Tweet Posting

Just this week I finished a project that involved creating a Twitter strategy for a group of Cleantech companies. Looking at the growing relevance of Twitter on the internet (see Sysomos or Comscore), I must say it would be a grave mistake for these companies to ignore Twitter. As a Twitter user, I must also say, please don't see Twitter as just another marketing channel.

Twitter did not occupy much of my time after I first registered as @this_moment but has become a fixed part of my daily routines ever since I discovered hootsuite.com (and opened up @ines_doodles as second account). So my personal behavior in a way humbly reflects the tremendous growth that Twitter has seen in the last months 

What I have also seen growing is the number of accounts by small and medium size companies. Unfortunately, many of their tweets I can only regard as spam: Mentioning brand names over and over again quickly bores followers and does nothing to improve the image of the company. In fact, the more companies come to Twitter, the more impatient Twitteristi become with one-way-messages. It even seems that a growing share of the conversation on Twitter is about blocking spam - but that may just be my personal impression.

"Embedding advertised tweets into social media is about trying to bully your way into the attention of someone," Kim Heras at the Next Web says about Twitter's new Promoted Tweets, and that also holds for "regular" promotional company tweets. As long as firms regard Twitter as just one more marketing channel, they are bound to be seen as bullies.

The secret to being accepted and followed at Twitter is simple: Don't see Twitter as being full of customers, but as being full of people you can listen to, people you can have a conversation with or people you can make friends with. Become one of them.

It's a bit like Personal Branding, just the other way round. In simple terms, Personal Branding is about becoming the marketing manager of oneself in order to support one's career development. Similarly, brands should be developing personalities in order to have a career of engaging conversations with real people. That will work best when the company culture permits authentic personalities to speak out publically. As simple as that. And as hard.

From Job Frustration to Responsibility

Over the past weeks, I have had some informal discussions with people (in Germany) about their job situation and what I heard was a deep dissatisfaction with management, the organizational culture or "the system" as a whole:

People are frustrated that they are treated "as if we were stupid" (for instance when management does not communicate the background of decisions).

People are frustrated that their personal engagement (doing more than what is expected) or experience is not valued or is even regarded as a nuisance.

Often, personal engagement ("the reason why I wanted to do this job") is cut short because the focus inside the organization is merely on quantity of results, efficiency of operation and there is no time to do something "as good as it should be done", for fostering personal work relationships or for developing new ideas.

People are frustrated about a focus on control rather than trust. Consequently, executives are often viewed as inflexible or authoritarian.

In sum, the people I talked to had the feeling that they are not seen or not recognized by management. As a result they tell themselves that their organization does not deserve or want anything else but medium performance.

People seem to put up with their frustrations because...

• They feel helpless ("this is how things are, they will not change and I have to cope somehow").


• They feel dependent on the money or other benefits ("better than no job so I can't complain").
  
• They cannot imagine a different kind of working. Fun or passion are not associated with a job. (And that I find really sad.)

Now, if all of the above was only true for the 10 to 15 people that I spoke with, there would still be no reason to be sad. However, I suspect that I spoke with representatives of the 87% of the employees in Germany that are not emotionally engaged with their work (which means they just "work-to-rule" or are completely disengaged) - this is the figure Gallup found in their 2008 Employee Engagement Survey. I would expect the situation to be worse in the new survey that will be published in spring. And, mind you, I am not talking about a specifically German problem. Compared to some other European countries, Germany is still doing ok.

One might think that having a workforce that is, by and large, neither very committed nor productive should ring a few alarm bells. Not just among companies, but nationwide. After all, national competitiveness, the holy cow, is at stake.

Yet, when politicians talk about the need to increase innovation and creativity (as they do for instance in the "EU 2020" strategy), they don't seem to be aware that the level of de-motivation and mistrust in organizations is working against their planned measures (which focus on R&D investments, new financing models and digital networks).

A key word here is empowerment. Managers should be empowered to shake off the habit of controlling and take on the responsibility to truly see the potential of each employee. Employees need to be empowered so that they can shake off the habit of helplessness and take responsibility for their work engagement.

