Kicking and SCREAMING: global

Showing posts with label global. Show all posts

Thursday, April 03, 2008

Thanks for the retweet @problogger !

I was recently one of 116 submissions that responded to a great opportunity for exposure beyond the imagination. Many thanks to Darren Rowse (ProBlogger) for his challenge to submit our best post title (and URL) from the last month on their blogs.

Here's the list, and as ProBlogger said:

Surf them - link up to those you connect with and if you’re on Twitter follow as many of this great bunch of bloggers as you can!

What do you think?

Sunday, March 09, 2008

Avoiding the Rebellion, and anything that sounds like a Rebellion

It seems that the majority of folks in the technology enhanced world are missing something that will be critical moving forward. Lest we forget, there are now and always will be naysayers and laggards, and it is our responsibility to provide guidance and direction for them so they can remain behind the power curve if that is truly their desire.

It may be difficult for many to understand these folks, but they are the reason that the buggy whip was still being produced long after the automobile hit critical mass. They are the reason that typewriter ribbon (even correctable ribbon) can still be found in online office supply stores (and perhaps a few local stores), and why computer manufacturers still sell dialup modems (though most are faster than 2800 baud).

Is it really that difficult to understand? It may take a bit of imagination, but when headlines like How Google and eBay Act Like Nations are found on an ABC News website, is it really that difficult to think that some could actually think that this whole e-commerce "revolution" died back in '99? Surely when the writer says "eBay took the extraordinary step of going to war against its own customers/partners/employees" they were speaking metaphorically . . .

And if the war coverage of ABC wasn't enough, a dose of reality (and close reality at that) shows us that the next generation of the Castro-controlled are (get this) using technology to break the rules, in Cyber-Rebels in Cuba Defy State's Limits. Do they really have it that bad on this island nation? I mean, come on -- state-owned cafe (only) charge a third of the average Cuban's monthly salary--about $5--to use a computer for an hour. That's no worse than you would pay at a franchised coffee shop or high-end hotel in the U.S. if you needed Internet access and had forgotten your laptop at home, right?

And then these poor folks have to deal with some obvious marketing hype when they read the claim that a Pew Internet and American Life Project Study found that Cell Phones are Now the Most Vital Device . . . cell phones? Who needs a cell phone? If you have a home phone, your auto is in good shape, and you don't work in Emergency Management, there's really no use for cell phones, right? Who were they talking to when they found that the cell phone is the technological tool its users would have most difficulty giving up, followed by the Internet and television, anyway?

To buy into any of this is simply rebellious, and most law-abiding citizens simply shouldn't have any part of it, right? Who would want to turn over government-like power to a corporation, anyway? The Department of Justice would stop that, like they did with Microsoft a few years back. Right? And who would believe that a bunch of kids could actually do anything to upset one of the few remaining concentrations of Communism by using technology that their government prohibits. The police and military could keep that from happening like they have before! And finally, what's this nonsense about cell phones being indispensable? Most people don't need them, and they are spoiling their kids by getting them for them. It's crazy to think that they will catch on any time soon . . .

What do you think?

Wednesday, February 13, 2008

Big Brother -- the future of social networking?

In no less than two articles I reviewed this morning, there was the undercurrent of "Big Brother" watching our every move. That's not the Big Brother you've been watching on television. That's the "Big Brother" that was the character in George Orwell's novel Nineteen Eighty-Four. I've had enough of these conversations to predict the responses by most of my contacts, but here's another opportunity for discussion.

In Science Daily, the article Wireless Monitoring Of People and Things: Future Of Social Networking?: observs that "Electronic tags promise to create what some call the 'Internet of things,' in which objects and people are connected through a virtual network." Imagine having instant access to your possessions, and being able to set up your system to tell you when you left really important things behind.

This sounds a lot like an upgrade of the "As seen on TV" sales of The Clapper that helped us find things when our memory failed us. Technology experts predict that RFID tags will soon be incorporated in consumer devices, such as cell phones, laptops and music players. Each tag, which looks a bit like a thin, flexible credit card, costs about 20 cents to produce. A specialized reader can scan the card through any non-metal barrier and from up to 30 feet away, depending on the type of tag. RFID tags are miniature computer chips that contain far more information than a barcode.

