Like herding cats -- what was on your Christmas List?

I've come to the realization that running multiple blogs in an attempt to compartmentalize my thoughts is akin to herding cats.



Of course it was a good idea, but in order to do such a thing effectively, at some point the brakes have to go on and the shift into organization must be intentional. That said, I have posted recently on the educational retrofitting blog in response to a post by Jason Alba (and elsewhere on the academic side of my life).

Christmas time (sorry, we don't call it the Holiday Season here in the South -- that will happen long after the second amendment gets changed :-) was good, and I just learned that it was good for publication as well. Our book The Emergence of The Relationship Economy (more here & here) apparently sold well in December. I must say I wonder whether it was more for enlightenment or necessity.


It took most of 2008 for much of what we were suggesting to catch on and be (slightly more) mainstream, so that could have been part of it. The other possibility is that we as a society, especially after the tactics used in the election, are realizing that social media doesn't just have a place in the world, it is a huge opportunity for many people who are stuck in the void between having time to reach out to established friends and making new ones and the need to maintain a massive productivity level.

Not being able to determine which is more important, I'd like to get your opinion(s).

Is social media "catching on" in your life and the lives of those around you? Do you still get that look from people when you mention Facebook, LinkedIn, YouTube, Twitter, and the like?

What do you think?

For Recruiting on the Social Web - add some innovation! (updated)

This post has a twist. It's not so much about advise for recruiters, 'cause I'm not a recruiter. It's about engaging in relationships with others and letting our personal connections (and how we treat them) be the lifeblood of our business. It's crazy, I know . . .

The text below may appear disjointed . . . it's meant to accompany the video that should have popped up when you hit this page (at least for the first few days). If you didn't get it, click here (or scroll down to see it by topic and choose from the menu on the link above). ReadWriteWeb continues to claim (as do others) that video is the hot media now, and we support those claims!

Note that the video of our talk is in bite-sized chunks, not like your normal video, more like chapters in a book . . . you can watch for a couple minutes, put a bookmark in, and return later to watch the next part. Each of the sections has a title, also, to let you know whether it would be interesting to you. This technology was made possible by www.GoYoDeo.com. It's free, so if you like what you see, find a way to put it to good use (it's worth much more than you pay for it)!

Here's an outline of the videos if you want to view them a la carte:

Part 1
1 How Web 2.0 are you now?
2 Advertising positions and making friends and contacts
3 Placing recruiting ads on the social web (and better ways to spend your time)
4 Connection strategies on LinkedIn and Facebook
Part 2
5 Social networking on the clock (it better be work-related)
6 Using video for recruiting and job seeking
7 Selected recruiting blogs
8 Engaging others on the social web (conversations)
9 Ideas for Using LinkedIn answers for Recruiting
Part 3
10 What about a virtual career fair?
11 What Web 2.0 job seekers use
12 Southwest Airlines 2.0 (social media recruiting) and jobs in pods
13 Krishna De on LinkedIn and Facebook
14 Robert Scoble on PR
15 Wrap-up and reading suggestions

To choose from the above, click here and hit the stop button on the video, then scroll to your choice!

In our previous post entitled How do you find the right people? Recruiting Socialutions, we talked about finding opportunities to improve how we do what we do. We suggested that professional recruiters shouldn't offer people employment, they should just make friends with them.

Before we get too much into that, though . . . here's a couple of preliminary questions:

Do you have a blog (or read blogs regularly)?

Are you on an email list other than one for work?

That's basic social web stuff. Do you have a profile on Facebook? How about MySpace? On LinkedIn?

Perhaps Bebo, Hi5, Orkut, one I am missing?

On Facebook and LinkedIn, there are hundreds of results with a search for "recruiter." I doubt that's the way to go.

Here are some links:

Recruiting Fly is a site dedicated to bringing visitors the best in employment-related content. From news to features to videos and more, Recruiting Fly is your destination for all things recruiting, HR and jobs. They have a virtual jobfair, too.

In the interest of offering more than one option, we are working with a company called Business 3.0 that has established a Virtual Exhibit Hall, where your organization could easily set up their own perpetual job fair and host events as you wish. Check back soon for a preview.