Empowerment is a process that can be facilitated...yet, individuals or organizations have to go through a learning process on their own. Nobody can do that for them. Facing the anger and frustration is a good start as a lot of energy and power can flow from this. - Exactly what is needed to take responsibility for positive change!

Replacing killer apps

The search for the next "killer app" is going on for decades already. So, obviously, not much brain was needed to write about "killer communities". (As spotted in a presentation on the slideshare front page.)

"Killer apps" evoke images of "bloody competition". Seems to me that it's time to use metaphors that are in line with the spirit of collaboration and co-creation- Especially when talking about communities.

(pictures from presentations here and here)

Why do rules tend to be ugly?

For some reason, enforcing rules often seems to produce ugliness. (Pictures from Helsinki)

Transformation through Story Telling

While on a rational level, most people agree that a fundamental shift in society and culture is necessary to tackle the problems of today, it seems very hard to make that leap on a personal level, leave alone a community or institutional level.
I was reminded of that when I watched the speech that UK prime minister Gordon Brown recently gave at the TED conference. He states that we are at a unique historic moment where we are more interconnected than ever before and we are also developing a global ethic, both promising preconditions for solving global problems - poverty, climate change, economic crisis - in a global way.The solution he proposed remained vague but he clearly saw a need for a central institution which would have the means to globally enforce agreements or regulations. While this may certainly be part of the solution, I missed concepts of co-creation, empowerment, collaboration and individual responsibility in his vision. Being inside a politician's story maybe did not allow him to see that new forms of governance would be central to such a solution, if it is not just to repeat the patterns of administrative institutions stricken by political power-struggles.

Another example for a solution that repeats past patterns is the idea of a British company to put RFID barcodes on trees so that controlling the sustainability of forests becomes more transparent. They even assume that tagging trees could play a role in fighting deforestation, and therefore, could be seen as a measure to stop global warming. But the underlying concept is still that we can care only for things that we can control and that nature has to be properly put into our warehousing system for us to see its value. An alternative to applying technical control mechanisms could be to bring forests and communities together, something that Roald Gundersen and Amelia Baxter are trying to do with their Community Supported Forests. Members will get a specific part of the forest where they "can camp, hunt and garden on the land. They can forage for mushrooms, garlic mustard and wild ginger. They can get firewood, sustainably milled lumber, landscaping stone or fresh spring water." And in doing that, they will have a chance to get to know the forest as a friend and not just as a distant resource. That's a very different story, right?

Recently I heard of the Dark Mountain Project, a literary movement to rewrite the stories that we base our assumptions on. "We aim to question the stories that underpin our failing civilisation, to craft new ones for the age ahead and to write clearly and honestly about our true place in the world."

Becoming aware of the narratives that we live by and re-inventing them is very much what we need, in my view, to have a new context for transformation - on a personal, community or even institutional level.

Story beneath...Barcoding Trees

Last week Reuters reported about a British company that is barcoding trees to protect the forest:

"Deep in the world's tropical rainforests, workers are hammering thousands of barcodes into hardwood trees to help in the fight against illegal logging, corruption and global warming.

The plastic tags, like those on supermarket groceries, have been nailed to a million trees across Africa, southeast Asia and South America to help countries keep track of timber reserves.

Helveta, the British company behind the technology, says the barcodes will help firms comply with tough laws on importing sustainable timber into the United States and Europe.

They could also play a role in fighting deforestation, which accounts for about a fifth of global emissions of planet-warming carbon dioxide. ...

"We bring transparency and visibility where historically that has probably been limited at best," Patrick Newton, Helveta's chief executive officer, told Reuters."

Sounds like a good solution? I am not so sure. To me that sounds like a reflex reaction to treat symptoms of a deeper pathology with the cures that we tare most familiar with: controlling, measuring, administrating. Nature is seen as something we can put a tag on, simply a resource. And that would be one of the memes that is being spread with this type of solution: Nature is a resource that we can only protect if we bring it into our warehousing system.