Also, you can write to an RFID tag--meaning the signal could not only identify the item, but what group it belongs to, when it was last seen, and other information. The technology has already proven its use in tracking goods. A manufacturer can identify a cart of hamburger patties and know which plant it came from, when it shipped out and a history of its temperature during transit. UW computer-science staff members have already requested to participate in the study so that they will be able to track their equipment as it is moved through the building.

Another useful tool mentionned by the author was the Friend Finder. This allows you to see where your friends are, and connect with them much easier than expending the effort to call them and say "hey, where are you." There's another article on Friend Finders at AFP where a new social network site, Gypsii, allows you to track your friends like the police track a fugitive. "The real time location-based element of Gypsii adds a new dimension to the social networking phenomenon," said the founder and chief executive of the company, Dan Harple.

Gypsii is compatible with other big social networking sites, allowing the core location-specific functionality to be transferred to a user's Facebook page, showing their friends' and their own location. The tracking is made possible with (as you can imagine) your friend's mobile phone. The location of a mobile phone can be identified in two ways. The first is via a GPS chip, which allows a device to recognise its position based on communication with a constellation of satellites around the planet. The second is by triangulation. A phone sends signals to communication towers located around it and by measuring the speed with which signals travel to these different base stations a position can be determined.

The ease with which phones can be located -- to within 25-50 metres of their position, say experts -- has sparked a wave of innovation in the mobile phone industry. I am very interested in these technological developments, and can't wait to hear the dialog!

So, what do you think?

Tuesday, February 12, 2008

THIS CANNOT BE REAL! TSA - DHS Site has been hacked!

THIS CANNOT BE REAL. There's no way that a bureaucracy-laden government agency gets it . . .

I happened across a New York Times Article that covered what they purported to be a blog that was sponsored by the Transportation Safety Administration. The article claimed that the site has links to independent bloggers and real news reports, including negative ones. Allegedly, the site even allows anonymous posters and publicly-viewable comments.

"A whole lot of our employees are really anxious to engage with the public," Mr. Hawley, the Director of the TSA was "quoted" as saying. The NYT writer reported that after the blog went up on Jan. 30, many reader responses were angry and sarcastic. But later, a greater sense of civil discussion set in.

Here's a look at the alleged blog, in case you are inclined to assist me with my quest to root out the real owner. It's called Evolution of Security, and claims "This blog is sponsored by the Transportation Security Administration to facilitate an ongoing dialogue on innovations in security, technology and the checkpoint screening process."

P-Lease . . . do they expect us to believe this nonsense? Having spent several years working in one government position or another, I can tell you that the last thing any government agency wants is to hear what their "customers" think about their "service." It's not like they need to make anyone happy. What would we do if we didn't lke the "service" we got from the TSA -- go to another airport in another country?

OK, just for the sake of argument, let's pretend that a government employee did ask permission to run with a public blog. The process for approval is so archaic with the government that you literally would rather try to get God and Congress to agree on something. Form after form, approved by no less than five levels of leadership, would have to be completed, reviewed, returned, and resubmitted. The Internet hasn't been around long enough for this to have received approval -- especially in an election year!

And then we're talking the likelihood of accuracy for those posting -- the "meet our bloggers" section shows that none have more than 5 years with the organization. R-i-g-h-t!!!

The URL appears to be spoofed to http://www.tsa.dhs.gov/blog/index.shtm, but I have friendly hackers who are checking into the validity of this. It is also possible that the DHS site itself has been hacked, but I think there would be a little more craziness posted . . . and wouldn't the media have covered this by now? Slashdot covered an incident like this at LAX TSA about a month ago. I wonder why they haven't done a follow-up! Others in the blogosphere have hit on this, but they appear to be buying into the cover-up.

As a taxpayer, I hope that our federal law enforcement agencies swoop down on the perpetrator of this fraudulent site. As a periodic flier, I would love to believe that the crappy attitudes we find so often on the other end of the x-ray machine might somehow change for the good. As someone who believes in the power of The Relationship Economy, I hope that the corporate world takes a serious look at the hurdles they will need to overcome and uses this as an challenge!

This can't be real . . . can it?

What do you think?

Wednesday, February 06, 2008

Is it copying or collaborating?

Copying or collaborating?

