Jan 25 2009

Let Them Be Heard

January 25, 2009 – 4:56 pm

Our “Social Media for Social Good” class this week is on the two-way communications paradigm that is at the heart of social media. There’s no greater way to bring that discussion to bear than the Cluetrain Manifesto. This epic book captures social media’s essence in a bottle, and is often passed over by communicators, and even more so by non-profit communicators. And what a tragedy that really is. They need to understand the principles behind the Cluetrain’s declaration of, “No. We Will Be Heard.”

cluetrain.jpg

I wrote about the importance of this book and it’s seminal line “There’s no market for messages” two months ago (students please read that post, too). And while that post really captures a lot of the marketing aspects that Cluetrain brought to bear, it did not get to the heart of the matter. We as communicators must listen.

In a media environment where people talk back, and expect to be listened to, simply talking won’t work. It won’t. Social media is relational, it’s two-way! If donors, volunteers and tax payers want messages, they’ll read your brochure, watch your educational video, etc. Not here. We want to talk. That’s why we’ve forsaken our roles as simple consumers of media and engaged in this vibrant online world, a veritable bazaar of ideas, conversations and yes, even products.

Consider what the old way of communicating did. Perhaps Chistopher Locke’s words in Chapter 1: Internet Apocalypso said it best:

We long to be part of a world that makes sense rather than accept the accidental alienation imposed by market forces too large to grasp, to even contemplate. And this longing is not mere wistful nostalgia, not just some unreconstructed adolescent dream. It is living evidence of heart, of what makes us most human. But companies don’t like us human. They leverage our longing for their own ends… Our role is to consume.

Nonprofit and government communicators may object and say, “Well, we are cause based, we are the essence of heart in life. We are bettering society.” But are you? Or do you just want to increase donations? Or “educate” the masses? Perhaps garner votes for your platform? Or even spread the word about your cause, movement or political reform?

Mass communications vehicles have lost a great deal of their strength and trust. Here on the social web those things live again. But to achieve them we must listen. That’s why so many organizational blogs fail. They talk first, and may never listen or let other voices be heard. In reality, it should be the other way around.

The Voices Will Be Heard

Back to Locke:

The Internet became a place where people could talk to other people without constraint. Without filters or censorship or official sanction — and perhaps most significantly, without advertising. Another, noncommercial culture began forming across this out-of-the-way collection of computer networks.

And so if organizations really want to participate in social web efforts, they need to engage in two-way — without filters, censors and punitive measures. That’s one of the big issues with the government 2. 0 movement. So much talk about the tools, and the technology. A sales pitch really. But what about letting taxpayers be heard? Do you think today’s social media government 2.0 conversation understands the difference between a new government policy/action inspired by our collective opinion, or just the same government only now more visible with social tools? I don’t.

That’s why burying criticism is so bad. It matters not that you agree with the points as an organization. People are going to say what they think of you anyway… It’s just a question of whether or not you choose to be a part of that real conversation on the social web. People need to be heard. Your filtering of that feedback is separate, but whatever you do, don’t stymie it.

care2.jpg

Back to the social cause. Voices (did you know social cause network Care2 has surpassed 10 million members).. A group of donors who want to voice their opinion. Volunteers who want to conduct their own kind of activism. Many stakeholders who want to see what the organization is doing and how, all who want to move that cause, affect that change together. They just want to talk about it, and yes, participate.

Let Them Be Heard. Begin your conversation with listening.

All we need to do is what most of us who’ve discovered this medium are already doing: Using it to connect with each other, not as representatives of corporations or market segments, but simply as who we are.