Maybe barcoding is a better-than-nothing solution for the time being, but generally speaking, it only enforces alienation from nature. Which is the real reason for thoughtless pollution or irresponsible exploitation of the ecosystem

Related post: Learning for Life

Shopping a legal drug

A website I noticed today: Shop around tours is a service “For People who live to shop and love to travel”. – Shop around tours offers guided tours for bargain shoppers e.g. Designer outlet shopping in Tuscany.

One testimonial statement of a (however briefly) satisfied shopper was on the landing page of the website: “You’ve created a wonderful environment for all of us bag-loving, shoe-hoarding, fashion-craving shoppers and we are all eternally grateful.” – Kate H. Arlington, VA

Hard to believe someone would really say this without irony. But it is a true statement of current reality: our environment is created for and by shopping addicts.

Wonderful? Eternally grateful? I am not buying this!

Magic Words

Dealing with new developments and the need to change brings me ever closer to a topic that has been dear to me since my childhood: The fascination with language.

Language can define the borders of what we allow ourselves to see and think. But language can also open a door to new understanding and a wider awareness. When I decided to study linguistics - and not something that would have seemed more practical - it was because I hoped to uncover the mystery of language.

I was reminded of the power of words several times last week.

The first instance was in a in a workshop about the future of education. In the course of the project, participating companies would dive into emerging opportunities in education for them as individual companies but also as a network. But at this early stage, the point was to get a common understanding for all relevant developments that affect education. It was our belief that these developments were visible in all forms of learning, be it at school, university or in company trainings. Yet, time and again a debate started whether we should make a distinction between primary education and further education already now. It became clear that the words we used and our belief that developments affect learning in general were out of sync. We dominantly spoke of "students" and "teachers", thus evoking a primary education setting. A colleague had the clarity to suggest that we start using more general terms - "learner" and "educator". Language evokes scenarios and sometimes we are simply not aware of this.

On my flight back I picked up an issue of US Today and browsing through the pages, I got stuck at the headline "Fighting Age and Illness with all natural products" that turned out to be an advertising slogan for American Rena. Fighting? Was it really appropriate to use metaphors of struggle and aggression in this context? Age and Illness? Since I don't belief that growing old is similar to having a disease I found the conjunction of the two words manipulative. The scenarios that Reno was trying to evoke through language felt totally wrong and my interest in Rena was gone.

The heavy book that I am currently carrying around with me adds still another angle: In Theory U. Leading from the Future as It Emerges, Otto Scharmer uses grammar as a metaphor to describe shifts in social systems. Social grammar is described as "the hidden rules, structures, and inflection points that enable certain types of evolution and emergence to happen." By understanding and using this grammar, change can come into being. The question how to make the leap from observed developments to structural change is exactly, what is often puzzling and challenging for me today. So here I am again with applied linguistics and my choice of study makes more sense than ever :-)

Cool: Being offline

Using social media has become a mainstream activity - this is at least what surveys like Social Media Tracker wave 3 (byUniversal McCann) tell us. If that is truly so, being active in networks, blogs, tweets etc. must be already yesteryear's fashion to the trendsetters and early adopters. Its simply not cool to be main stream!

In fact, the world is ripe for a counter trend to constant online activities, since constant networking also means perpetual disruption which translates to stress and productivity loss.

But how can anyone who makes a point of being part of an elite of forerunners show that offline is the new black?

One way of going offline with style would be to turn logging out into a luxury. In a way, power napping in spas (like Yelo in New York) or with special equipment (like the napshell or the EnergyPod) offers just that.

Another idea could be to have a zero communication service (by telecommunication providers ?)which holds back all communication in a defined area for a selected time. At a premium price, of course. Have not seen this yet but it is just a question of time...

Companies can also reserve rooms where employees can work completely uninterrupted. Would it not feel like a privelege to work for a company that frees staff from stress?

At any rate, stating that one decided to quit a network or an online habit may become just as main stream as joining one of the community services. As an added value, such a statement adds an aura of no-nonsense down-to-earth rationality to the person who made the statement.

