Can relationships help you turn back time?

If you are old enough to remember cassette tapes, you probably remember her.

She used only one name - legally - to identify herself.

She sang with the Righteous Brothers' for the recording of 'You've Lost That Lovin' Feeling'.

She holds the record for the longest time between number 1 hits: 1974 (Dark Lady) to 1998 (Believe).

She was the "babe" that Sonny referred to when he sang, I've got you, babe.

And she brought us the song "If I could turn back time."



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7OR0U87mRsY

So can you? Is it possible to turn back time? Is there a possibility that anything or anyone (other than God) will ever be able to go backwards in time?

I don't think so.

But I do know that as our technology advances, we are sure finding ways to try to minimize the time we spend on a variety of things. Everyone in the universe has been to a time management seminar, and many of us have tried the "proven" methods of many a time-management expert.

And yet we still have no time . . .

Here are a couple of examples:

CPA
In 1997 Nat Torkington (O’Reilly Media) coined the phrase continuous partial attention. He noticed that continuous partial attention had become a way of life to cope and keep up with responsibilities and relationships. When we've stretched our attention bandwidth to upper limits, that’s a sign of “continuous partial attention.” We think that if our computer networks have a lot of bandwidth then we do, too.

Torkington (2005) proposed three sets of (relatively) contemporary Attention Cycles that address how people in our society have interacted with each other -- both personally and professionally.

He noted that between 1945-1965, we focused on an organizational center of gravity. We paid attention to that which we served.

From 1965-1985, it was all about me and self-expression. We trusted ourselves.

Then from 1985-2005, it was all about our network as the center of gravity. We trust network intelligence.

Torkington suggested that we are now in the time for committed full-attention focus. In this new era we feel alive by feeling engaged attention. We will use trusted filters and protectors to remove distractions and manage our space, so we can have meaningful connections.

TADD
Jay Deragon tells us that time and attention are the only factors that are becoming scarce. As we engage in techno-enhanced relationship building, we find new functions and features aimed at facilitating faster, more meaningful reach, proposed new efficiency and a host of other value propositions. These integrative technological breakthroughs will ultimately enable us to better manage our time through one interface by segment of use.

Jay calls this “TADD”, Technological Attention Deficit Disorder. With The Relationship Economy, we will be better able to balance our time and use it wisely for whatever personal and professional aim. Until then, a few of us will bear the burden that comes with learning new technology. Once lifted, the burden will become the value we can pass on to the masses so collectively we can gain more time to create more value.

So what can be done? What can we accomplish in The Relationship Economy that positively affects our time?

CIO magazine (online) provides an A-Z listing of professional and personal social networking sites (as of Jan 23, 2008). From Advogato to Ziggs each provides yet another niche and a variety of benefits, but none promises to give you more time!

So how exactly are we going to find time for networking, much less being social? And how are we going to accomplish anything in more than one place, on more than one network?

Networking, especially Social Networking, can be used to leverage time. Jay Deragon often refers to the leverage of social media as the ability to communicate one-to-one-to millions.

But we have to be careful! In many cases, our convenience in social networking may inconvenience others. Think about how we get "connected" in the networked world. We join a new network, complete a new profile, and then email everyone we know asking them to (take a wild guess . . .) join a new network, and complete a new profile. Just as Torkington (above) pointed out, Morgan (1998) observed that in The Relationship Economy, all of us will become dependent on the intricate network of impersonal relationships that possess many of the characteristics of personal relationships. These relationships are fueled by technological advances, and are a phenomenon that, going forward, we should understand, especially if we are truly dependent on them.

It's easy for network building to become a huge time vacuum -- building networks inherently appeals to our competitive nature. We find that anything (or anyone) new in our networks can grab and keep our attention just like the first time we discovered we could play solitaire, hearts, ScrabbleTM, or minesweeper on the computer. Taking the time to find our way around social networks can be just as big a time investment as the time it takes to learn our way around a new city -- and rightfully so. Many of the activities in these networks are similar to those we find in the "Real World." We can (or soon will be able to) meet people, engage in discussions, browse books, read magazines, try on clothing, drive cars and fly airplanes (at least virtually).