 
AddThis Social Bookmark Button By Geoff Livingston | Posted in Georgetown University: Social Media for Social Good, Internet Marketing | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments (8)
Jan 19 2009

Leveraging Idea Markets While Avoiding Echo Chambers

January 19, 2009 – 12:02 am
japanesebulb.jpg

Some of the greatest potential of social media lies in its ability to facilitate collaboration (Image: Japanese Light Bulb by emburke07). This ability to leverage multiple minds towards a greater, better solution — the harnessing of our collective intelligence — holds much hope for communities, businesses, nations and even the world alike (see the book and companion blog Wikinomics for discussion). At the same time, sometimes “groupthink” environments can go astray and turn into echo chambers and losing their value as idea markets (see book Honest Signals for discussion).

For marketers, idea markets have become fantastic tools for actively engaged communities. They provide customers a voice to engage companies and discuss current and potential products, suggest value added additions, vet issues, and discuss service environments. Better engagement with stakeholders yields to better results for all parties.

Idea markets occur publicly in social networks like Twitter, or in more productive focused environments like Dell’s Idea Storm, Nokia’s Mosh and My Starbucks Idea. These collaborative environments also work well inside corporations and in nonprofit initiatives like the Spot.Us community funded reporting project, the oft questioned and even more often cited Wikipedia or the Brooklyn Museum’s Click Exhibition.

However, one word of caution, if the community is exploited and does not find its own reward for participating, it can abandon the idea market (special thanks to Beth Kanter for pointing this weakness out and some nonprofit examples). There are ways around that issue. Incentive programs can be used to provide a WIFM (What’s In It for Me) result. There are even for purchase crowdsourcing networks and tools like InnoCentive.

Harnessing idea markets means understanding the dynamics of groupthink. Humans have multiple ideas, but an echo chamber can conquer or bury other ideas in the spirit of popularity and cliques. In reality, while the groupthink shows a strong indication that once concept is more worthy than others this tendency prevents other ideas from being vetted intelligently. This can be particularly troublesome if the idea is flawed or special interests are at play. In essence, the “Wisdom of the Crowds” can go awry in the dynamics of human behavior.

mlk.jpg

Want an example? Today is MLK day (image by emdot). The reason we have this holiday is to celebrate a man who rose up and said no more. He had to because historically this nation embraced slavery, and then after the civil war continued its legacy with Jim Crow laws and separation. A majority of Americans allowed these human rights violations to occur. WHile this did not occur online, it did happen in the our greatest idea market of all, the national consciousness.

For an organization, understanding these dynamics is critical. More minds are better than one, yet human behavior can cause problems. So the marketer must rise above the fray and leverage collaborative environments with a full understanding of potential pitfalls. Here are some ways to conquer off groupthink:

  • Marketers should source memes as one idea. While voiced by many, it’s still one concept (Honest Signals).
  • At the same time, the community should vet ideas repeatedly. The community will weed out a lot of bad ideas (Honest Signals).
  • Some maybe bad ideas may succeed if offered by popular minds. Their approval has less to do with the idea and more with group dynamics (Digg has had major issues with this). Creating checks and balances — filters — including vetting ideas for business sense is critical (microengagement, Honest Signals).
  • Allow for the voice of the minority. Opposing ideas are not necessarily bad ideas. They may be improvements. With tolerance and open communications such ideas can be vetted, and while not popular, they may be examined for pragmatic use (basic democratic principle).

    What would you add?

    •  
    AddThis Social Bookmark Button By Geoff Livingston | Posted in Georgetown University: Social Media for Social Good, Internet Marketing, Social Networks, social media | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments (14)
    Jan 12 2009

    Philanthropy’s Long Tail, the Economic Crisis and Social Media

    January 12, 2009 – 8:11 pm

    As part of our Georgetown University class “Social Media for Social Good,” we will be publishing each session’s discussion in advance of Tuesday night’s on the Buzz Bin. We will also use a hashtag on Twitter and related materials: #gtownsm4sg. We hope our efforts will not only benefit our students, but also the general marketplace.

    Class One (January 13) – Philanthropy’s Long Tail, the Economic Crisis and Social Media

    Social media seems to be a magic elixir that might resolve pain and woes for many organizations, but it’s elusiveness makes it seem like Fool’s Gold at times (image by smccard). Nonprofits, in particular the 501c3 charity or social cause, are no different, wondering how to make conversational media deliver tangible results.