Alltop (the vision of Guy Kawasaki) has a huge collection of links to career-related blogs.

Find a few blogs that interest you, and subscribe to them (or check them regularly). ReadWriteWeb has some great suggestions on how to engage bloggers and their readers in meaningful conversation.

Jason Alba, co-author of I'm on LinkedIn, now what?, and I'm on Facenook, now what?, has the JibberJobber site blog. Take a look at his articles and then check out his site to see how some folks are and will be getting to you.

And Jobs in Pods had a recent post on Southwest Airlines 2.0. He answered the question, "So who does recruiting well on the social web?" - see Nuts About Southwest.

Krishna De says LinkedIn is used by people in leadership roles in business and those people actively managing their career as it’s a little more discriminating in terms of connections. She considers her connections on LinkedIn network as people she would happily recommend and refer as she knows their work. She observed that Facebook is far more relaxed and is like a group of eclectic friends with perhaps business or social interests in common. She found people who are world wide experts are really happy to connect on Facebook which is exciting and seems to level the playing field.

In the social web, there are some serious players (they understand it and live in it). One of them, Robert Scoble (former Microsofter), says PR now stands for “Professional Relationships.”
So what's HR stand for?

For more on The Emergence of The Relationship Economy, check out the blog of my partners, Jay Deragon (especially his recent post on the changing rules of the game) , and Scott Allen's The Virtual Handshake Blog, and mine - Kicking and SCREAMING.

What do you think?

SmallBizAmerica Radio Podcast interview

Smallbiz America is an integrated new-media platform created to help entrepreneurs profit in business and prosper in life.

Ron Sukenick has been called many things, including one of America’s leading authorities on networking and business relationship strategies. He is the author of “Networking Your Way to Success” and the co-author of “The Power is in the Connection: Taking Your Personal and Professional Relationships to the Next Level.”

This is Ron's interview of two of the four authors of The Emergence of the Relationship Economy -- Jay T. Deragon and Carter F Smith -- by Ron Sukenick at SmallBizAmerica.

The COMcast ic forecast -- chance of storms

. . . with possible improvement if COMmunication improves

Jay Deragon's post Can Comcast Reverse the Storm suggests that Comcast has the opportunity to be a leading brand that leverages the tools of the web for improvement of service and innovation of propositions to their customer base, both personal and business. He suggests that they could be customer service trend-setters and thought leaders, which would be a great improvement over their current ranking by a 2007 J.D.Power survey, that ranked Comcast second-to-last only to Charter in customer service for cable and satellite TX providers. Bob Fernandez, in article in The Seattle Times that Jay quotes, discussed this survey, and noted that in the February issue of Consumer Reports, Comcast ranked ninth of 10 big telecom companies. It was sandwiched between Time Warner Cable, at No. 8, and last-place Charter Communications.

I first got engaged with Comcastic customer service with a post by a (local to me) Nashvillian, named Mark Kerrigan, in a fabulous demonstration of the use of webtime by corporations. Mark was frustrated by the local Comcast office's attempts at customer service, so he went to the best distribution channel he had available -- his blog. Mark had a follow-up appointment (after a three day wait) scheduled from 8-11 AM. He wrote, the breakdown in communication became apparent when someone from Comcast called at 9:28 on the day of service to “remind” us that we were scheduled to have a service tech come out between the hours of 12 and three! I read that post and thought, "good for him, he's demonstrating the communication style needed in The Relationship Economy -- talking out in the open." And the next day, Mark blogged again, and it blew my mind (not that he's not that frequent, but what he was writing :-). Mark reported a phone call from Frank Eliason,with Comcast Corporate. Mark explained how it felt to know he was speaking with someone who could actually do something about the service (or lack of service) provided.

Shortly before this, I had been working with Mike Orshan to start a series of initiatives called The Conversation On . . ., on Facebook, and we had posted the first 50 or so companies from the Fortune 100 (and begun a website, too) to try to organize "the good, the bad, the new, the old, the newsworthy and the hopes regarding the United States number 84 company in revenue." Seeing an opportunity for traction and momentum, we pushed the Comcast group to the front of the line for development. Check out the Facebook Group for more -- if you join, you could be member number 440!