If we are doing these things at work, it's possible (probable) that we are wasting valuable time, and if we are on the clock, that time isn't all ours. If we are at home, it's possible that we are avoiding other things, like cooking, cleaning, watching television, helping with homework, cutting the grass, walking the dog, and any number of other parental or spousal duties (no, I won't be expounding on those for you).

So what's the fix, you ask? As with engaging in these activities in the "Real World," when we engage in these activities in the virtual world, we need to focus the majority of our actions on the results we hope to achieve. In other words, we need to make sure that what we are doing contributes to what we want to achieve.

These techno-assisted relationships are needed to combat the direction our relationship-building strategies have been heading in of late. In a previous post we addressed the business response with Customer Relationship Management, but let's focus a bit more on those business relationships. How can the technology we now have available help us save time and avoid the limitations of sound-byte communications with those who provide us with products and services?

If we can trust these relationships (which we can and will find a way to do), we can learn to rely on those with whom we have dealt with (in a satisfying transaction) in the past. Amazon, eBay, and many other e-commerce sites use this model to help us make decisions about buyers and sellers with whom we transact business. As Morgan (1998) noted, human behavior depends on our perception of risks, not (perhaps unknowable) the actual risks we are facing (p. 53). The relationships in the marketplace of old were built on trust, built up over time. The relationships in the marketplace of The Relationship Economy are built on trust, as well -- technology-enhanced trust, but trust nonetheless.

So how can I limit the time I spend on networking and still be effective?

Perhaps the best contemporary guidance available on this topic comes from David Teten and Scott Allen, in their book The Virtual Handshake: Opening Doors and Closing Deals Online. In the book, the authors describe several ways you can apply the concept of leverage to your networking time. Here are a couple of quick summaries.

Crossing the Action Threshold

The authors observe what many of us intuitively know - people will respond if you ask them for a favor. In case the request is worth more than your relationship with the person of whom you are asking the favor, there are other incentives available.

The Power of Many

Another example they give is public speaking -- a powerful way to reach more people. When addressing more than one person, you are exposed to, and connected with, a large number of other people, all for the same amount of effort -- plus you get the added benefit of the other people in the community sharing their experiences.

(Teten & Allen, 2007)

Separating business from personal

As with anything business-related, it is healthy to be able to separate your professional (business) life from your personal life. Though there are countless examples of successful people who lived, ate, breathed, and slept with their work, for those of us who really want to "get a life," here are a few pointers. If networking helps us save time, we have to find something to do with it, after all.

Examine the role or roles you are filling at a given time. Is that role primarily one related to your professional life, or is it more personal?

Examine your recent actions, responses, and interactions. Could they benefit you professionally? There's something to be said for being able to monetize every minute of every day, but at what point do you live to work and when will you start to work to live?

Intentionally engage in activities that are strictly personal -- for you as an individual, with no possibility of professional benefit. Sure it can be difficult, but force yourself. You'll feel guilty for a while, but you can learn to enjoy yourself.

Here's the tough part -- asking for help. Get with some of your trusted friends (yes, they can be people you work with if you are still in that rut). Tell them what you want to do. Explain to them that you want an honest evaluation of your ability to separate your professional life from your personal life. If you are able, get them to write down a few indicators that you are or are not able, and then (only after they have written them down) discuss what they see with you. Ask them to make suggestions to help you. If they give an example that you don't agree with, shut up and listen. Remember, you asked them.

Then take their advice. You do this by implementing the suggestions you got from your trusted friends. Try it for an hour, a day, a week, or (if you are really bold) as long as you can. If you couldn't get anyone to agree to critique you, look at the suggestions we made (above) and use your own imagination (if you still have it).