In school, it’s called copying, and it’s wrong. In business, it’s called collaborating, and it’s expected and rewarded. When two people work together to submit the same work product, how should it be received? It depends on the 1) assignment, 2) agreement between the parties, and 3) recipient's expectations.

Individuals are moving more and more toward collaboration, especially in the business community. We’ve seen team-building become almost an art form in business, and the focus on forming short-term business teams appears to be a foregone conclusion during negotiations. So where do we draw the line?

If we can’t monetize it and ensure we get our share, we aren’t likely to go for it!

Knowledge in organizations is (rightfully) treated like it has value. But, as with other things of value, the usefulness of knowledge depends on how we process it. There are apparently two perspectives, or schools of thought, on the handling of knowledge in organizations.

One perspective is that knowledge consists of objects that can be created, collected, stored, retrieved and reused. This model suggests that knowledge needs to be codified in order to be effectively managed. This model can be understood using a "conduit" model of communication (Heo & Yoo, 2002).

The second perspective is that knowledge in organizations is socially constructed and collectively held. It is malleable, uncertain, and embedded in work practices and social relationships. This model is more in line with the “communities of practice” model (Heo & Yoo, 2002).

Many organizations are still concerned about getting an immediate return on investment for the knowledge they create, maintain, and share. The Relationship Economy won’t work that way, so now would be a great time for us to learn to get over this antiquated business practice. We may all agree in the importance of fostering a collaborative culture within our organization, but just how do we go about doing so?

Tapscott and Williams, in their book Wikinomics, identified four steps we can take.

•Encourage and reward openness in networking for all members of the organization.

•Create peering environments that foster self-organizing human connections for collaboration and innovation.

•Allow radical sharing to expand markets and create new opportunities.

•Think and Act globally as an individual, team and organization.

(Tapscott & Williams, 2006).

To achieve Openness means ensuring a culture of candor, flexibility, transparency and access. How many of today’s workplaces can accurately be described by these words? Openness means making your organization’s boundaries porous to external ideas and human capital. It means being open to the talent pool that lies outside your walls and sharing access to corporate performance. Moreover, it means seriously participating in the global knowledge economy (Tapscott & Williams, 2006).

Peering is also important in the establishment of a collaborative culture. Peering results in the creation of a horizontal organization that is often unrivaled by hierarchical organizations in speed of solution deployment. Looking at some examples of peering may give us an indication of how it can be accomplished.

•Marketocracy is an organization that uses collective intelligence on virtual stock portfolios. Marketocracy is a research company whose mission is to find the best investors in the world and then track, analyze, and evaluate their trading activity. They claim to have beaten the S&P 500 Index in 8 of the 11 quarters since inception http://www.marketocracy.com/

•Wikipedia is a free multi-contributor online encyclopedia. Wikipedia is written collaboratively by volunteers from all around the world. Unlike a paper reference source, Wikipedia is continually updated, with the creation or updating of articles on topical events within seconds, minutes or hours, rather than months or years for printed encyclopedias. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:About

•Linux is a Unix-based operating system with shared infrastructure and resources. It was originally created starting in 1991 by Finnish programmer Linus Torvalds with the assistance of developers from around the globe. Linux runs on a wide variety of hardware platforms, from huge mainframes to desktop PCs to cell phones. http://www.linux.com/whatislinux/

Peering succeeds because it leverages self-organization. The natural self-organizing behavior of humans suggests that self-organization should be expected in our society. Self-organization can provide a platform for a decentralized, distributed, self-healing system, protecting the security of the actors in the network by limiting the scope of knowledge of the entire system held by each individual actor (Self-organization, 2008). Usually the growth of such networks is fueled by an ideology or sociological force that is adhered to or shared by all participants in the network.

Radically sharing Expanding markets

As any business model demonstrates, expanding markets create new opportunities. These opportunities are beneficial, and often require insight into the local business culture. They are also likely to require the sharing of duties among people who haven’t worked together before. In order for these relationships to work, there has to be an agreed upon comfort level between the participants.

Technology has brought us a couple of excellent examples of sharing that we (as humans) might try to replicate in our endeavor to “get radical.”

Computing power sharing allows companies to harness the processing power in a multitude of computers and combine that power to accomplish tasks that before required expensive supercomputers (Kessler, 2003). Shared computing also lets companies, or researchers, shift computing power via a network to where it's needed, cutting costs and increasing computing productivity.

