It is not so much that these opposing views are at different ends of the same spectrum, the fact is they operate on completely different tracks and there are few bridges linking the two.

There are many points where the two tracks follow different paths. A good example is the blind conviction of command and control structures that if we find something that works on a small scale we need to scale up in order to achieve greater profits and return. This is not to say that scaling up is wrong, or does not have its place; it is the approach that is fundamentally flawed.

From a command and control point of view it is important to control the inputs in order to control the outputs. Scaling up allows an organization to reach economies, streamline operations and ultimately control processes. This works ok in situations where resources are infinite or at the very least not scarce. It also assumes that the outputs are universally demanded and relevant. We are increasingly finding that resources are scarce, people are searching against need and objectives and new markets are organizing themselves differently.

The open source philosophy sees this differently. They will not argue against the need for scale, but the approach to scale is different. In order for something to scale efficiently the process must be opened up. Through opening up the process , each contributor is able to use what has been built so far and add to it in a way that makes it relevant to their needs, objectives, resources, experience, context and knowledge.  The scale element comes from sharing and building upon existing knowledge through an open model.  In simple terms this equates to taking the elements that work successfully within a localized solution and applying those while changing specific elements that relate to context, resources, needs, learning styles and so on. Often when we scale up universally we lose many of the elements that led to success in the first place.

I know what you’re thinking: ‘this is specific to software’. If we consider that software is produced in order to facilitate solutions to problems, to satisfy needs or attain objectives, rather than for the sake of producing software, we can see how this philosophy can be universally relevant.

One of the barriers to understanding and adopting the open source philosophy is the need for profit or revenue generating models. If I give something away for free, how am I going to make money? The answer lies in changing the focus of commerce away from:  ‘How can I get people to buy my product or service?’ to ‘How can I service people’s needs, objectives and demands?’. The open source approach looks at creating the right environment in order to provide relevant, contextual solutions, products and services that people are looking for, or that meet their needs and available resources.

There are numerous examples of open source initiatives that are doing just that. Ken Bank’s FrontlineSMS is a great example with its global adoption across thousands of separate initiatives, all based upon his open source software but adjusted to fit specific purposes and solutions, from development projects to larger spin offs such as Frontline SMS Medic and FrontlineSMS:Credit.

There are many examples out there. Feel free to add yours here. I would love to hear your views on the subject.

Photo by: bre pettis

The book Writers, Writing on Conflicts and Wars in Africa edited by  Okey Ndibe and Chenjerai Hove is a collection of essays written by real people doing real work within Africa. My friend Mike Woodman is one of those who contributed.

I have asked Mike permission to include an extract of his essay here on my blog. This is followed by a brief bio of Mike.

Excerpt 1:

BOOM, BOOM, BOOM, BOOM; gunfire shatters the stillness of the night.

I roll onto the floor instinctively, staring upwards in the direction of the bullets hissing above the thatch roof. My heart pounds with raw fear and I try to reassure myself that any bullet would have to pass through two mud brick walls to reach me.

I assume the heavy calibre fire is spewing from the truck mounted antiaircraft gun at the nearby military camp.

It intensifies and is now answered by the crackle of smaller calibre fire spattering from one direction then another. An engine screams and revs in low gear. Footsteps; urgent shouting; then voices are outside my hut.

The door swings open but from the floor I can’t identify the robed silhouette.

“I am Mohammed,” comes the familiar but breathless voice of our guard.

“Man shoot, come!”

I dress hurriedly. A wounded man is being carried into the compound followed by a crowd of men and a few women. I direct them to the tent and ask for the generator to be started.

The man is in agony. He hangs around the necks of two men who are supporting his legs. His white trousers are ripped and wrapped tightly and knotted around his right knee as an improvised bandage which is dark and glistening. His name is Farid and he is the younger brother of the local chief. He is laid on the table in the makeshift operating theatre, a canvas tent. I open the bandage. Several bullets have ripped through the knee leaving shards of gleaming bone amidst a mangle of flesh. I quickly cover the wound and lean hard down on it to stem the bleeding. The midwife sets up the drip and injects the general anaesthetic whilst I finish donning a surgical gown and scrubbing my hands. I start to work, stopping occasionally to swipe in vain at the gathering swarm of flies.

