Social Media Presentation for NEWWA

Published on December 14, 2009 by in Social Media

0

On Thursday, 17-December I will be presenting Social Media and Its Effect on the Water Industry at the New England Water Works Association’s monthly meeting at The Lantana.

As the tools and technologies that facilitate communications, sharing, and coordinating become free, they’re empowering groups to organize and challenge value propositions of institutions. This will affect you as a municipality, private operations company, supplier, trade organization, engineering firm, or regulator. This presentation will discuss how social media works and why it should matter to you.

Video of the presentation is included here, and the handout is embedded below:

Handout – Social Media and Its Effect on the Water Industry (NEWWA Lantana)

Continue Reading

High Five for Week Ending 1-Nov 2009

Published on November 1, 2009 by in High Five

2
High Five for Week Ending 1-Nov 2009
HighFive 300x275 High Five for Week Ending 1 Nov 2009

Weekly High Five lists the most interesting, compelling, and/or useful links of each week.

This week’s High Five include a couple of stories about how technology is affecting governmental organizations.  The last three stories all demonstrate the power and pervasiveness of social media on every aspect of our lives; whether we know it or not, and whether we want to admit it or not.

#5: Los Angeles adopts Google e-mail system for 30,000 city employees

Well, Google has bagged itself an elephant.  In a unanimous vote, the Los Angeles city council became the largest city to move its entire email infrastructure to Gmail.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technology/2009/10/city-council-votes-to-adopt-google-email-system-for-30000-city-employees.html

#4: Lobbyists beware: judge rules metadata is public record

This is an interesting legal development that will make it a little bit harder for politicians, lobbyists, or government officials to pull a fast one over us.  Document metadata includes information such as the author, creation date, etc…  In some cases, this information can be used to reveal details of a document’s true history.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/10/lobbyists-beware-arizona-rules-metadata-is-public-record.ars

#3: Mob rule! How Users Took Over Twitter

This is the sort of thing that one could write an entire book about.  On the surface it sounds simple enough; a Web 2.0 technology comes out, users run with it and discover cool applications that the founders hadn’t intended or thought of, then rebel against changes that marginalize those applications. But if you’re listening carefully, there’s a lot there that can apply to institutions, businesses, consultants, etc…

http://www.wired.com/magazine/2009/10/ff_twitter

#2: Google Social Search

This short video describes what I believe will turn out to be an important change in the way we find information. It warrants its own blog article (that will be upcoming), but in the mean time consider the following.  Who do you trust more?  A Microsoft commercial or your nephew-computer-whiz?  A Wall Street Journal reporter or your accountant for the past 20 years?  The point is that we trust the people we know, and social search is a way for Google to leverage your own network to provide “pre-qualified” search results from sources you typically trust more than most.

You can read the entire help article here:

http://www.google.com/support/websearch/bin/answer.py?answer=165228

#1: Clay Shirky: How social media can make history

This video is a TED presentation by Clay Shirky, who is my favorite speaker and author on the subject of social media.  In this presentation, he makes a compelling case about how powerful and pervasive social media is in ways that are far more important than clever marketing techniques.

The other take away, for my money, is a lesson in innovation, which often occurs when common, boring technologies are used in unique, exciting ways.

http://www.ted.com/talks/clay_shirky_how_cellphones_twitter_facebook_can_make_history.html

Feel free to provide your thoughts and/or contributions…

Continue Reading

0
iStock_000003145965Medium

There are man interesting discussions happening right now concerning the International Society of Automation (ISA) and its current travails with regard to its membership, publications, and exposition.  For those not familiar with the situation, this volunteer organization has been around for over sixty years and has come upon tough financial times, not unlike most organizations.  Two of its major revenue generating enterprises (its InTech magazine and ISA Expo trade show) have declined precipitously and are necessitating major changes.

The dialog is starting to reach a boil with comments like those recently posted on Jim Pinto’s web site by former ISA Executive Director Glenn Harvey.  I wanted to focus on just one statement in his response, in which he said “Who knows, but if large numbers of members do not call for change, ISA will keep doing what it has been doing and the results will be the same.”  Although I certainly don’t disagree with him, there is a larger message here for institutions in general; in our Web 2.0 world, that’s not the worst thing that could happen to you.

iStock 000003145965Medium 240x300 Institutions: Whats the Worst That Could Happen?

Do-It-Yourself Institutions are possible in the world of Web 2.0

DIY Institutions

When it comes to institutions like ISA, dissatisfied members used to have two choices; to stay with the institution and either live with it or try to affect change, or to find a better institution that more closely aligned with the member’s needs and desires.  If there wasn’t a suitable competitor, then the institutions had very little need or incentive to change or adapt.  If competition is a factor, then the institutions would generally react only when and if they started to lose members.

But today there is a third and more unsettling option for these dissatisfied members – they can simply do it themselves.  As the transaction costs of building, organizing and managing organizations approaches zero (thanks to the explosion of free Web 2.0 applications), members who are dissatisfied with their institutions can simply go and build their own.  Why pour time and energy into fighting an established bureaucracy (an exhausting, sometimes nasty endeavor), when one can instead simply invest the same amount of time and energy into building the institution they wanted in the first place.