Sharing bandwidth (neighbors or neighboring companies) can also keep costs down. Talk to any (honest) telecom sales representative and they’ll tell you it’s rare (like with streaming media) that all the bandwidth is needed all at one time. Those office buildings who treat bandwidth like electricity or water and pick up the tab for their average tenants have the right idea.

Content sharing is becoming more and more useful on the Internet. Many of the once-stagnant websites we mentioned previously are now dynamic because of shared content.

The sharing of scientific and medical knowledge is how both communities got to where they are. The research may go on behind closed doors, but the results are only useful when they are shared with the community. How many other communities do you know that freely share their findings?

Thinking and Acting globally

Thomas Friedman was right - The World Is Flat. The only way that today’s companies will be able to maintain a healthy balance sheet tomorrow is if they focus on staying globally competitive. That means they need to devote time to monitoring international developments. They will have to begin (or continue) tapping the global talent pool. They will have to get to know the world.

The International Labor Office provides us with Eight Dimensions of Knowledge Sharing. Contemplate these as you decide whether you are prepared to engage:

Create a supportive culture
Gather internal experience
Access external learning
Expand communication systems
Use creative mechanisms for drawing conclusions
Develop an organizational memory
Integrate learning into strategy and policy
Apply the learning

(ILO, 2007)

Examine your tradition of knowledge sharing to see how many of these dimensions you use.

Tomorrow’s successful companies will need to find ways to Think and Act globally, even if their budget and management has them stuck with legacy systems and processes. They will need to become true global companies, with no physical or regional boundaries. They will have to learn to treat the world as if it was one company, run by truly global individuals. They will need to see remote as if it were local, and realize that we don’t need to be in the same room to collaborate (Tapscott & Williams, 2006).

Michael Powell, then Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, said that change is inevitable. He made this statement after using Skype (Tapscott & Williams, 2006).

What do you think?

References:

Heo, D. & Yoo, Y. (2002). Knowledge Sharing in Post Merger Integration. Case Western Reserve University http://sprouts.case.edu/2002/020412.pdf

ILO (International Labour Office), (2007). Results-based management. Available at http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_norm/---relconf/documents/meetingdocument/wcms_084822.pdf

Kessler, M. (2003, January 8). High tech's latest bright idea: Shared computing. USA TODAY. Available at http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/technology/2003-01-08-shared-computing_x.htm

Self-organization. (2008, February 2). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 18:43, February 5, 2008, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Self-organization&oldid=188631462

Tapscott, D. & Williams, A. D. (2006). Wikinomics: How mass collaboration changes everything. New York: Portfolio

Thursday, January 03, 2008

The Translation Factors (be more like Lady Liberty)

The process used to grasp the power of social networks is similar to the process of learning a new language. I have learned three languages in my life, one of them Southern, and I found similarities in the process each time, even though I was at very different places in my life each time.

I learned French in elementary school. In each grade (1-6), I had French class with a wonderful teacher. I took French again in 9th or 10th, and realized I remembered very little from before.

I learned German in my late teens. I was in the military in Germany, and I learned how to order beer, french fries, and schnitzel. I learned German so I could engage in commerce. I later learned German so I could do my job better. I worked undercover narcotics and often dealt with drug dealers who spoke German. It saved my life on at least a couple of occasions, because I didn't always let on that I spoke German.

I learned Southern in my mid-20s. After Germany, I moved to Tennessee where a sizable percentage of the population spoke the language. I learned how to say all kinds of things, and engage in a variety of transactions.

So here's how the translation thing works. Say you and I are talking. My customary language is L1, and you are fluent in L2. I am learning L2, so I will engage you in a discussion using proper terms and speaking rather slowly. You humor me and tell me how well I speak your language, but inside you wish it didn't feel like it took a lot of time to get me to answer a question.

I get more proficient in your language, and begin increasing my vocabulary, and am a little quicker with my responses. We talk even more and more frequently. You sincerely note that I am improving, but there is still something missing. It's not that I don't understand every word you say, because I do. So what is it?

