Experienced Criminal Justice Professor looking for trend-setting police departments in need of free social media assistance

(not for me -- for my students)

Despite the economic challenges we are facing (or perhaps because of them), the growth of social media use by businesses and organizations continues. Many a company executive is being educated on why they need to blog, what good having a Facebook or LinkedIn account is, and what Tweeting (not Twittering) is.

The problem is, even if they do get it, most don't have the time.

If the marketing or public relations folks are able to convince the executive that having a social media strategy is important, there are two main options -- pay for it or get it for nothing.

Option 1 (paying) will likely start with adding responsibilities to someone who is already on the payroll. In a different economy, this position might be more likely to go to someone with training, but we have to make the ends meet, don't we?

Option 2 would entail finding an intern and trusting them with the reputation of the company. Not many executives are likely to be excited about this option -- even if the intern is in their bloodline.

In most cases, you get what you pay for, or at least you won't get more than what you pay for. Everyone on Facebook or Twitter is not an expert, and everyone who uses these tools successfully for their personal benefit is not necessarily qualified to do so for their company.

So what about the police? We've advocated the use of social media by police organizations to interact with the public before, and there have been some great examples of forward-thinking departments implementing strategies that admittedly don't clearly impact the community reputation of the department.

But there may be a solution.

I have, in any given month, a couple of hundred students in need of exposure to the workforce in the outside world in the profession they are interested in. Many of these are interested in criminal justice, yet almost all have a hard time getting internships. I think most criminal justice departments encounter the same problems.

So I am proposing that each criminal justice department contact each police department within a 500 mile radius of the university. I would suggest a 50 mile radius, but that would not adequately demonstrate the reach of the Internet, now would it?

Offer the police departments a chance to beta-test your 10 hand-picked social media police intern strategists. Set up a Facebook (or Ning) group and set strict guidelines for communication policy, to include a 2 month probationary period where posts have to be screened by a criminal justice professor on the collaboration site prior to presenting them to a department representative for approval. Once the probationary period is completed, the intern will still need to get department approval, but only needs to post a snapshot after the fact, along with a short summary of the logic and rationale if outside the established guidelines.

This process will serve as a test bed for more active departments in the social media space, and allow departments to see the benefits of interaction in the social space with minimal investment.

The primary responsibility of the Social Media Police Intern will be to promote the police department using a variety of social media such as Twitter, FaceBook, MySpace (if they are still around), Blogs, Yahoo!Groups, and related spaces as agreed by the faculty mentor and department representative.

The Intern will be responsible for maintaining the Twitter account with posts reflecting arrest trends, wanted persons, Amber Alerts, and other police information needing immediate public assistance. Approvals for following the department will be made according to pre-established guidelines and approved by the department representative.

The intern should maintain the department's Facebook Fan page, to include promoting events and monitoring communications, and informing the department representative of any problems exposed in the social media domain so the department can determine how to respond appropriately.

Monitoring of police-related communications (comments regarding the department or criminal activity in the jurisdiction) may also be included.

Intern Qualifications: The candidate should be someone with a mix of:

• Strong interpersonal skills
• Effective written and oral communication skills
• Able to work alone, while operating as an integral team member
• Experience using social media in a non-business, personal setting

Interns are expected to work a minimum of 5 and a maximum of 20 hours each week. The schedule will remain flexible and can be adjusted based on the intern’s availability. These internships should be offered for a term of approximately 4 Months.

For more posts addressing the need for social media strategies for police departments, click here.

What do you think?

Secure Social Networking -- sounds a little like a hurdle that many won't want to jump -- Nixle?

I guess we'll have to see.

I've posted before about the use of social networking site by government agencies -- especially the police. There's another entry (besides Facebook and Twitter) that appears to be set on making this a secure reality.

Nixle is a free service that allows you to receive trusted, up-to-the-minute, neighborhood information for where you live, work, visit – or for where your family and friends are located throughout the country.

Hmm, so trusted means secure? I guess we'll see how that goes over.

Police can send you information about car accidents or crime that's going on in your neighborhood—either by email, text messages to your cell phone, or both.

For now, I must admit there seems to be a decent movement underway. Apparently, more than 1,000 agencies have joined Nixle so far, and over 40,000 people have signed up. That's not a real good show of interest. I'm concerned especially since it requires both a learning curve for using the site (both the department representatives and the citizens) and a marketing push to get them to the site.