But webtime wasn't over yet with the Facebook group addition . . . the Comcastic Twitter initiative had just launched. Two Comcastians, known as @wscottw3 and @ComcastCares (Scott Westerman and Frank Eliason) started responding to Twitterposts by Comcustomers (who were "venting" about Comcast) like they were personal account managers. I saw a variety of high and low-profile technology folks being helped, and even saw some Twittered follow up posts. Take a peek at how messages are passed on Twitter by @mjlambie, @chrisbrogan, @bloggersblog, and @jowyang. if you aren't familiar with this technology. You can see more at The Comcast Tweet Scan. Scott and Frank are doing so well in addressing the issues that they are getting referrals for both customer service and strategy!

So yes, Jay, I think Comcast can reverse the storm.

They were #84 on Fortune's list (they are #79 now)and they have one heckuvan Internet presence, too! Alexa.com Site Stats for comcast.net show Comcast.net has a traffic rank of: 123 (wow - they were 223 on March 20), and they have been online Since: 25-Sep-1997. But it would take a transition, no, a company-wide transformation, to relationship-based customer serving. As we noted in a previous post, relationship building for businesses seems almost counterintuitive. 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. And that, in webtime, is what it will take to divert this storm.

So how do you engage your customers in webtime? You can use simple tools, like this mini-mashup I got from Steve Rubel to check customer service posts for Comcast (or the company of your choice). You can also search the blogosphere . . . Technorati has 541 blogs listed in a search for Comcast in their aggregated blogs, alone. Now, many of them could be spammer sites, but they all tagged their main blog with Comcast, and at the time this was written, there were individually 2,864 posts tagged with Comcast on Technorati (this should make it # 2,866 if Jay tags his).

But searching these sites, whether manually or automatically, is not the solution. There must be something better!

Imagine a public access portal set up strictly for Comcast communications. In that portal is a live blog collector and a live Twitter stream (among other cool tools). The posts are searchable, sortable by keywords, and threadable. A potentially disgruntled Comcustomer finds the portal (shouldn't be too hard with the search tool of choice) and searches for their specific issue (no service, delay in responding, blocked file transfer, late technician, etc.). They locate an ongoing thread, and see that others, perhaps others in their area, are experiencing the same problem. In this example, the threads will serve as a FAQ section that is updated in real time. Instead of making a new call or sending another email, the Comcustomer can say "me too" by tagging the post or thread with their location or adding a simple comment.

If you really want to kick your imagination into high gear, envision a webcam of the technician speeding to your location . . . That's the webtime way!

What do you think?

Disclaimer: The author is not a subscriber to any cable or satellite TV provider, and has not been one since 1990. Though this may indicate that he does not know much about these providers, it does not indicate that he's unable to know a storm when he sees one. And this, my friends, is a storm!

comcastcares

Can Candid Camera make a comeback?

As you may have seen from my post on the Retro-Education blog, I have recently figured out how to take a slideshow and turn it into a video. There's probably an easier way to do it, but I have it down to a science (if you want a how to, I'll get to working on that soon :-)

But the bigger question is WHY did I see the need for this anyway . . .

With Google's YouTube Video running so Hi def lately (almost 52 million visitors per year as of October 2007), the numbers are surely stacking up, and they are making good Cents (sic) . . .

. . . and with companies like GoYoDeo launching their cutting-edge interactive site personalization tools (my term) that allows anyone to publish their personal video content ON TOP of their blogs, social networks and websites (for a demo, check this out -- for an imagination stimulator, go here) . . .



. . . and LinkedIn, MTV, and Beet.tv doing video interviews to supplement their Internet presence . . .

. . . and now animoto is making it so simple to create flash-bang videos with lots of buzz (if you haven't seen their stuff yet, run over there now!) . . . it appears that this whole video thing may be catching on . . . ya think?!?!?

I'm not talking about the paranoia-laden concerns that could be caused by the press (the BBC to be exact) where a teacher was secretly filming lessons she taught, I'm talking about the use of video for a majority of our non-in-person (or video conference) communication. I'm talking about the only person I know who has never owned a computer (a friend since grade school) will be able to communicate the great ideas he has to more than just those who answer the phone when he calls (he does do mobile text-messaging, maybe I should set him up a Twitter account :-). I'm talking about the use of video for more than just passing around shots of the latest Go-Daddy Super Bowl blunder.