“Surely You Exaggerate”

If you think I’m overestimating the power of Web 2.0, then you need to read my blog more often (just kidding). But seriously, I’ll illustrate this with two examples.  The first is a presentation by Guy Kawasaki about how quickly and inexpensively he was able to launch a company:

The second example is a project on which I’m currently working as IT Director for a NH gubernatorial campaign.  I was able to put together an entire IT infrastructure for the campaign that includes staff collaboration tools, shared calendar, web site and email hosting, web site design and development, customer relationship management (CRM), and e-newsletter services for less than $90 per month and under$500 in up front costs.  The entire system is cloud-based, which allows the campaign staff to work remotely and eliminates the need for purchasing software licenses.

So, the catch phrase is no longer “If you build it, they will come.”  Now, it’s “If you don’t build it, they will.”

Continue Reading

0

Making membership free will not, in and of itself, build an effective army. First, they must be recruited. This is where the long tail comes into play. Next, they must be equipped with the latest technology, afforded competent and inspiring leaders, and trained in effective tactics.

Recruitment

The “Long Tail” is a phrase attributed to Wired magazine editor Chris Anderson, who wrote an article in 2004 about “Why the Future of Business is Selling Less of More.” Engineers and economists would already be familiar with the numerical component of this phenomenon, known as the power law distribution curve or more colloquially the “80/20” rule. The transaction costs historically associated with institutions’ ability to organize people required that the focus scarce resources (people and money) on the top 20% of people who would contribute 80% of the work, value, donations, revenue, content, etc…

I think the current strategies are more focused on maintaining the 20% than pulling in the other 80%. It can be done now, because (assuming a freemium model) the transaction costs to the organization and barriers to entry for the members is essentially nil. One example (though certainly not the only) is the reluctance to embrace strategies that rely exclusively on Internet-based technologies. The reasoning is that not all members have broadband access or are active enough, which may or may not be true (show me the numbers). But the point is that it doesn’t matter. I submit that losing a few thousand members in order to gain a hundred thousand is a good trade. Sometimes you need to fire your customer and go find better ones.

The benefits to a long tail may be self evident to anyone reading this, but in case they are not I will provide two anecdotes. The first is taken from Clay Shirky’s book “Here Comes Everybody” which is, incidentally, the most profound book you can read on the subject of the “power of organizing without organizations.” Shirky discusses the fundamental misunderstand of open source software by Microsoft. They long fought against the concept of open source, calling it a myth that it was developed by thousands of programmers because only a few hundred contributed more than a few lines of code. He goes on to say, “It’s easy to see, from McGrath’s [Microsoft U.K. executive] point of view, why the open source model is the wrong way to design an operating system: when you hire programmers, they drain your resources through everything from salary to health care to free Cokes in the break room.” Microsoft simply can’t afford to pay a programmer’s entire annual salary for a mere two dozen lines of code. But what if that code fixed a buffer overflow vulnerability that put millions of computers at risk? Borrowing from the cheesy world of informercials, now how much would you pay? The point here is that when the transaction costs of organizing are free, so are the failures. You can afford the hundreds or thousands of failures in exchange for one game-changing success.

The second anecdote is simply an interesting description of Amazon.com’s business model. As one employee described it, “We sold more books today that didn’t sell at all yesterday than we sold today of all the books that did sell yesterday.” That one takes a few moments to digest, but it’s the quintessential differentiator between atoms and bits, scarcity and abundance, costly and free.

Equipment

Once free membership and the long tail begin filling the membership hopper, the next step is to “arm” them with the latest technology. Much like the weaponry for a particular soldier is dependent on his or her mission, so to must our tool sets match the mission.

  • Listening – Our members must have state of the art tools for listening to ISA activity in their preferred communication channels. These may include any combination of RSS, email, Twitter, FriendFeed, Facebook, etc… And by the way, these will change from year to year.
  • Sharing – When members have news to share or interesting ideas, there need to be easy and efficient ways to share that information. Again, there is no single tool or technology but ISA must be connected with all of the common platforms. Automated social media channels could be set up to mash up mentions on various networks.
  • Collaborating – Every Department, Division, and standards committee must have its own shared workspace for effective collaboration. This could be done today for free using sites like Ning. They are currently being assembled ad-hoc, which is obviously inefficient and alienates ISA from the process.
  • Publishing – In order to leverage the contributions of the long tail, members must have a platform to easily publish their work, accomplishments, opinions, and (perhaps) open letters to ISA leaders. There are a multitude of technologies available to do this in extremely interesting and profound ways. One of the simpler tools is simply to enable a blogging platform where all members get to publish themselves in a common area, perhaps by subject area. This is not unlike traditional user forums with a few exceptions. Blogs allow complex content and multimedia (images, video, and presentations), they are more easily indexed by search engines, and they are an easier platform to monitor.

Leadership

It is important not to look at the membership as one big mob, but as a collection of interconnected networks. Member Sally may be a cybersecurity expert in HMI systems and wireless communication with zero interest in the finer points of flow measurement and calibration, while Sam may be a pump designer who does care about flow, while Dan is VP of marketing for a large automation distributor and needs to a little bit about everything. With the proper tools in place as already described, these small networks will organize themselves and the leaders will naturally rise to the challenge. ISA’s job will transition out of the planning and organization business and into the coordination business. It will be important to provide these leaders with the tools, support, and motivation to succeed at leading their respective tribes.

Tactics

Some members will be right at home in this new paradigm (they will be the first generation of leaders). Others will need some training, best practices, guidelines, tips, and hacks. The better ISA can train the leaders in effective tactics, the more value the members will be able to provide. It’s not unlike training office staff in using Word and Excel.

Continue Reading