And then, prepare to engage in a little self-reflection. This is necessary so you can evaluate the results of your efforts and adjust, as needed. You may not get it right the first time. You may go overboard, or you may feel like you will go crazy if you don't check that one more email or make that one more phone call. It's like breaking any habit -- you have to want to and you have to be prepared to not get it right the first time.

If anything we've covered is totally foreign to you, don't worry. The Relationship Economy is a place where totally new paradigms will produce totally new actions and reactions. If someone tells you they have been-there, done-that, just let out a chuckle and run away from them -- as fast as you can. Make the time to build your foundation now, and prepare to reap the harvest of time tomorrow.

What do you think?

References:

Morgan, B. W. (1998). Strategy and enterprise value in the relationship economy. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold

Teten, D. & Allen, S. (2007, April 17). Who Knows Who You Know: Leverage and Focus. Fast Company. Available at
http://www.fastcompany.com/resources/networking/teten-allen/leverage-business-goals-080107.html

Analysis of The Relationship Economy Model

Businesses that capitalize on and thrive in The Relationship Economy will not use a business model that resembles that of a traditional business. The businesses that have been retrofitted for The Relationship Economy will have the basic building blocks of traditional business models, addressing their Infrastructure, Offering, Customers, and Finances, but there will be some highly unusual additions. When you think about a Relationship Economy business, think hybrid.



The Relationship Economy Business Model



Recent news from eBay indicates they are attempting to appease sellers by lowering the upfront listing fee and increasing the back-end fee for sellers. Their "success-based" model is meant to increase listings, but according to Betsy Schiffman (2008), it will do little more than enrage its merchant base. Schiffman suggests that it isn't just the fee structure that has sellers complaining: eBay also changed its feedback system so that sellers cannot give a negative or neutral rating to buyers.

Ironically, eBay's business model has been one of the most successful in the online business movement. (Somewhat) average business people can minimize risk and overhead while avoiding the time and geographical constraints that can plague traditional businesses. They often benefit from social interactions (both in their online endeavors and in the frequent face-to-face seller conferences that eBay offers). The eBay-powered businesses often enjoy a large number of bidders, and benefit from networked markets.

Networked markets benefit from the effect that causes a business' products and services to have potential value beyond that of traditional markets. This phenomenon, often referred to as
network effect, grows exponentially based on the number of additional customers who have and use the products or services. The term was coined by Robert Metcalfe, the founder of Ethernet, the most widely installed computer local area network (LAN) protocol. But eBay, and other businesses intent on surviving The Relationship Economy, must master yet another model.


The customer loyalty model is useful for those companies that, like eBay, deal with a multitude of customers and collaborators who engage in conversation around and about the products or services they are purchasing and using. Businesses who use the customer loyalty model find that cost of customer acquisition only occurs at the beginning of a relationship, while the cost of maintaining (and retaining) that customer declines. These customers are generally loyal, satisfied, less price sensitive, and are less inclined to switch providers. This loyalty manifests itself in customer advocacy, where customers openly share their convictions about the company with others. These customers refer their friends and acquaintances to the company and vice versa, often promoting a company better than the marketing department could ever dream about.

How do businesses build relationships?

Relationship building for businesses seems almost counter intuitive. Back in the day, Customer Relationship Management was the practice of leaving the house, stopping for a cup of coffee at the local diner on the way to work, taking a break to visit with your neighbors who happened to be long-time customers, and generally engaging others in conversations about anything and everything.

Over time, businesses realized that in order to make those who held the purse strings happy, they had to generate revenue beyond what they had generated before. This first led to cutting out all nonessential and unproductive activity. Go figure -- taking the time to talk to others was one of the first activities to go. Think about the last time you engaged in conversation with:

• the store owner of a place you visit at least once a month


• your barber or hair stylist


• the person who delivers your newspaper (I know, you don't talk to digital people)


• your bank teller or your financial adviser


• your business associates

I'm talking about real conversations here - beyond 2-3 word phrases and in more depth than a peripheral dialog on the weather forecast. The habits of the business world have carried over into our lives, and causing us to be very antisocial.


