changes and how the implementation of them is often done in one of two ways.

1. Change done to you or,
2. change that you are a part of implementing.

In life we all know that change occurs that, as individuals, we feel is being forced upon us; that feeling of something being done to us. This may be something such as a lover breaking the romance off or a boss giving you a pink slip. Needless to say, having change “done to you” doesn’t usually feel good.

Organizational Health

When we think about communities and organizations we generally think in terms of the organizational “health”. What does a healthy organization look like? Every organization will have their own checklist but a couple pretty standard ones that I can think of are that they:

• are producing enough output to maintain or expand the organization;
• are maintaining an environment that fosters good morale; and,
• are innovative and create a vibrancy.

The Death of Morale

One sure way to kill innovation, vibrancy and eventually production is to kill morale. When your organizations chooses to operate using a process of “doing to” instead of “doing with” you run a very high risk of killing morale. In the short-run you will realize the change you hoped to implement but consider the costs associated with killing morale.

• Employee turnover = organizational knowledge deficit.
• Employee silence = workers will no longer feel that their opinion matters and will stop providing innovative ideas; instead they’ll look for outside opportunities to share those ideas.
• Employee revolt = consider all of the opportunities employees now have to express their opinion about thier personal lives (e.g. Facebook, Twitter, etc.). Can your organization overcome 10-100-1000 employees spreading the word-of-mouth opinion that your organization is broken? Imagine each one of those employees has an average of 150 friends that might not just read that message but re-link it?

Changing Together

So how do you avoid the “doing to” type of change? There’s no single answer but here’s the general idea.

• Include everyone in the path of the possible change an opportunity to share their knowledge with the work group that is ultimately tasked with making the decision.
• Use technology to provide those people with a chance to follow the decision process as closely as they choose.
• Clearly show how their concerns are being addressed (either with a bulletproof explanation about why something can’t be done or an acknowledgement that a change came about due to a specific person or groups suggestion).
• Never assume that a person within the organization knows about a change that is coming; be explicit with announcements and be overly inclusive in your change initiatives.

Remember, the change you do to someone else is an open invitation to changes your organization might not be able to afford.

Blog Post 12/4/2009

Fix City Dot Org

The good people of Brooklyn, NY now have a new tool at their disposal: FixCity.org. This crowdsourcing website (and its supporting organization) is all about taking small steps to “fix your city”. In this case the first project is to enable the public at large to suggest good locations for bicycle racks. As a part of the larger Open Planning Project and Open 311, FixCity is another effort to help citizens help government implement changes that they really want. 

Crowdsourcing – What?

I’ve talked about crowdsourcing on several occasions but for the uninitiated let me give my quick explanation. Essentially crowdsourcing is the term used for asking anyone (and I mean anyone) interested in participating in a process to provide their opinion/data/etc. based on some set of specific parameters. This is most often done via social media sites because it allows for maximum participation. The most famous crowdsourced project is, of course Wikipedia.org.

Fixing my ______

So what are the projects facing your community or organization? Do you feel like you really understand what your constituents and supports want? By crowdsourcing you may not get expertise (but you might get that too); what you will get is a chance to learn and honest feedback.

Crowdsourced solutions are like any other solution, if you aren’t asking the right questions you won’t end up with useful answers. To mitigate this issue follow these guidelines:

1. Create an environment of invitation – make your crowd owners of the process instead of outside participants.
2. Make sure that your questions are framed in the positive and require actionable answers.
3. Provide clear transparency of what is happening along the way so that participants don’t feel like they are talking to a wall or that their input is being misused.

There are other issues that need taken into consideration as well but I feel like this list is an excellent starting point. There is no need to be fearful of crowdsourcing – just take some time for thoughtful consideration about what your end goal really is and if you are ready to listen to the wisdom of crowds.

Pay it Forward

A big part of crowdsourcing is sharing; people giving to reach a common goal without outside incentives. When developing a crowdsourcing process use social media tools like Wiki’s or Blogs to share the process, the work, the lessons learned and hopefully the success story so that everyone can learn from what you’ve done. In this way you will be paying forward the good work you received.

Blog Post 11/9/2010

I had the chance to hear Phil Gardner, Ph.D. from Michigan State University speak about generational differences – particularly the difference between the Boomers and the Millennials. While he spoke only briefly about my generation, Generation 13 (aka Gen X), the key to the interaction between the Millennials and the Boomers was found in that brief mention.

Dr. Gardner explained that GenX laid the groundwork necessary for the Social Media revolution to take place. It was our generation that was left alone to fend for ourselves, the “latch-key kids”. He pointed out that our generation had more crimes committed against it than all other currently surviving generations. In light of this we learned two things: first was a total distrust and disdain for the boomers, second was to band together as a way to fend for ourselves. Most important was that we were left alone with computers and with those machines we eventually found ourselves and each other online.

The development of the internet led to the extreme decline in the price of production. This decline continues rapidly. Because of this change in cost GenXers, who already did not want to follow in the footsteps of their Boomer elders realized they didn’t have to. 

The Boomers followed the systems that were in place before them and worked to earn (or inherit) the systems of hierarchy of the past. Dr. Gardner explained the strong sense of ownership that Boomers feel and clench so tightly in regards to their station in life. However, the GenXers (and now the Millennials) have the means of production to side-step much of that hierarchy.

These new generations are less interested in inheriting systems or earning ownership over the old systems. The new generations value group effort more than individual effort and innovation over inheritance. The new generations are ok with letting those systems die off.

The new generations are looking to create new ways to work together.

So what does this mean for organizations trying to engage younger volunteers/donors/supportors?

• Provide the tools and resources necessary so that the most motivated supporters can create their own movement around your organization [online this means providing easy to access data, logos, graphics and photos licensed under Creative Commons]
• Encourage that movement to grow as second tier supporters begin joining in [online this means spreading the movements message across your organizational networks]
• Watch for opportunities to extend even greater resources as a way of building greater community around the movement [if this movement started online this may mean extending offline resources such as throwing a networking event in your physical space]
• Watch for spin-offs from the main movement and look for opportunities to engage there [are new groups forming? if so then start this process over with them]
• When the movement returns to stillness reach out to the most connected individuals and provide them with deeper connections to your organization to spur new movements [online or off you always want to connect to those “thought-leaders” for a debriefing/lessons learned and a chance to envision future collaborations]
• Be mindful that you are always showing appreciation and be very vocal about it [online this means providing link backs to the key organizers, opportunities for second and third tier participants to become first line organizers, etc]

The younger generations of today are in a constant state of collaboration. By realizing that anyone can carry the energy behind a project, that it doesn’t have to come from within or from the most knowledgeble person, you will free your organization to embrace these flat and self-organizing groups of support.