Part of me is concerned that we'll be dumbing down the future generations, but it's possible that we'll be giving them another avenue for self-expression (I know, they've been doing this stuff for a while). And for those who simply can't (or won't) learn how to type . . . welcome to the Internet . . . come on in, the water's fine!

So can we expect a return of the peeping-Toms of Candid Camera? Though the show (on it's return trip) hasn't been around for three years, does that mean this kind of activity hasn't permeated our culture? I'm thinking it has, and I'm thinking we haven't seen the end result yet. When portable video cameras can stream better than mobile-phone quality videos through the metropolitan wi-fi, I think it will be time for all of us to wear wigs and shades . . . until then, let's have some fun!

What do you think?

Police 2.0 - To Protect and to Twitter!

Not sure how I missed this, but here's an update from a previous post.

InThe death of social networking as we know it . . . Social Network Commerce, I suggested this scenario:

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.

In our recent book, The Emergence of the Relationship Economy, I suggested:

We should consider adding our local police officer or precinct to our contacts or friends list. These individuals and organizations exist already in our community network, and possibly our social network of friends. Imagine community policing enhanced by a display of trusted connections, personal photos, or random thoughts.
* * *
If law enforcement took advantage of existing technology, we envision the process of a phone call to the police station being replaced by a posting on the virtual wall of the police station’s Web site.

Well, what do you know . . . some police departments have already upgraded to The Relationship Economy!

A search of Facebook shows 3 page results for Police Department, but there are many profiles set up with these identities.

A search of MySpace returns about 54,900 for police department, with many of the links for this department or that "jobs," and many individual officer profiles and videos - check out the Fairfield, CA police!

But as Doc Searls says, these sites are like AOL 2.0 (actually he says that about Facebook, I don't think he has ever seriously addressed MySpace). There's not much room for the relationship economy in government is there?

And now, here in the unexposed, unwalled social web of Twitter, there are . . . Real Police!

So how's this work . . . let me think. (I'm kind of new at this Twitter thing, so please correct me if I miss something).

I am a citizen in my town. I follow the Police and they follow me. They can instantly send out notifications, and I can directly message them, even from my mobile phone, right?

That's it, right? A new line on the officers' business cards, telephone hold messages, and of course on the back of the police cars . . . To Protect and to Twitter!

At least in Franklin, MA and Austin, TX . . .

What do you think?

Customer Powered Service -- the next step in The Relationship Economy!

A while back, Bruno Teuber suggested we use something called Customer Powered Service to define service that is shaped by the customer . . . driven from outside the business to inside and designed to make the customer successful, not just to make support staff more efficient. There have been a few instances of the use of this term, but they all seem to focus on the company's reputation, not the customer's needs and desires. Teuber suggested that Customer Powered Service was a new model that empowers customers, not just internal service personnel. It helps customers achieve their goals, and it optimizes service towards making the best use of customers' time.

I think it's time to revisit the use of this term -- not as a buzzword, but as a mantra.

Customer Powered Service should be seen as a return to the mindset of the marketplace. It is the empowering of the customer, but it doesn't stop there. We have to realize (and make sure the companies we are dealing with realize) that they really aren't going to be successful if they don't provide us with what we need (and are asking for). When we speak of Customer Powered Service, it's not just about the customer -- it's also about the service!

Scott Allen recently noted that we have been moving closer and closer to the point that the customer is really the one in charge of the relationship, not the vendor. How does that work? Customer Powered Service!

Mark Kerrigan established a contact within #84 of the United States’ most profitable companies, and they (the founders) weren’t going to let that slip away. How did he do that? Customer Powered Service!

Jay Deragon observed that the best kind of sale comes from existing customers either buying more or referring someone else to your business. What is he talking about? Customer Powered Service!

Doc Searls, at Harvard's Berkman Center, is knee deep in VRM, or Vendor Relationship Management, the reciprocal of CRM or Customer Relationship Management. It provides customers with tools for engaging with vendors in ways that work for both parties. How are they going to build that? Customer Powered Service!