    In general, the embattled market segment has seen traditional fundraising mechanisms plateau and its donor base continue to age. With the economic impact of ravaged stock portfolios, social causes are forced to turn to younger donors and the digitally rich. Yet how to engage them remains a prescient significant topic for many in the business. And often the puzzle of social media becomes a topic of discussion.

    But is it fair to really look at social communications without first understanding the larger dynamics impacting the industry? Really, any communication should foster dialogue or understanding between an organization and its stakeholders. Whether that communication is for education, awareness, fundraising, customer service or any other aspect of day-to-day business matters little if the organization is out of touch with its stakeholders. The same goes for the type of communication. Social media’s primary difference is dynamic, uncontrolled conversation about mutual interests between parties.

    What does matter is a true understanding of the market, and what its expectations and needs are. By garnering this knowledge, nonprofits can better engage the market in positive dialogue via social media (or other means), and build stronger relationships that can lead to fundraising, education, political action, and widespread discussion (word of mouth).

    How the The Long Tail and Economic Crisis Impact Philanthropy

    Philanthropic organizations are different than traditional businesses in that they usually don’t fulfill a conventional market need. The issues they address are more cultural, helping society develop or alleviating some sort of misfortune (economic, health, ecological, etc.). Sometimes they raise funds through traditional business means (for example, Goodwill stores), but they have cause-based missions which often means that making money is not their primary reason d’etre. That creates its own issues.

    According to the Bridgespan Group, only 144 of the more than 200,000 nonprofits established since 1970 had grown to $50 million or more in revenue by 2003. Consider that when it comes to communicating their mission, many 501c3s never reach the size where they can command regional or national awareness.

    There’s a significant social cause market that serves niche audiences, who could serve larger groups of people, but probably cannot afford to reach them. In essence, there’s a significant Long Tail of social causes that serve the market just waiting to be discovered.

    Add in the economic crisis, and you have a double whammy. Not only are dollars hard to come by, but now national and global economic performance is impacting giving. With 401ks and stock portfolios ravaged, big donors — often above the age of 50 — have ratcheted back giving. Smaller donations from families under $50,000 in income have basically subsided. Now some 501c3s are fighting for their very existence.

    Finally, many social causes are faced by the same sweeping media changes every other organization in America. The old ways of marketing are simply not working as well. As Pew Research Center for the People and the Press reported late last year, the Internet has surpassed newspapers as a primary news vehicle. For young people under 30, the Internet even rivals TV as a news source.

    Sector specific research from Future Matters verifies that nonprofits have a split audience of under 40-somethings who are Internet savvy, and older (and often higher dollar donors fall in this category) folks who prefer traditional media. While there is increasingly cross-pollination between media, the writing is on the wall. 501c3s must adapt or they will watch their long-term sustenance fall the way of newspapers. The economy is only adding pressure to find these new sources of awareness and revenue.

    What the Market Cares About

    The conflux of size, economic pressure and media change is forcing 501(c)(3)s across the country to start examining social media as a means of reaching new groups of stakeholders; including millenials, digitally savvy Gen Xers, and the younger high-dollar donor who will not respond to phone calls, conventional mail or email (image by nalilo). In some ways, social media’s promise should encourage smaller nonprofits who are in the Long Tail. It’s the great equalizer, giving smaller voices the opportunity to be heard just as well as powerhouses like The Salvation Army or American Cancer Society (see Beth Kanter’s blog for ongoing case studies).

    At the same time, social media fails when organizations talk at the market and the people that comprise the community. The inherent error – a mistake caused by mass communications training and habit – demonstrates an organization still controlling the message and not engaged in real conversations about the community’s needs.

    While conversations do not equate to return on investment, they are mandatory precursors to achieve any kind of result on the social web. It’s only when stakeholders are engaged in a worthwhile, meaningful dialogue about their interests that they will seek a deeper relationship, whether that’s transactional, volunteering, or simply spreading the word.