Come to think of it, such a statement started yesterday's Iconoculture newsletter: "I committed Twittercide the other day. And while I'm sure it was disappointing to the couple hundred Twitter followers who had gotten used to updates on what I ate for dinner (usually lasagna) or my level of exhaustion (high), I retired my account for many reasons — one of which was the fact that I wasn't having much fun with that aspect of my identity anymore."

Related: Communicate Less

Picture by OmirOnia (sxc)

The Brain and The Truth

At the beginning of the year, a pundit at Harvard Business Review predicted that lie detection would become a business application soon. It was not far fetched at all.

At TrendtoGo I have already written about how the U.S. Department of Homeland Security's is developing a sensor system that predicts "hostile thoughts" in people remotely. While these sensors at the moment "only" scan body functions like pulse, facial expressions and breathing patterns, the next step obviously will be to include brain scans.

Brain scans already were used as evidence in court in India: "In June, in a murder case in Pune, in Maharashtra State, that a judge explicitly cited a scan as proof that the suspect’s brain held “experiential knowledge” about the crime that only the killer could possess, sentencing her to life in prison," NYT wrote in this article.

Scanning brain activity may the pathway for better human - machine interaction. This is at least what the company Emotiv is betting at: "Emotiv has created technologies that allow machines to take both conscious and non-conscious inputs directly from your mind." - You can see their prototype in the picture - a wireless headset which detects brain waves, facial expressions, body language, and movement to have direct control over computer functions and processes. The idea is to use the headset for gaming, but obviously, applications can be manifold. The company is hoping to have the devices in the stores before chrismas.

There are many more examples that show how close we are at communicating directly from our brains. How sure we are that what happens in our brains tells more about the truth than our words could.

The interesting thing is that researchers who study learning and long term memory also found out that our brains actually are not the key to an objective truth. Each time we upload an old memory into our short term memory, we modify the story a bit. We don't distort our past consciously, it just happens. Researchers also found that every one of us perceives the same piece of reality - be it a football game or a book - differently, depending on the beliefs that we hold and how much we cling to those beliefs.

It will be interesting to see how the commercialization of brain scans especially in the "truth business" will handle the fact that truth is not objective as we are definitely bound to find out more about the quicksilver nature of "truth". Sure enough, there is something like a discernible lie. But sure enough, people who don't lie about an incident will still have slightly different perceptions of this very incident. They may differ even though no one was lying.

Actually, different perceptions or interpretations of reality are not a new finding. Nevertheless, people's everyday behavior (and I am also talking about myself) does not show that we have understood this phenomenon. The current commercial interest in the brain's inner workings may force a wider public to accept the reality of various realities. :-)

What will the common reaction be? Quarrels as well as wars arise over the issue of being right. Will mankind learn and accept that there is no such thing as "being right" as opposed to "being wrong"? To me, the consequence seems to be that all opinions, especially the opinion of "the others" should be welcomed as yet another expression of the truth/of reality.

Beware of the Hippos!

Hippo's are said to be quite dangerous. I've only met them in the zoo, so I don't really know... Well, but there are also other HIPPOs around and they are dangerous, too. Hippo is an acronym for "highest paid person's opinion" and, unfortunately, these hippos tend to kill all other opinions. Sometimes unknowingly, and usually to the disadvantage of that person.

Brandtao wrote that, with one simple rule, P&G avoids the killer tendency in hippos:

Hippos say “I think…” It’s not uncommon for everyone to then fall into line with the Hippo’s view, possibly without even airing their own. Often the more junior clients will have little ability to influence their senior staffer, who has now publicly ommitted to a view, as the boss would lose face and isn’t open to discussion.

In variance to this, one management technique used by P&G, amongst others, during reviews of proposals and ideas with their agencies came to mind. It involves letting the most junior member of the marketing team present at a meeting to comment first. They are followed by the others, ascending in order of seniority; leaving the final comments to be spoken by the most senior person within the team. Sometimes 3 or 4 others may have commented before the Hippo speaks.