It is the process I am using to communicate with you in your language. When you say something to me, I receive it in L2, translate to it to my customary language (L1), process the communication in L1, translate it back to L2, and then (and only then) deliver my thoughts to you in L2. The extra time you are noticing is the processing time (not unlike the time it takes to switch between applications on a computer when you have one-too-many windows open).

So when does that change?

The process speeds up when I begin to think in the language in which I am speaking. Said another way, if you and I are conversing in L2, we should both be thinking in L2. Hard to do? Perhaps at first, but with some practice it comes. At some point, I'll even start dreaming in L2, and I'll find myself in conversation in L1 and translating to L2 before speaking in L1.

Confusing?

Here's how that "translates" to a message on social networking.

We know that the up-and-coming generation (and a few techies and musicians) brought social networking to it's first benchmark. But recently, many adults (often more mature) that were not previously engaged in this phenomenon have begun testing the waters. Those of us who try to explain the environment and the benefits and all the other fantastic aspects of this new world often feel like we are talking to people who (as they say in Tennessee) aren't from 'round here. As a result, we may get frustrated, or worse . . . speak slowly in a higher volume. That doesn't work with the spoken language, and it won't work with social networking.

If we want to help these immigrants (we were all one once), we need to take the time to walk with them for a while. We need to explain the customs and traditions of the social networking space, and perhaps even provide them with a list of dos and don'ts. We need to stop being impatient when we here them speaking with a traditional-world accent and stop trying to finish their sentences. We need to welcome them, and prepare them for the new and exciting experiences they will engage in.

So get to thinking about how you can be more like Lady Liberty . . . "Give me your set-in-their-ways, your that-stuff's-for-kids, and your I-don't-see-why-we-have-to-do-that's." Stand on the shore with an outstretched arm. You (and they) will be richly rewarded!

What do you think?

Saturday, December 29, 2007

The death of social networking as we know it . . . Social Network Commerce

Social Network technology is only as useful as we make it. There will, however, be a point when it gets old or outlives its usefulness if all we are doing is connecting for the sake of connecting. If it's going to be more than a fad in the history books, then there should be something more than sharing information, displaying our music and video preferences, making introductions, playing games, and poking each other. Now would be a good time to figure out what to do with it.

Here are a few ideas. They center around a yet-to-catch on term . . . Social Network Commerce.

Police Departments

Some departments already distinguish between a crime in progress and the need to take a report (especially for insurance purposes). They have non-sworn personnel that either take your report on the phone or at your home. These reports are usually not followed up on unless other developments occur separately (like the recovery of a bunch of property). This program provides a convenience to the citizen and limits the cost (and the need for additional on-duty sworn officers) for the police department.

So stick your imagination cap on and think about this . . . you realize that your yard art has been damaged, your mailbox has been smashed, or your neighbor's car has been vandalized. Your local police department recently installed a social network precinct, and you already added them as a "preferred location." This virtual precinct takes reports around the clock, using either text or voice input. Follow up consists of a text confirmation or a phone call, and you can check the status of your report at any time.

Upon submission of your report, you check the block that allows your neighbors to see the type of report and a general description of what you reported. You limit their personal information visibility to the street you live on, not wanting to get a bunch of visits or calls from any nosey neighbors. You also check the block that provides you with updates. In a few moments, everyone in your neighborhood (that opted in) has received a text message or recorded voice message) with a brief summary, including the time frame you reported.

Within a couple of hours, you receive a text message that another resident on your street just reported something similar (they checked their stuff after getting the message), and you choose to allow them to communicate with you in a protected area -- accessible to you and your neighbor and the police only. You chat with your neighbor and realize that you saw the same car in your neighborhood, or that both of your teenage daughters knew the same "troublemaker," or . . . you get the point.

Would this benefit the people in the neighborhood?

Grocery Stores

Why do people spend more for milk and food at "convenience stores?" Because they are convenient. No matter what time it is, or how clear the parking lot is, the grocery store is rarely confused with something resembling "convenience." So why not shorten the time that it tales to get the essentials?

OK, this type of thing has been tried before -- with Webvan, Peapod, and the like, but it was a few years ago and those models were based more on delivery. Imagine you are in front of your computer and you are trying to squeeze in time to stop by the grocery store where you just need "a few things." Your local store recently developed (or joined) a social network storefront, and you already added them as a "preferred location." This store keeps a record (only for your benefit) of your frequent purchases, and allows you to import/export the list as a CSV file for use on your computer or smartphone (or pda, of course). They take orders for up to 15 items around the clock, also using text or voice input. You receive a text (email or SMS) confirmation or a recorded call, and you can check the status of your order at any time -- even in traffic!