They do have a pretty impressive list of partners.

What do you think?

Can we text to 911, too?

Well, no, but we can text to TIP-411 (847411)! We'll have to wait for NG911 . . . read on . . .

As we observed in It's nice to see it coming together, a little over a year ago we made suggestions for public service social networking in "The Death of Social Networking as we know it . . . Social Network Commerce." The focus was on the police department, and the situation was:

. . . 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.

Well, there aren't too many police departments on Facebook, MySpace, or Twitter yet (though there has been some improvement), but . . . you (at least I) can text the local PD to report a crime via text!

You can now report a crime via text in Franklin. Send your tip to TIP-411 (847411). In your message page, type 615 FPD, and then write your message.

It's a shame as plugged in as I am that I first heard about this on NewsChannel5 but I guess old media is how people find out about new media, so I'll take what I can get.

The department is the first law enforcement agency in the state to be able to handle anonymous text messaging tips from the public. Anyone in the community will be able to text tips. According to WSMVvideo link here), A third-party company called Citizen Observer removes the phone number, replaces it with an ID number and sends it on to police, making it anonymous.

Perhaps now we can get to the point where we are able to get crime reports like on the Digital Public Square in D.C.!

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.

In Police 2.0 - To Protect and to Twitter! I envisioned 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!

I guess we'll be doing it old-school with the text messages for now . . . there's got to be a way to text to 911 and have Google Latitude (My Location) share your current location with the police (if we choose). It makes sense to provide the police with information (using 411 in the text address), but if we want to send a report, complaint, or our smart house wants to report suspicious activity . . . I cannot wait for the next-generation 911 (NG 911) call centers!

What do you think?

It's nice to see it coming together -- why isn't this happening everywhere?

A little over a year ago in a post titled "The Death of Social Networking as we know it . . . Social Network Commerce" we suggested that social networking should be something more than sharing information, displaying our music and video preferences, making introductions, playing games, and poking each other. In that post, we made suggestions for Government and Private organizations to engage their communities in the social space.

And now it's here. Well, at least it is here where I live . . . is it here where you live?

Downtown Franklin is on Facebook, and they are hosting and inviting residents to a variety of events happening in (of all places) Downtown Franklin!

It's not the Digital Public Square in Washington D.C. that helped the recently appointed presidential technology adviser get a new gig, but I'm OK with that. Now, I think we'll see more of what Tim Tracey offers at YouGottaCall - a connection of local, trusted service providers with new customers using their network of customers, friends and neighbors (see comments on this post).

I think there's an opportunity for Customer Powered Service, as noted previously - a return to the mindset of the marketplace. Customer Powered Service is the empowering of the customer, where companies are successful only if they provide customers with what they 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!

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?

Who does Social Networking better -- guys or gals?

According to a recent Rapleaf study, while both sexes still use social networking sites in huge numbers, women are the ones holding down the fort. I have known that the ladies "get" the social part of social networking (and online learning interaction) a heckuva lot better than us guys. Auren Hoffman will help convince you . . .

He suggests we should expect social networks of the future to cater to women and alienate men.

Rapleaf conducted a study of over 30 million people to see how they're using social media. While the trends indicate both sexes are using social media in huge numbers, their findings show that women far outpace the men. They predict that this gender gap on social networks (and increasingly in all of social media) will only widen with the next wave of innovation.

The study included mostly what was referred to as Social Networkers (those with 1-100 friends), about 13 million in all, or 80% of the sample. They found that in this group

• Women have on average 62 friends.
• Men have on average 57 friends.
• Women are more likely to be "Social Networkers."

Do these findings support those of Schler, Koppel, Argamon & Pennebaker - Effects of Age and Gender on Blogging, which found that male bloggers write more about politics, technology and money, while female bloggers discuss their personal lives – and use more personal writing style?

It appears that they do.

As we noted in The Emergence of The Relationship Economy, there is good reason to think that networking comes naturally for women. Traits that are considered feminine in our culture , like cooperating, building relationships, helping, and developing others, are not surprisingly also those necessary in (effective) networking. Traditional male traits like directing and controlling get nowhere in networking, and may get you blacklisted in social networking (Forret and Dougherty, 2001).