So what kind of conversations are we having with those we engage in business? We let them set the rules and make the initial approach. They use traditional business relationship techniques, sending us information they "know" we want, about stuff they "know" we need. We throw printed matter in the recycling bin, wear out our computer mouse (and left-button finger) hitting the delete button, and still they persist. Every once in a while we will actually speak with a human representative of the company, but it's usually after we have become very annoyed because we did not get what we expected for our money (and then had the privilege of listening to old, stale elevator music for 20-30 minutes).


Jay Deragon recently addressed these issues in his question: Ever try and reach someone with influence at a Fortune 500 Company? He noted that those that have any authority to make changes to improve customer relations are insulated from the customer. Even worse, companies that are growing will find it beneficial to outsource customer care (to people who may have less experience with the company and its products or services than the newest customer) If they really want to build our trust, they'll install a Customer Relationship Management (CRM) system to manage the details of our lives.

That's not a relationship!


So if we get the point, and we have the technology available, how do we get started?


Larry Weber (2007) provides us with Seven Steps to Build Your Own Customer Community.

1. Observe.
   – See what’s going on without you, who is talking and what they are saying
   – Map (locate) your customers


2. Recruit.
   – Drive traffic to your business locations -- online and offline. Lose the strategy of "build and they’ll come."
   – Develop innovative (and sincere) ways to send out invitations
   – Find and devote time to building your community & make connections to other communities


3. Evaluate platforms (conduits to others).
   – Reputation aggregator
   – Enlist someone in your organization to Blog – make the material regular, relevant and connected to not only your company's mission but also to the needs of your customers (in other words, allow comments).
   – Participate in E-communities (those developed for folks with a common interest) & Social networks (those used by members to make and develop connections)


4. Engage.
   – Your content and conversations should be engaging, meaning you are engaged in the discussion (not like when talking to someone who interrupts your favorite television show). By seriously demonstrating your commitment to customers, you will develop committed customers.


5. Measure.
   – Frequently check the level of community involvement you have, compared to the level you hoped to have.


6. Promote.
   – Everywhere you (and your customers) go, you should be there. Learn how to talk about your business (face-to-face or online) in such a way that people don't get the feeling that's all you think about, but they should realize that you are passionate about it.


7. Improve.
   – Improving your "strategy" requires (gulp) listening to users - both customers and prospects, and actually evaluating (not summarily dismissing) the suggestions they make.
   – As you come up with new innovations, test them. If they aren't accomplishing what you had hoped, re-evaluate, tweak, fine-tune, or replace them.

In many cases, the only way to get new business is to find the unhappy customers of a competitor. Hopefully you can avoid being on the losing end of this transaction!


What do you think?


References:


Schiffman, B. (2008, January 30). Ebay Sellers Riled Up About New Fees, Rules. Wired Blog Network. Available at http://blog.wired.com/business/2008/01/ebay-sellers-ri.html

Weber, L. (2007). Marketing to the Social Web: How Digital Customer Communities Build Your Business. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons

The revolution called The Relationship Economy

You say you want a revolution
Well, you know
We all want to change the world
You tell me that it's evolution
Well, you know
We all want to change the world
But when you talk about destruction
Don't you know that you can count me out
Don't you know it's gonna be all right all right, all right
(thanks to lyrics007.com)

Revolution history

The most memorable recent "Revolution" was on the flip-side of the "Hey Jude" single by the Beatles, which they released in August of 1968.

You know you want to hear it -- go ahead -- you can still read while you listen!


(alternate link here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=87yq372R4Ts)

The first American revolution was marked by the "shot heard round the world" at Lexington on April 19, 1775. That shot began the eight-and-a-half year war for American Independence. It ended on September 3, 1783 with the Treaty of Paris. There have been many significant events in world history since then, and there are many more to come.

Recent History

The most recent revolution, like those before it, is the natural result of a series of collaborations, decisions, events, and actions. Like many revolutions, the majority of people in the world will look back after it is well underway and claim that they never saw it coming. But we can see this one coming! The media has reported on a variety of indicators and the imminence of this revolutionary shift in the way business is done in the networked world.