You know that between 4:30 and 4:45 PM, you will be passing by the store. You access their site and click 14 of the 15 frequent purchases, and then search for a not-so-frequent purchase. You submit the order and pay for it in advance using your debit/credit/whatever card, and receive a confirmation that the order will be ready. Your order comes up on the screen in the store at 4:20, and one of the baggers is handed your shopping list and a cart.

At 4:45 you pull up to the drive through window, and the clerk recognizes you. After confirming that you want paper, not plastic, you receive two paper bags, inspect each one, and are on your way as (or more) quickly as if you had stopped at the fast-food restaurant of your choice. You are home in record time, and didn't even have to get out of your car.

Local Shopping Areas

OK, imagine this. There are a number of businesses in your city that realize that we have increasingly busy lives. They band "together" (or even better, are united by a pre-established organization like the Chamber of Commerce) to provide you what you want -- a pleasurable shopping experience. Each store provides a list of a certain number of their wares on a site and allows you to see what they have -- before you head off for downtown. That way, you can make sure you find what you are looking for (guaranteeing them a sale), and you have more time to "enjoy" the experience (and spend money at the local coffee shop afterwards). They might even allow you to purchase the item for pickup, or allow you to pay for it with your cell phone and your mobile bank account when you arrive, but that's another post.

So would this work? Jay Deragon's recent post makes the observation that "A business is driven by the need to produce revenue and subsequent profits for its stakeholders." Doesn't that mean that business are in business to be profitable? Shouldn't that mean they provide value to the consumer? For most people who like the "get in and get out" shopping method, I think it's a winner. Doc Searls is focusing on VRM (Vendor Relationship Management), and recently observed that "the Net has been seen as a way to remove the humanity from markets." This strategy gives a bit of a nod to humanity, while still offering convenience -- something we are demanding (whether we receive it or not) more and more. I realize some people enjoy "the hunt" and that actually purchasing something is not part of the game. It won't be mandatory that we pre-order, but it sure would be convenient. These two shopping types can co-exist easily, and meet for coffee afterwards!

Why does this represent the death of social networking as we know it? Because Social Network Commerce takes it to a new level. "Computers" were there. They needed people to use them for more than gaming before they were widely accepted. "The Internet" was there. It needed something for people to do on it besides just "be on it." And now, Social Networking is there. If we don't use it as a commodity then it will remain a hobby, or even worse -- an expense (think about the bass boat in your back yard) and those don't pay the bills.

What do you think?

Friday, December 21, 2007

The CEOs new social network strategy

At some point in the recent past, there lived a CEO who cared so much for cutting-edge technology and unusual ways to increase market share that he spent a sizeable amount of his company’s profit on finding and implementing new ideas. One day, he realized that many of his employees had embraced the new “social networking” phenomenon, and decided to find a way to harness the power of this new technology to secure the future of his company. He instructed his managers to direct their minions on the appropriate way to represent the company in their off time. He made sure that there was no inexperienced addressing of product quality issues, and there were no online discussions that might expose trade secrets.

The CEO even got in on the action, and before long he had a login for every social networking site. He spent most of his time checking out the activities and connections of his employees and regularly changing his profile picture so that everyone would get an update and might see his handsome face and know that he was watching (and learning).

One day there came to the company two rogues who set themselves up as social networking gurus. They said they knew how to establish the company as a market leader while providing a venue for capitalizing on the social networking phenomenon and increase not only the bottom line, but also the position of the company in the global marketplace. The samples and statistics they showed were beautiful.

"I must have a strategy designed by these networking gurus," thought the CEO. "When I announce this decision at the annual company webinar, I will find out which of my executives and business partners are not fit for their positions. I shall know the brilliant minds and visionaries from the has-beens. Those networking gurus must be brought to me at once."

So the two rogues came to the Executive suite. The CEO asked to check out their profiles on a variety of sites, but they advised that was not possible, and their personal networking efforts and activities were relatively non-existent. They explained that only those who studied the space were able to help others understand it, and that participation in the space was something they “just didn’t have time for.” They noted that this information could not be understood by anyone who was stupid or unfit for his position within the company, but they assured the CEO that they could deliver results. The CEO gave them a vast sum of money so they could begin designing the company strategy immediately.