    Some things have become clear over the recent past that impact philanthropic social media:

  • Awareness is a huge asset from social media. Word of mouth successes have been well discussed. Beyond altruism, individuals that affiliate themselves with social cause, either because of its intrinsic value to their lives or because they believe in the mission’s good nature, are enhancing their own profile. Further, younger demographics want to be seen making a real impact.
  • More importantly, beyond feel good, social media gives organizations the tools to foster social investment from people, allowing them to become part of the cause on an extended basis.
  • Fundraising online has become a huge topic of discussion. Small micro payments a la Kiva have demonstrated the power of online tools, and the Obama administration achieved power by harnessing the micro and turning it into macro-fundraising. But what about the high dollar donor and achieving substantial contributions? Social media has yet to produce a silver bullet answer here.

    • In addition, social media has yet to be tapped for its full benefits as an idea market generator in the social cause segment:

  • High-dollar donors want to see accountability from nonprofits. Conventional rankings on dollars allocated on actual causes, etc. may not be accurate barometers. Affecting change, producing positive movement on the primary issue, and communicating those results requires a new level of transparency and conversation that social media can provide.
  • Similarly, nonprofits have a promise. But their mission can get distorted by a diverse donor base asking for many tangential results and programs (See “Delivering on the Promise of Non-Profits,” Harvard Business Review, December 2008). Social media can facilitate dialogue between the organization and its donors, including the use of internal social tools, to discuss the mission’s centralized focus and garner alignment.
  • Finally, social media can facilitate dialogue amongst donors and recipients, a larger community discussion, which may or may not involve the charitable organization. Social networks like Care2 are already fostering these types of discussions.

    • These six marketplace conversations are only some of the issues that matter. Our class conversation will revolve around the marketplace’s concerns and how social media could help. What would you add to the list?

     
    AddThis Social Bookmark Button By Geoff Livingston | Posted in Georgetown University: Social Media for Social Good, social cause | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments (5)
    Nov 14 2008

    Social Media Communicators Don’t Read Cluetrain

    November 14, 2008 – 7:48 am

    “There’s no market for messages”

    One thing has become readily apparent to me: Most social media communicators, “personal brands” (snort) and social media experts have neglected to read the Cluetrain Manifesto. Whether you agree with the principles in this book or not, in my mind it should be mandatory reading for anyone who conducts business communications on the Internet.

    cluetrain.jpg

    Many a social media consultant or online communicator have confided in me that they have not read the Cluetrain Manifesto. To me that’s as unforgivable as practicing law without a J.D. or practicing medicine without going to medical school and internships.

    Cluetrain captures the essence of the uncontrolled business environment and they need to provide authentic, real dialogue based around the market’s needs. Without understand the fundamental dynamics of the social media form and the inherently uncontrived conversations it inspires, communicators are lost in the darkness.

    At bare minimum communicators should read the opening salvo of 95 theses that comprise the Cluetrain Manifesto, Christopher Locke’s chapter, “Internet Apocalypso, and Doc Searls and David Weinberger’s contribution, “Markets Are Conversations.”

    It get backs to community concepts which are at the heart of Now Is Gone. In many ways, Now Is Gone is the direct product of the Internet and Cluetrain’s unrelenting view that controlled and contrived business brand messages — personal or corporate — have no place on the Internet. Consider the boiled down thesis of the book and its seven principles of community development.

    For me Cluetrain represents a great hope: That business can be done differently. The Internet and social media can become the elixir to revolutionize our corporate cultures of exploitation, and refocus it on social good, causes, and service to actual markets.

    One of the reasons the whole personal branding movement disturbs me is that most personal branders are in actuality exploiting these tools to foster a new conversational, self-centered hucksterism that makes me sick. It’s not genuine or real, and I don’t want any part of it. Add your genuine personality to the conversation, not a contrived self image.