For both men and women, success in networking depends on understanding and capitalizing on our individual strengths, and supplementing individual strengths with the strengths of those in our networks. The connectivity afforded by online social networking provides many opportunities for improved relations.

In The Relationship Economy, everyone has the opportunity to win, but maybe the guys will have to ask for help.

What do you think?

Responses here are always welcome (actually requested), and if you have a LinkedIn account, please take a look at the responses of others there.

References:

Forret, M. L. and Dougherty, T. W. (2001). Correlates of networking behavior for managerial and professional employees. Group & Organization Management, 26(3), 283-311.

Hoffman, A. (2008). The Social Media Gender Gap. Business Week, available at http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/may2008/tc20080516_580743.htm

Schler, Koppel, Argamon & Pennebaker (2005). Effects of Age and Gender on Blogging. Available at http://lingcog.iit.edu/doc/springsymp-blogs-final.pdf

Collaborating with co-workers and customers: Socialutions as a management strategy

We are, of course, social creatures, and many marketers understand that. Telecom companies have long encouraged us to connect with our friends & family (or Unity), call our network for free, and purchase family plans. Starbucks has built a business around a unique mixture of offline connections accessing online content “together.” Many email newsletters have the “forward to a friend feature.” And, a growing number of communities are using a mixed-use design that allows us to work, live and shop in one area.

We are naturally drawn to places where people we know congregate. As social networking sites have demonstrated, we go where our friends are, and we connect to people with whom we have something in common. So it’s pretty natural to think that managing an organization would include understanding the relationship dynamics of those who contribute in some way to the bottom line, right?

Not necessarily.

Many large organizations operate with a directed-association model. Departments are set up in hierarchical fashion, and we learn to work with or for people with whom we may never have come in contact but for our employment. Some enterprising organizations make attempts to capitalize on our personality styles, but how many try to capitalize on our networking styles? Do we examine the “fit” that new members to the team demonstrate in relation to those already established?

Not very often.

Caldwell, et. al., in studies of perceptions of “fit” found that as organizational change becomes the norm, adaptations by individuals is expected, though the ready embrace of change often eludes the observer. The change itself may be the variable, and many organizations are finding that change strategies should include possible reactions to change. So, if people initially deemed “a good fit” for the organization are suddenly experiencing major challenges, was the hiring process faulty?

Tomorrow’s employees are engaging in the social space now, and they are bringing this tradition to the workplace. They may adapt to the directed-association model, but they may also rebel. These are not members of the complacent generation(s) that took what they got and kept silent. These are the “kids” who have been asking why and what’s in it for me since they could talk.
So how do we incorporate them into our management strategies?

A recent example of the technology-enhanced ability to have everyone manage processes was described by Denis Pombriant in his look at Right90, which captures and tracks changes to the business forecast (all the things that can and should be forecasted in addition to revenue, so that a company can keep its supply chain informed of coming changes) in real time. With Right90, if a salesperson reports that a customer is doubling an order for 32-inch HDTVs, managers in sales and operations get alerted, and the full implications of the change in the forecast get thoroughly reviewed.

Pombriant observed that this kind of attention to detail gives every relevant person and department a seat at the table, and makes them accountable for bringing in the forecasted revenue in the forecasted product lines. Imagine this strategy being implemented in your organization!

Many small businesses have the idea of this kind of collaboration built in to their initial organizational cultures. Have you ever been to a diner where one person tells the other, “I’m going to the freezer, do you need anything?” The ensuing dialog is likely to result in an informal report of the number of a certain product remaining in stock, followed by a quickly calculated mental note by the person who orders these things. As the business grows, however, each position becomes more intense and focused, and it becomes decreasingly natural to see the operation as a system.

And that’s where the problem lies.

When all the participants in a system fail to see it as a system, each facet of the operation becomes disjointed. If not integrally connected, much additional effort is needed to catch up to at least temporarily unify the thought process for actions such as logistics, personnel, finance, and the like.

By implementing Socialutions as a management strategy, organizations can capitalize on the relationships and relationship connections of the people connected to them in some way. This naturally includes the employees and the organization’s leadership, and should include customers, clients, vendors, and others served by and serving the organization. These people all represent the company in some way, so why not acknowledge and try to affect the way they represent? As we engage The Relationship Economy, we need to find new ways to leverage technology to interact with people to solve real problems. Only those people, communities, and organizations who use this type of collaborative problem-solving model will emerge successfully. Those who choose to go it alone and use long-antiquated systems and applications will look back and wonder why they didn’t.