Pete Blackshaw suggested that if customer service and consumer affairs professionals want more budget, more respect, more leeway to nurture meaningful consumer loyalty -- and hence positive word-of-mouth and CGM creation -- they need to make their case, and do so now at a time when the resource-rich marketers are dotting every third word in speeches and memos with the word "conversation." How can they do that? Customer Powered Service!

The March 3 issue of Business Week, in an article entitled “Consumer Vigilantes“, provides us with a look at the creative ways that "we the people" have started using social media to address the issues when we want to avoid dealing with the phone menu (press one if you really want to do something about the problem).

This Thursday, February 28, 2008, join is at the Business Week webcast on The Impact of Social Media on Selling.

It promises to be a glimpse into the future of Customer Powered Service!

What do you think?

Arrrgghhh! All those years studying Political Science were a waste!

It's a shame when you realize that you wasted time doing something. It's even more a shame when you realize you wasted A LOT of time doing something!

No, I'm not talking about the times where we might second-guess ourselves after a failed marriage. I'm not referring to the soul-searching that goes on when one of our adult children does something REALLY stupid and we wonder where they learned that from. I'm not even talking about the feeling we get when we are downsized, rightsized, or even (God forbid) laid off, nor am I talking about what happens when you and your spouse vote for opposing candidates (more on that later).

I'm talking about the time we've wasted studying the variety of ideologies and political maneuverings at the Federal, State and Local levels of government in our fine country. I'm talking about the time we (even now) spend on trying to discern the benefits of voting for one primary candidate over another, or even trying to engage in public dialog to assist others in distinguishing from one potential political candidate over another.

This revelation comes like a cannon ball in the gut (I've never felt it, but I watched enough cartoons as a child to be able to imagine how it feels). Could it be true that it is actually our gut that affects our political persuasion? That's what it looks like . . .

According to James Fowler and Christopher Dawes of the University of California, San Diego, genetic predisposition can account for up to 50 percent of our political ideology. Tom Jacobs observed that political scientists have debated which environmental influences have a bigger impact on a young person’s nascent political ideology: the belief system of one’s family of origin, or the alternative ways of thinking one is exposed to in the outside world (say, at college). “All liberals know conservatives don’t have a heart, and all conservatives know that liberals don’t have a backbone,” joked John Alford, a political scientist at Rice University and one of the first academics to explore genetic influences on ideology. “So the issue has always been biological. “This takes some of the onus off of parents,” he added. “If your kids become liberal and you’re a conservative, they’re usually not doing it to poke a finger in their eye. It wasn’t a choice for them, so it doesn’t reflect a deliberate flaunting of your beliefs.”

The sure thing here appears to be that politics are not simple to understand -- at least not as simple as business.

Doc Searls, Scott Allen, and Jay Deragon have all posted of late on the effects of the basic factors of The Relationship Economy on politics in the context of the recent debates. Doc reported that Clinton called it “an honor” to be running against Barack Obama, and that “Whatever happens, we’re going to be fine.” Scott and Jay observed that in recent debates, Obama was saying that we have to have a relationship in order to effect change, while Clinton was saying that “they” have to change in order for us to have a relationship. In order to keep this framed in one ideological stance or another, let me observe that McCain was deemed newsworthy by the New York Times for claims made eight years ago regarding his relationship with a telecommunications lobbyist . . . oh, wait, that's not we mean by The Relationship Economy . . . Actually, I think Newsweek did a decent job of covering the recent mud-slinging toward the GOP candidate-in-waiting.

The bottom line is that all these politicians need is a crash course on relationships. In the marketplace, the reaction to someone who completely and totally offends your offering of a relationship is the removal of that offering, the commitment to take your business elsewhere, and (if they were really offensive) the commitment to report this offense to everyone you know, everyone they know, and as many people as you can by a variety of broadcast mediums. In government and politics, we have to wait a bit longer -- usually around four years. Nonetheless, we all remember the ways to get involved in politics from our American Government class, right? If you don't like the way you are represented, either jump on the bandwagon of someone you agree (more) with, or build your own bandwagon.

It is sad, but I think the choices in this election season started out in the crapper, and they just keep swirling around and around.

Here's Tango's attempt to combine Politics and Relationships:



See if you can do any better!

What do you think?

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