This revolution has been talked about in one form or another for almost ten years.

This revolution was identified as "a symbiosis of services and new information and communications technologies" (Morgan, 1998, p. 2). It was digested for the better part of the first two months of 2003 in the Business Administration School at the University of Prince Edward Island (UPEI). And it was discussed at some length in a Socratic exchange on a long airplane trip (Searls, 2007).

More recently, the news updates for this revolution have been briefed (almost daily) to those who are interested in getting involved on the front lines. And now, the revolution manual is available for your reading pleasure.

This revolution is The Relationship Economy, defined as the people and things we are connected with in our personal networks who or that distribute or consume our capital, which in turn influences our individual production outputs.

This post begins a series on the finer points of the Revolution. It will include a step-by-step analysis of the factors and indicators that will point the way as we engage in The Relationship Economy. You'll see many familiar concepts and will be able to find your way through the process and prepare for the changes to come.

The Revolution Begins

The Relationship Economy includes the use of Social Media for traditional networking and business processes. In the most recent developments, it was the younger generation who were the early adopters in this recent trend toward social engagement. They sought (and found) face-to-face and virtual relationships based on shared interests, thrived on using just-in-time communication methods (like short messages on phone or instant messaging interfaces in lieu of email), and enjoyed connecting to people they met through friends and acquaintances to create, collect, and share content and information.

As these young early adopters move to the workforce, they will bring their expectations with them, and will demand access to the building blocks used to construct their lives thus far. The companies that employ them can choose to adapt to these needs, or they can try the "old-school" way and require adaptation by their new hires. The former will create an atmosphere of trust and an environment of innovation and collaboration. The latter is likely to result in a quick trip to "the company formerly known as" land.

What do you think?

References:

Morgan, B. W. (1998). Strategy and enterprise value in the relationship economy. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold

Peterson, Rob (2003, November 13). The Relationship Economy - UPEI Jan - March 2003. Rob's Thought (Blog). Available at http://smartpei.typepad.com/robs_thoughts/2003/11/the_relationshi.html

Searls, D. (2007, February 15) Building an Relationship Economy. Linux Journal. Available at http://www.linuxjournal.com/node/1000182

There can be too much of a good thing!

I realize that everyone has an idea that they consider "the best," but at some point don't you think it's better to just adapt your idea to something already in place? There's an old saying that there's no need to re-invent the wheel . . . it's round, it rolls, it serves the purpose for which it was designed.


I think we are reaching the point of reinventing reinventions, at least for social networking sites. Yes, I realize that many of the sites that are now wildly successful got that way by being responsive and innovative. I realize that Friendster probably had a "duh" moment when they noticed that MySpace was offering things they didn't allow. I realize that MySpace looked at Facebook and maybe thought twice about all the bells and whistles (user-chosen music and slow-loading pictures and backgrounds) that Facebook abhorred (though the Vampires and Werewolves aren't much better). But at what point do we realize that our friends, acquaintances, and barely-known connections would rather fall off a cliff than join "yet another" social networking site just because we tell them "it's designed specifically for what we've been looking for?"

In announcing a new sports-related social networking site, Business Week said:

Sports social networking would seem to be a natural since fans are tribal by nature. And if the sports world has taken a while to capitalize on the obvious, that's changing fast. In the past year pro leagues—including the NBA, NHL, Nascar, and PGA Tour—have opened up their sites, allowing fans to post comments on message boards and create interest groups. Now athletes and teams are taking social networking a step further, establishing communities outside league sites.

So why not just add a group to MySpace, Facebook, Bebo, Hi5, Freindster, Yahoo! or Google?

Must we face yet another login-and-about-me post-fest? Come on! Does anyone that isn't into funding and media not realize that we have had it up to here (motioning with left hand to forehead) with another site that refuses to import our profile and can't seem to get the whole openID concept?