If these suggestions look familiar, perhaps you are seeing a similarity to team-building, which the social web appears to be well suited for. Team building in Asia has been part of the culture since long before W. Edwards Deming traveled to Japan to implement Quality (and plan-do-check-act) in the post-war rebuilding effort. Global team building has enjoyed mostly steady growth as organizations expand an a variety of travel opportunities contract. Socialutions as a management strategy requires using a group (team) of people (stakeholders) to be accountable for the process.

What do you think?

Caldwell, S.D., Herold, D.M. and Fedor, D. B. (2004). Toward an Understanding of the Relationships Among Organizational Change, Individual Differences, and Changes in Person-Environment Fit: A Cross-Level Study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(5), 868. Available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15506866

Pombriant, D. (2008, May 7). The Dawn of Social Networking 2.0., ECT News Network – Tech News World. Available at http://www.technewsworld.com/story/web20/62896.html?welcome=1210165490

Amber Alerts using the Social Web . . . at least somewhat

It's been my experience that government and quasi-government agencies are always the last ones to figure out the technology that helps them accomplish their mission. For the most part, my impression has not changed, though more and more I am seeing a glimmer of hope.

There are police officers , emergency management personnel, homeland security employees, and firefighters on LinkedIn, Facebook, MySpace, and several of the other social networks, and more and more poised to enter The Relationship Economy.

From my time in the criminal justice field (and discipline), I have developed an outside the walls network of thousands of these folks (they are "connected" to me in the address book on my computer, and frequently post on my old-school wall known as an inbox while CCing others). I have seen a select few (and growing) number of folks over the past 15 or so years adopt (and adapt to) the various iterations (is that spelled right?) of communications technology and I am often impressed by their progress. In fact, the friend I mentioned in 4score and . . . how would Lincoln do on Twitter?, where I observed that the combination of my time working for the government and my legal training and my current focus on education was not a good breeding ground for brevity, works in this very field.

In the recent past, though, I have seen a more useful (my opinion) adaptation and implementation, and have noted police and fire departments using Twitter, the microblogging service that feels a lot like a mashup of instant messaging, chat rooms, and 2-way radios. I first noted that three police departments were on Facebook (update: there are now five) and two (there's now a third, but no posts yet, though they have 5 followers) are on Twitter. I made some suggestions in our recent book that police departments could find innovative ways to communicate with the communities, and I have been impressed with those who are (and I am waiting patiently for the tens of thousands who are not). I delved a little deeper into a hypothetical scenario in the post on Social Network Commerce.

I have noted also that a fire department is Twittering (update: Now there's a second). The @LAFD has a very active presence in the Twitterverse, and they add followers by the day (you can follow them, too) though they are only following one. And I just realized that there are nine (yes, 9) Fire Departments on Facebook -- wow!

And today (Wednesday, April 30, 2008), while Twittering with Chris Brogan (@chrisbrogan), I learned from @wscottw3 (yeah, the Comcast guy) that Amber Alerts are on Twitter, too - see @amberalerts. I knew that Jason, with Herban Media has had an Amber Alert application on Facebook for a while, and our local (Nashville) media does a decent job of putting the alerts out, but Twitter seems to be the perfect place for them (especially since they just received another infusion of funding).

I don't know that the @amberalerts on Twitter are from an official site, but the program is a Department of Justice Initiative, and before now, I had only seen the Transportation Safety Administration getting involved (other than covertly) in the social web. The only problem with this demonstration is that @amberalerts hasn't seen a Twitterpost since three months ago. I suspect that's not reflective of the most recent Amber Alert . . . but it's the thought that counts, right? I did find that the @Amber_Alert Twitter Feed is directly from the national website DM, so make sure you follow the right one!

What do you think?

BTW - I promise to make my next post on something unrelated to Twitter . . ..

Freelance Security probes on LinkedIn - Rickrolled?

I got this email today . . . from CSIS Security Group [kas@csis.dk]

Dear LinkedIn user: Meet Mr. John Smith!