This approach has 4 effects.
1. It ensures everyone involved airs their opinion, even the most junior.
2. The less senior staff prove their ability, as they speak before the boss.
3. The meetings are more consensual in feel.
4. The most senior person gets to pick over the arguments and comments expressed by their team before uttering a word. At which point they may unify the response, focus on the most important points and speak with authority and insight that can appear more sage-like.

Sounds like a great meeting recipe that brings out the best in everyone - and makes meetings less of a waste of time (even if they may take longer that way).

Picture: runrunrun/sxc

Communicate less

Communication, communication, communication. That seems to be the mantra when it comes to good team management, successful organizational change and the much sought-after collaboration. Tools from emails to wikis, Skype to Twitter are enabling communication everywhere, anytime at low cost. – But if you get the idea that communication should flow continuously, you are in danger of receiving perpetual, ubiquitous chatter (i.e. noise) instead of high-quality interaction. Communication should come in small, efficient dosages. And just as “slow food” or “slow transport” are supposed to bring quality back into our eating and travel habits, “slow communication” could raise the productivity at work - and even the indulgence in work!

Slow communication – some fragments

• Switch out: 37signals, the web2.0 company behind popular collaboration tools like basecamp and campfire advises “alone time” of uninterrupted work as the means to safeguard productivity (see their publication Getting Real). E.g. no telephone and email between 9.00 and 14.00. Some companies like U.S. Cellular try to solve the problem by introducing zero-email-days (see this article at USAToday.)
• Opportunities: Michael Arrington, famous Techcrunch blogger complained he received more than 2000 emails a day – and he saw this as a business opportunity: “The long term answer is that someone needs to create a new technology that allows us to enjoy our life but not miss important messages. If I knew what that solution was, I’d quit this blog and go do it.” Yes, there is money to be made and some already do it – like Timothy Ferris, whose book The 4-Hour-Workweek became a hot selling item at Amazon – he also advised to radically cut down inefficient communication.
• Meetings: One way to achieve this is spending less time with meetings. The FT recently gave the anti-meeting movement some space: “If three people meet in a corridor and discuss a project for five minutes, they have had a meeting, and probably an effective one. But most meetings are seen as immovable blocks in diaries.” Bill Daniels, chief executive of American Consulting & Training is quoted with views on the cost-side of meetings: "[Some] meetings are very expensive. Not only do you have all the people in the room, but for every hour you spend in the meeting, there's five to 10 hours getting ready.” Nevertheless, he also says that meetings are needed to build teamwork.

Helping employees avoid inefficient communication should be in the interest of every company (inefficient meetings are not just expensive and unproductive but also never climate friendly!) and therefore a management topic. But still, everyone probably needs to find their own individual balance between too much and too little. I personally find lack of communication much more frustrating than communication overkill, which at least gives me a chance to pull the plug.

Mobile Graffiti

Stumbled across a really cool mobile tagging project in Edinburgh called Spellbinder:.

"Spellbinder is a new interactive digital medium based on camera phones and image matching. Using Spellbinder, digital content can be embedded in the real world by taking a photograph of an object or place. The digital content can be released by another user by taking another photograph of the same location. Spellbinder does not require special markers or barcodes to be placed in the world and works indoors or outdoors. Unlike tracking technologies such as global positioning systems, the focus is onwhat specifically is being looked at rather than where the user is. "

Currently, the system is used for an Edinburgh Invisible Art project (see picture from the interesting BBC article about this, but, as Dr Mark Wright of the Division of Informatics at the University of Edinburgh told the BBC, not just locations but practically everything could be linked to the virtual world. "With Spellbinder, the real world becomes a computational resource."

Fascinating: Take a picture of a real life object and get information, pictures, sounds, comments from your community,... in return. Lots of applications possible. But what really entices me is that mobile tagging based on real objects instead of code is one more step towards living in a world where virtual and real are no longer distinguishable. Yep, I fell for the Simulation Argument which says that if mankind is at some point able to build a simulation of the real world (and it looks like we're getting there), then chances are we are already living in one. And I think that is a consolation :-)