Everyone in business has ideas. See my previous post on how easy it is to get caught up in the innovation process and succeed at absolutely nothing. For those who missed it, the rules for social networking (as I understand it) are here.

There will come a time when the latest group to "get" social networking will no longer be news. There will be a time when people will actually figure out how to engage in business activity on the social networking sites they already are signed up for (though they may need a password reminder for). There will be a time when we get messages from a real user friendly site that advises us of the start of a new group based on the interests and preferences we listed with them.

I sure wish that time was now!



What do you think?

Facebook. It's not just for students, anymore!

Have you ever been invited to a party where you couldn't find anyone you knew and had no clue what the conversations were about?

I first was acquainted with Facebook as a college professor, when I realized that about 85% of the students communicated with each other not by email, not by telephone, but by messages on Facebook. I signed up, set up my profile, and wondered . . . now what?

(see previous post for more particulars)

It truly felt like everyone was speaking a different language. I knew that I was in the right place, but I had no idea how to find the people I knew or how to talk to the ones I could see. I was able to get pieces of information here and there, but no one had all the answers . . . until now.

Jason Alba & Jesse Stay have written the users' manual for Facebook!

Regardless of why Facebook is the place for you, this book will provide the answers for how to operate. It's a must read for professionals in all industries. If you understand the power of networking, then you need to get on Facebook. if you don't, then you probably need to read another book called "The Emergence of The Relationship Economy" (more on that another time).

What do you think?

Space Invasion -- in Reverse!

The problem with blazing new trails through uncharted territory is Space Invasion. I'm not talking about the online game, I'm referring to my space, the stuff I don't want certain people invading. I'm talking about the stuff that I should control -- not you!

The time as come. You've realized your dream. That property in the mountains that you bought years ago finally has a structure on it that you can spend most of your time calling home. You're able to enjoy the fruits of your labors and sleep in -- past 6 AM. If a neighbor (or, even better, your in-laws) wants to visit, they call first to make sure you are home.

And then you get your first piece of junk mail. No big deal, you think. Just something more for the recycling bin (or the fire-starter pile). You expected a few enterprising people would locate your home, but with no landline phone, cars registered to a P.O. Box, and this being such a remote location, you thought it would take a while.

More junk mail the next day. Even more the next. It's coming from businesses that you have never shopped at, some of them don't even have a presence within 100 miles of you. More for the pile, no big deal. At least they haven't figured out your email address and satellite phone number -- that's sacred ground.

And then the first telemarketer (sorry, the "we're conducting a survey" operator) -- on your satellite phone. That's it, you call the provider and once you get to a manager, you realize that the number for your recent purchase was previously owned by a playboy from South Florida who traveled . . . a lot. You cancel the satellite phone.

And then your first visitor knocks on the door. With a mix of disturb and excitement, you open the door. It's a guy with a vacuum cleaner. You tell him to go away. He asks if he can demo the Dirtfighter 8000 for you before he leaves. You explain to him that you have wood floors and a central vacuum system, and all your vehicles are trucks with plastic floor mats. He persists. Finally, you agree that it is possible for two handfuls of mud to end up on the curtains in the upstairs back guest room where your mother will stay when she comes for her twice yearly visits. You lock the door to the soundproof room behind him and go make some coffee.

Why has it come to this? You just can't seem to get far enough away from these people who have so much faith in their products and so little respect for your time. The vacuum guy seemed nice enough, but his style just caused you to flash back to the super-annoying times of previous decades when you got tired of fielding dozens of calls selling who-knows-what between 6 and 9 PM at least five days a week. Don't the marketers get it? We need our space!

Speaking of space. This same mistake can be seen in the early days of the social networking space. Whether on Facebook, LinkedIn, MySpace, Bebo, or any of the others, the marketing message smells the same in the virtual world as it does in real life. Emma Thelwell reports that Google and other search engines may lose advertising money to social networking sites as businesses shift their marketing focus to social networking. It's funny how the old ways find themselves being applied in the new space . . . Carrie Meathrell 's recent post even seemed a little excited about her discovery that she had been spammed -- on Facebook!