The rogues put up two cutting edge computer systems, with multiple monitors, and began building a closed social network that would allow the company to synergize the brainpower of employees across all divisions. They designed file-sharing systems that would allow multiple-user edits. They made sure that all who signed on automatically had the CEO and their supervisor as a contact, and they provided a recommend-connection mode that allowed supervisors to see who should be connected and communicating but was not. They designed policy that allowed for up to one hour per workday for socializing with others in the company, and encouraged employee access from home via VPN.

They expensed trips to remote locations and had lunch with some of the best and brightest strategists in the social networking space, charging the costs to the company. They worked steadily at the computers, building their own reputations on many of the largest and most profitable niche sites, and cruised the lonely matchmaker websites until far into the night.

Day after day, the CEO could hear the clicking of the keyboards. He became very curious to see the wonderful strategy these rogues were developing; and he decided to send someone to find out how the networking gurus were doing. But he remembered that no one who was stupid or was unfit for his position would understand their strategy.

"I will send my COO to the gurus," thought the CEO. "He is a very clever man, and no one is more worthy of his position than he."

So the COO went into the office where the two rogues sat working at the computers. The rogues explained the networking strategy that linked employees to one another, enabling them to capitalize on institutional wisdom and build on it – even on their own time. He stared and stared, and opened his eyes wide.

"I am in so much trouble!" he thought. "It looks like they are closing us off from our customers." He thought to ask the gurus how building a gated community would interface with the envisioned social networking strategy, but he said nothing at all.

"Step a little closer," said the rogues. "Check out these graphics! And the colors - are they not wonderful?" And they pointed to the computer screen.

The COO put on his glasses, and looked and looked at the computer screen; but he could not figure out how this closed environment supported his company’s outreach strategy.

"Oh no!" he said to himself. "Is it possible that I am unfit for my office? Certainly, no one must know it. Am I a complete idiot? I will never say that I cannot understand this strategy!"

"Well, sir, what do you think of it?" asked one of the rogues.

"Oh, it is exciting – wonderful!" said the COO, as he peered through his glasses. "The colors are gorgeous and the graphics are excellent. I shall tell the CEO that I am very pleased with your strategy."

"We are glad to hear you say so," said the rascals. And they continued talking of the design and vision for strategy implementation. They estimated the ongoing costs, and described the benefits. The COO listened carefully, for he wished to repeat to the CEO all that was said.

Soon the rogues began to ask for more funding for their work. All that was given to them they put into their pockets. Not a single dime was ever put into improving the company strategy.

The CEO sent another faithful friend, the CMO, to see the gurus’ work and inquire how soon the strategy would be ready, as the webinar was scheduled to happen soon. But the CMO fared no better than the COO. He stood before the computer screens, and looked and looked and looked, but he saw no useful strategy.

"Isn't this great stuff?" asked the two rogues. Then they praised the gorgeous colors and explained the design and its relationship to the current networking strategy, which was nonexistent.

"Oh, dear!" thought the CMO. "Surely I am not stupid. It must be that I am unfit for my position. That is very strange, as I have impeccable credentials and a resume that is very impressive. But I must not let it be known that I cannot understand this."

"Ah!" said he. "The strategy is most unusual; and the colors are marvelous. I shall tell the CEO what fine progress you are making."

Soon every one in the company was talking about the wonderful strategy that the two networking gurus were designing. The CEO thought that he would like to see the draft while it was still in the works. With a number of his executives, he went to visit the two rogues, who were working diligently, day after day, without really doing anything new.

Among the executives that accompanied the CEO were the two who had already visited the gurus. They thought that the others would see something in the strategy that made good business sense, so they began to cry out at once, "Look! Do you understand this insightful strategy? And the technology and design - are they not cutting edge?"

"What is this?" thought the CEO. "I see nothing new at all! Am I not fit to be CEO? Am I an idiot? If that were known, I will be terminated."

"Yes, yes, it is very exciting," said the CEO aloud. "I could not be more pleased."