    Here are my favorite 10 of the 95 theses from Cluetrain:

    3) Conversations among human beings sound human. They are conducted in a human voice.

    25) Companies need to come down from their Ivory Towers and talk to the people with whom they hope to create relationships.

    26) Public relations does not relate to the public. Companies are deeply afraid of their markets.

    33) Learning to speak with a human voice is not a parlor trick. It can’t be “picked up” at some tony conference.

    34) To speak in a human voice, companies must share the concerns of their communities.

    35) But first they must belong to a community.

    61) Sadly, the part of the company a networked market wants to talk to is usually hidden behind a smokescreen of hucksterism, of language that rings false — and often is.

    62) marketers do not want to talk to flacks and hucksters. They want to participate in the conversations going on behind the corporate firewall.

    83) We want you to take 50 million of us as seriously as you take one reporter from THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

    91) Our allegiance is to ourselves — our friends, our new allies and acquaintances, even our sparring partners. Companies that have no part in this world, also have no future.

     
    AddThis Social Bookmark Button By Geoff Livingston | Posted in Georgetown University: Social Media for Social Good, social cause, social media | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments (13)
    Nov 7 2008

    Social Media for Social Good

    November 7, 2008 – 12:41 am

    I have the great privilege of teaching a post graduate class next semester at Georgetown University, called “Social Media for Social Good.” Qui Diaz has agreed to teach with me, promising a high powered experience for social cause communicators seeking to engage their communities online.

    quisdaboss.jpg

    Here’s a sneak preview of the syllabus for MPPR-785-01, “Social Media for Social Good,” including the text books…

    Social media offers organizations an indispensable tool set for a wide variety of philanthropic activities including activism, education, donor and volunteer development, and direct fundraising. Because of its inherently personal and community-based nature, social media provides an ideal canvas to work within, allowing causes to not just communicate, but also to activate and invigorate significant grassroots activity.

    To effectively use social media for social good, nonprofit communicators need to cross the great divide from one-way to two-way communications. This challenge should be easier for communicators to embrace since creating active publics is at the heart of good cause marketing, but it’s still a major challenge.

    Communities and individuals associate their online activities with interests, character and personality. They inherently reject organizational insertion into their conversations. When it comes to social causes, the cause must inspire the individual on personal level, and then activate that person to engage in the larger community and corresponding conversations.

    Conversational engagement and dissemination of cause-based ideas by the community, whether the organization participates or not, represents the heart of civic-minded social media. True “social” media – built with the right calls to action – can yield measurable results for impact: from cultivated relationships to widespread education, advocacy, volunteerism and donor giving.

    Organizations need to transition from messaged communications at their audiences to understanding the community (and the people within it) in order to inspire and engage in larger conversations. This requires a significant shift in communications ethos, a return to the basis of solid, strategic marketing principles, and also a core understanding the media form.

    In our class, we will examine social media in a general sense to understand the fundamental underpinnings of online communications. We will then examine social media and traditional marketing strategy, particularly as it applies to social causes. Here we will learn about communicating a value proposition for our communities. We will then survey the current social media tool set to see how various tactics work.

    The reading list for the class includes the following books:

    • Christopher Locke, Rick Levine, Doc Searls, and David Weinberger, The Cluetrain Manifesto
    • Seth Godin, Flipping the Funnel, nonprofit edition (eBook)
    • Charlene Li and Josh Bernoff, Groundswell
    • Geoff Livingston with Brian Solis, Now Is Gone
    • Jack Trout and Al Ries, Positioning: The Battle for Your Mind
    • Ben Rigby, Mobilizing Generation 2.0
    • Malcolm Gladwell, The Tipping Point
    • Allison Fine, Momentum

    Plus web-based case studies! It should be a great class, and if you are local and can participate, please join us. We look forward to working with the next generation of social cause communicators!

     
    AddThis Social Bookmark Button By Geoff Livingston | Posted in Georgetown University: Social Media for Social Good, social cause, social media | Comments (15)