We finally leave the operating tent as dawn breaks and I strip out of the bloodied surgical gown.

Farid is waking but woozy under the cocktail of anaesthetic and painkiller.

He will not lose his leg but will never walk normally again.

Sleep won’t come; my eyes dart restlessly in the darkness behind my closed lids. Eventually I drift into a fitful sleep punctuated by vivid dreams: I am kidnapped by rebels at gunpoint, taken by horse to their cave and operate on their wounded colleagues in a cave by candlelight.

—

Mike Woodman was raised and educated in Zimbabwe. With a medical degree from the University of Cape Town, he completed his internship in the UK and Zimbabwe. He left his post at a government hospital in Bulawayo to work with Aboriginal communities in northern Australia. Following a longstanding ambition, and finally equipped with enough experience, he volunteered with the French aid agency Medecins Sans Frontieres. Since then he has lived and worked in Sri Lanka, Afghanistan, Indonesia, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Sudan, Vietnam and Russia. Along the way, he obtained further qualifications in international public health in Australia and tropical medicine in London. His passion is the provision of acceptable level medical services to those most in need in this world of recurrent conflicts, natural disasters and ever increasing inequalities. He is currently based in Harare with his partner Tanya.

Author: Alasdair Munn

tcg: The Communication Group

One-way or broadcast/display advertising and messaging has to rely on creating brand perceptions and reinforcing ideals. Campaigns are built around maximising the power and reach of the message against a set amount of time, or display space.

When this approach is taken out of this context and supplanted into a multidirectional relationship context, setting out to create a perception can be viewed as manipulative or forced. The rules and expectations around messaging and relationships change.

Many big brands are exceptional at creating perceptions and broadcasting their values and messaging. Understanding how people react to language, colour, design, lighting and messaging is a science. Positioning and the use of “trust” figures have become an industry in itself. The business case for outstanding back-up, customer service and client policy is well understood and executed.

Broadcast media works for consumers because we know the rules. We are happy to play this game. Our affinity towards a brand is as much to do with what our association with the brand says about us, as how we perceive the brand.

The challenge for many comes when adapting to building relationships using social media tools and approaches. Apart from the lack of consensus and understanding around the use of social media, an organisation’s inability to move from a broadcast mentality to a relationship mentality will let them down.

There is an unwritten psychological contract between individuals and brands when organisations open themselves up to establishing relationships using social media. We talk about transparency, trust, truth, openness, listening, dialogue and approachability. Organisations are paying strategists to tell them these things. Yet, often there is a broadcast mentality hanging over their approach to these concepts.

“How can we develop the perception of openness and transparency?”

“What colour says ‘approachable’?”

“How do we leverage our social media participation?”

In reality it is much simpler. If you use your social media channels to listen, and you are indeed listening and act accordingly, people will think of you as an organisation that listens. If you tell the truth, avoid half truths and resist the urge to manipulate facts, there is a better than average chance that you will be seen as an organisation that can be trusted to tell the truth. If you are transparent you will be seen as transparent.

The upside to all of this is that your brand, product or service will benefit from being informed, up to date and relevant for its market.

Photo: sepblog

Author : Alasdair Munn

tcg: The Communication Group

For the past few months I have been writing about a vision of social media where social networks are not the only playing fields and where social media’s place within the marketing mix does not exist entirely within “online promotion”.

Understanding that people have different learning styles and different starting points, I used pen, paper and elementary venn diagrams in a meeting with “traditional” marketers to illustrate where the “online” and “social media” elements fit into their marketing world.

Although simplistic and elementary, they helped them get over their initial block as to the “why, where and how” of social media.

Writing down the “five P’s of marketing” I asked them to circle where they saw social media having a role to play within the marketing mix. Below is a tidied up representation of what they produced.

Taking the same “five P’s” I added my interpretation of where social media tools and thinking apply to the marketing mix.

This opened up the discussion as to how an integrated marketing plan, using “traditional” and “new” tools adds value to an organisation. It was able to break down the resistance to social media. After further discussion, they could see how having access to real-time information and knowledge adds value when used in conjunction with retrospective measurement and information gathering tools. It also allowed the penny to drop that opening up and fostering collaboration and engagement can actually help grow an organisations IP, not loose it.