He smiled and nodded his head, and stared at the computer screens. His executives, too, looked and looked, but saw no more than the others. Yet they all cried, "It is wonderful." And the rogues asked the CEO to provide some input on their draft design of his profile page, which they would roll out during the upcoming webinar.

The CEO put each of the rogues on his top connections list, and strongly recommended their work, calling them “Corporate Network Strategy Gurus.”

As the day of the webinar came nearer, the two rogues worked around the clock, inhaling energy drinks, and walking around the halls to keep their thoughts flowing. They were up the whole night before the webinar. They kept the lights on, their computer speakers cranked, and their plans for success empty.

Through the huge windows of the rogues' borrowed corner office, the employees could see they were hard at work. They edited and re-edited page upon page of code. They made drawings on whiteboards and sketched out designs on page after page of easel pad paper stuck to the walls. They wrote, revised, and re-worked; and at last, they said, "The strategy is ready."

The CEO, with his executives and board members surrounding him, went to examine the new strategy.

The rogues pointed to the computer screens as if there was something exciting there. "See!" they said. "Here is the website! Here is your profile! Here are your contacts! The company logo is watermarked in the cleverest places. You can drag-and-drop pictures, upload spreadsheets, interface with other internal corporate databases, and talk amongst yourselves as freely as if you were in a bank vault. That is the beauty of it."

"It is marvelous," said the executives. Yet the whole time they really understood nothing, for there was nothing to understand – this was all a (barely) new spin on an old business practice.

"Will you please provide us a quote for our press release?" asked the rogues of the CEO. "Then we will make a joint announcement, just in time to increase the excitement and attraction of the webinar."

The CEO deleted all his external networking website profiles, and issued a directive to have all his employees and company leaders to do the same. The rogues then showed each of the executives their new profiles. They had music and videos, and made a big deal about each one.

"How great an idea this is!" said the executives. "What a great strategy! What a wonderful idea!"

The CEO clicked on friend after friend, checking out each profile. He adjusted his top friends, posted on walls, sent instant messages, and even posted a few videos, and nodded his head enthusiastically.

"The webinar is about to launch," said one of his executives.

"I am ready," said the CEO. He gave one last click on his “about me” and prepared for the camera.

The two masters of ceremonies launched their browsers. They had yet to see the design of the site, as they wanted their own excitement to be expressed in their dialog. But they could not access the site, as they were not company employees. They assumed it was a technical glitch, and did not dare let it be known that they saw nothing. At least they could see the streaming video!

The CEO smiled at the camera, with the new site displayed on a 42-inch screen behind him, and all his executives stood beside him, with smiles on their faces. But those attending the webinar – the suppliers and partners, looked only at the screen behing the CEO, for they all wanted to see this wonderful site.

"How handsome the CEO's profile is!" they all cried. "What a great design! How well it represents him!" And they rushed to open a new window on their computer so they could check the site out in real time.

And they were all instantly depressed. None of them would admit that they could see nothing, for that would have proved them very stupid and unfit for a relationship with the company. No website strategy launch had ever been so widely announced or richly funded.

"But there’s nothing there!" said a customer in the chat room.

"Hush! Hush!" said a value-added reseller, “you must not have the new version of Java installed. Call Tech Support after the Webinar. Trust me, this thing is BiG! And, it’s revolutionary!”

But the customers, vendors, and suppliers began to private message one another about what the customer had said; "There’s nothing there! The customers cannot access the site!"

Soon all the suppliers were typing into the chat room, "But, we cannot access the site!"

The CEO saw what they said, and he shivered, for he knew that their words were true. He had agreed on the strategy because it was so familiar. Keep everything close-hold. Make it so contact with the company from outside is a privilege that is earned, not a natural response to an attempt to get information by a potential customer. But he couldn’t stop the process; and so he held his head up, put on his best fake smile, and continued his speech. And behind him, his executives smiled and nodded, and helped drive the company into the bankruptcy courts – even without a bursting bubble.

This contemporary portrayal of denial, rewritten from Hans Christian Andersen’s rewrite of an old Spanish story, was designed to provide a thought-provoking perspective regarding how social media (and other new technologies) can be seen by those entrenched in the status quo of yesterday’s business model. Will tomorrow’s successful companies apply the old rules in the relationship economy? Only time will tell!

Kicking and SCREAMING