So how do we fix this? I'm thinking fighting fire with fire is the best way. Can you imagine the message that big business would get (or have the opportunity to "get") if thousands of their would-be customers sent them a message in a language they purport to understand? Is there a chance that their procedures would change if a group of folks started using their tactics to convey a very important, business dependent message? I'm thinking that's what it would take.

Jay Deragon notes that business models and structures have historically followed form with traditional media, with the few at the top controlled the conversational content and direction aimed at influencing the masses to behave according to the needs of their markets. He observes that the masses are the markets and the conversations can no longer be controlled, rather the conversations of the people will influence the business markets. So let's try it!

Lets show the business world what we are talking about when we say "let's have a conversation!" Let's communicate, in their language, the requirements that we have in order to form a relationship with them and consider buying their product(s). Here's my example.

Let's say tomorrow I get a direct (snail) mail piece from oh, I don't know, a new restaurant in town. With this approach, I would send them back a letter (I'd have to go buy a stamp -- wonder what they cost now :-) suggesting that they provide their website address so I can check them out. If I received an email -- even an opt-in email, say, from Borders, I would respond by suggesting they take a look at Amazon's strategy -- they make specific suggestions based on what I have purchased in the past, and they tell me how they made the decision to make those recommendations. I have a Borders card, why don't they use it? Or what if I saw a billboard for the political wannabe of your choice. On it, the name and tagline was visible in full color, as well as the people who paid for it, of course. How 'bout if I stuck a billboard up on the candidate's daily route and suggested a website that had a list of campaign promises, the rationale for those promises, and a block for checking completion and the difficulties faced in fulfilling those campaign promises. Yes, they could even put a "click here to donate" button on the site.

Doc Searls' recent post suggests if PR wishes to remain relevant in an environment where networked markets get smarter faster than those that would spin them, the profession needs to define and satisfy a market for something other than spin. I think that means take the time to reshape the model based on what we, the people, take our time to tell you, big business, what we want.

What do you think?

Local Social Network Commerce -- taking us back to the old days?

In a previous post, I suggested that local businesses and government services could enrich our lives by taking part in the social networking phenomenon. I was already aware of an application (that's such an inappropriate word given the power it brings) called Business 3.0, that allows you to create a profile of your business, your products and services and sell them on your social network site.

Facebook Pages allow businesses to connect with theirr customers on Facebook similar to the way they connect with their friends. Through a Facebook Page, users can show their support by becoming a fan, writing on the business' Wall, and other actions that automatically generate News Feed stories.
It's designed for all types of businesses:

Restaurants Bars Cafes Health and Beauty Pets

Local Stores Parks Attractions Sports Teams Games

Artists Musicians Politicians Non-profits And many more...

So start your business, build your business profile, install the B30 app, and get busy, right?

What can we imagine with this? I'm thinking a back-to-local movement for businesses who are tired of losing business to the Amazon's of the world. Roll back the local business strategy (before my time) where everyone knew everyone, and those who lived in the town shopped in the town. Could it be that we could see a resurgence in local shopping? Is it time for the Mom and Pop stores that were pushed out by Wal-Mart to push back?

I'm thinking a local presence in my Facebook neighborhood, where the gas station lists their current prices (one can hope!), and the local grocery displays advertised specials. The library can send you a text message when that video you wanted gets returned, and the barber shop posts their mood as "bored, come get your hair cut now).

The local nursery can post receipt of a bunch of new shrubs as a bulletin on their profile, the local newspaper (if they are still around) can have "top friends" based on who gave them the scoop on news, and the local bank can tell all their customers that a new branch manager was hired and they are having a meet-and-greet this afternoon.

Reservations at the best restaurant in town can be made with a text message, the pavilion at the local park can be reserved in seconds, and you can schedule a yard-waste pickup from your pda. Local politicians can share their vision for the community with minimal cost, and the local car dealer can post "just arrived" specials.

The sky's the limit . . . but it's only for those with vision.

What do you think?