Yes, as innovative and generous as the US are as a nation, we’ve been FAT THINKERS. We’ve become rather lazy with our thinking. We even have cars parking for us for goodness sakes. Our arms are fat. Our brains are fatter.

So, back to Social Media – our business is busy. We have and continue to be approached a lot as people are ready to think more resourcefully. Ready to truly put what they learned at school about integrated marketing into actual practice. Interconnecting dots is for a lean brain. We can all do this.

The ROI of Social Media:

1. Asking questions leads to better informed answers and solutions. This is always an immediate time and money saver. Access to real time information and knowledge and being able to act on that information and knowledge, is the new competitive advantage.
2. Measurement is key. Here we talk about measurement against objectives, not against resources.
3. Interconnecting the dots is definitely an exercise for leaner thinking. Fun though.

For additional points, call us and help us understand your business and initiatives and we can help you figure out the relevant ROI framework for your specific business case.

Contact: info@tcgagency.com or Michelle Smith at +415 864 1431

This photo was taken by tomsaint11

Author : Alasdair Munn

Reading all the comments and articles about the 15 year old Intern at Morgan Stanely and his research report has me scratching my head.

I am not belittling “Matthew Robson’s” efforts, or suggesting that his report is not worth anything. In fact I applaud him and his contribution.

What does concern me is the hype and wonderment surrounding the “uniqueness” of this report and the suggestion of brilliance on the part of Morgan Stanely for publishing it.

No longer is marketing viewed as an eco-system of identifying, anticipating and satisfying needs. Instead we engage tactics, techniques and a “push” mentality.

If asking an audience how they behave, how they communicate and how they navigate technology is seen as groundbreaking, the financial district in London, and by all means, further afield urgently need to be brought up to date.

This can only be good news for integrated marketing professionals who like to ask questions.

Photo by Tomsaint11

Author: Alasdair Munn

tcg: The Communication Group

People, myself included, like to talk of shifts in ideology and the complexities that go with transitions from an older, more predominant ideology towards a newer, more relevant one. I’m not sure this achieves much other than producing a smug group of self-labelled enlightened ones and a larger group of people who don’t really care and don’t see the point of changing in any case.

The problems with self-labelling are all too evident. A couple of months back there were a plethora of blogs and discussions within social media circles as to what makes someone a social media expert. A great question and one that cannot be adequately resolved as social media is a vast discipline with many nuances and parts. Who can really define what is essentially a fluid ideology, changing faster than it can be documented? Even if we can and do document it, what are we measuring it against?

So it is a bit like getting hold of a pilots uniform, swatting up a few technical terms such as landing gear, flaps, ADF and HASELL check, walking onto a plane and announcing “Good day I’ll be your pilot today”. However in this case we have not completely defined which airplane it is yet. (I agree not the best example but I’m hoping it will paint a picture)

Are we, as self labelled social media practitioners helping to create the problem? Should we be less frustrated with the pace of change and stop waiting for people to catch up? Should we be seeking labels and descriptions that make sense to the people we are selling our services to rather than ones that alienate them further? Listening to them, understanding their concerns and finding out their objectives would be a great starting point.

I just get the sense that not enough is being done by the “enlightened ones” to close the gap. After all, most of the frustration about the slow pace of change originates from the people who are paid to effect that change.

Photo by Darren Hester

Author: Alasdair Munn

I am very interested to hear what people are doing within the world of Social media. I get a lot of value from reading widely on the subject. What I am not that interested in is people telling me how to “leverage” social media, or the best social network strategies.

I find some of it insular and limiting.

When we approach social media in a logical, scientific manner, bringing with us our right and wrong mindsets we set our own limits. Social media becomes part of a campaign rather than a diverse and effective business tool.

Let’s see. Some examples:

“Content is no longer static. The ability to put targeted content in front of the right people within the right context is where we are heading.”

Yes.

“In order to do this you need to figure out where your audiences are and take your message to them”

Um. Yes that is part of it.

“In order to effectively distribute your content you need to take your message to where your audiences naturally congregate online, and that is social networks”

Again, yes, that is part of it too.

But this is not where it stops. For some organisations this forms an important part of their content strategy but not their whole strategy. I have been working with companies who recognise that the content on their own online networks needs to follow the same thinking. Audiences, be they internal, external, channel partners or customers should not have to search for the information that is relevant to them. They should not have to log out of one network and into another to get different levels of access to information.

Social media tools, applications, systems and thinking are allowing organisations to understand what content should be served up to who based upon their profiles, their level of permissions and their individual preferences. For example, a channel partner who needs access to three different levels of information should not have to search three different organisational online networks to receive it. Content should be served up seamlessly.

Choosing who gets to add value to what content and how has to be based upon a more robust strategy than sending content out to social networks. Setting levels of permissions and deciding where your content travels and what can or cannot happen to it when it gets there is all decided and set using social media tools and applications. It may never see a social network.

The same can be said for developing relationships. The mindset is that people go to online networks to develop online relationships. Absolutely. But this does not mean that an organisation has to formulate all its online relationships on social networks. Nor does it mean that all online relationships need to be overt, or based upon a social networking model.

Yes. Organisations do need to pay attention to online social networks and building relationships with their audiences where those audiences feel comfortable having those relationships. Content distribution strategies on social networks are important. But let’s also think how social media tools, applications and thinking can be used to create business tools beyond the social networking world.

The beauty of social media is it’s open ethos. Its ability to connect the right people to each other so they can collaborate and add value. This does not need to be limited by the boundaries of social networks or the strategies of commentators.

Photo by Pink Sherbert

Content no longer sits on a website and hopes for people to come along. It travels. Not only does it travel from the website, smart websites are putting relevant content in front of their website visitors according to their profiles, preferences, searching and navigation behaviour. Social media tools, analytics, CMS, LMS and CRM are being combined to ensure audience and content relevance. The form content is delivered in, video, audio, photo, graphic, text etc. is no longer seen as merely innovative or a gimmick, rather as aligning to learning styles, expectations and delivery mechanisms. Context.

The relationship between content and context is two pronged.

1. Content is created in relation to the context it will be consumed in
2. Context directs content.

For content to be relevant it has to be created in the context of your social media strategy. Understanding the following is a great start:

1. Who are your audiences?
2. Where they live online?
3. What are their learning styles?
4. How they are influenced?
5. What are your competitors doing?
6. How can you differentiate yourself?
7. What is your USP? (Unique selling point)
8. What should you be doing online?
9. What are the rules?
10. What resources and tools do you have at your disposal?

Aligning your available resources and tools to your content goals seems obvious, but so much content is cobbled together in a piecemeal fashion. How many times, for example, have we seen a company start a YouTube channel and not update it?

Context rules social media. Keeping this in mind ensures we prepare, research and create strategies that align our goals with our audiences and resources. Relevant content and content delivery strategies will follow.

This post is reproduced from the original which can be found here

Author: Alasdair Munn

tcg: The Communication Group

Our shift from the industrial age to the information age has been led through our ability to make better-informed decisions. To achieve a competitive advantage we have had to have instant access to real-time information, harness our collective expertise and intellectual property and ensure we are nimble and efficient when adapting to change. Technology has played a starring role in this transformation, however, we are rapidly realising that the value of technology goes beyond chips, computers or software.

The industrial age was characterised by economies of scale through standardisation, retrospective measurements such as ROI and market penetration through demand creation. The information age has seen a shift, led in part through changing consumer behaviour and expectations. We are increasingly living, working and interacting in real-time.

It is estimated that within a year the amount of digital information in the world will double every 11 hours. This information is largely unstructured and will be produced in a multitude of formats, originating from an ever-increasing number of intelligent devices. To stay informed and nimble we need to change the way we structure our organisations and analyse our data.

Capturing, processing and analysing relevant data so it is seen in context and helps direct and inform decisions is essential. The ability to recognise patterns, to analyse content in motion and present this information so it allows for effective management and decision-making is the new competitive advantage. Managing your content through a permissions based hierarchy so it can inform, grow, have value added to it and be accessed when and where it is needed is an organisation’s new intellectual property.

Social media has an important role to play within this eco-system. The collaborative and real-time essence of social media, be it across open or closed networks fuels the information age. The tools and thinking behind social media, applied in relation to an organisation’s unique business rules and objectives drives this shift.

In this context, social media is not just about brand or reputation management. It is about giving organisations the tools they need to succeed in an age where change is rapid, collaboration essential and expectations are real-time.

Photo by The Rocketeer