You have a profile on LinkedIn.com and you have chosen to connect with "John Smith". This itself is not a problem, if it wasn't for the fact, that John Smith doesn't really exist (in real life). The profile was invented as part of a security experiment in pitfalls of Social Networks to determine and illustrate potential risks using Social networks, such as LinkedIn. The presentation was just released on the Fraud Europe conference in Bruxelles today.


We decided not to release any detailed information about who and how John Smith got connected with in his network. However, we felt obligated to inform all Linkin accounts hooked up with John Smith about this piece of research and the release of the final edition of "Social Networking Risk - Who Do You Want to be Today?".

With the paper being released we will delete the "John Smith" profile!

If you've not already guessed it, you're receiving this e-mail because you are linked with john Smith. We hope this will be a leason learned and nothing else ...

All data harvested during the past year, will be deleted. We will also inform LinkedIn and asking them to remove the profile.

You can download the presentation given at Fraud Europe conference at the following URL:
http://www.csis.dk/dk/media/LinkedIn-Threats.pdf

The technical paper, used as background for this presentation and released in January 2008, can be downloaded here:
http://www.csis.dk/dk/media/LinkedIn-V2.pdf

Best regards,

Dennis Rand, Security- and Malware researcher CSIS Security Group http://www.csis.dk

---
CSIS Security Group
www.csis.dk


A Google search for "LinkedIn CSIS Security Group" found Martin Lynge Hansen at http://www.linkedin.com/in/lynge . . . maybe I should Rickroll him? I flagged him and linked to this post.

linkedin.john@gmail.com LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/linkjohnsmith

what do you think?

UPDATE: I posted it on my blog, and flagged the profile to linkedin as misrepresentation -- it's gone now, go figure.

Thanks LinkedIn, but with over 3,000 connections how many got the email and how many flagged the profile?

I found one other who posted this, see Uncommon Sense Security.

More on a search for linkedin.john@gmail.com:

http://www.linkedseo.com/list.php
http://www.meta-guide.com/malta/cse12.asp

Social Network Portability is coming, with a twist

Microsoft appears set on getting into the social space, whether by owning it or facilitating it. It's kind of like "let someone else build it and if they come we'll go get them and invite them over." Now it appears they are going for the Mall approach, rather than the franchise or leveraged buyout approach. Or at least, so it seems.

In a prior post, we noted Google's opening the cross-platform communications mode with OpenSocial, and the many developers working on an aggregator for users. Could this latest venture serve as an aggregator not just for individual profiles, but also one for groups? We are still looking for a mobile solution, too . . . waiting to be invited to participate in the mashup of Dashwire and ProfileLinker!

Microsoft is working with Facebook, Bebo, Hi5, Tagged and LinkedIn to create a safe, secure "two-way street" so we can move our profiles and relationships between social networking sites. It's a little late for that, isn't it? How 'bout something that will synchronize what we have, or maybe even a business and personal profile, with by-individual or by-group access? We've already copy-pasted our "About Me" and a variety of likes and quotes and . . . What happened to the Open Social adventure that Facebook was avoiding making a commitment to?

Microsoft has been using SharePoint, with support for wikis, blogs and RSS feeds, with privacy and security so everyone can feel secure, for enterprise social networking, but now they are going after those who aren't connected by their internal company relationships. And they are proposing that we help them by using Windows Live Messenger to connect with Facebook (available now), Bebo, LinkedIn, Hi5 and Tagged (coming soon). The strategy starts with inviting your friends and connections to connect on Windows Live Messenger (not sounding a lot like portability here -- I am thinking "import from").

So I tried the only currently available option -- Facebook. A login to Facebook screen (with Windows Live logo but a Facebook URL) popped up, and the first try on login failed (hmmm, a phishing site?). But the next screen had the Facebook logo, and it logged me in just fine. I didn't however, see where I could add anyone to an invite list, so . . . I gave up and started blogging.

I was using MS Internet Explorer on XP on a Dell, so maybe that's what the problem was. Next time I find myself with nothing to do but beta-test for Microsoft, perhaps I will try Firefox on Leopard on a Mac.

I'm not sure that this will be a profitable venture for Microsoft, but it's worth a try. We know that owning a centrally located piece of real estate and inviting big names to stake their claim there has worked in the real world in the past. Microsoft has shown their ability in Web 1.0 to make money, and it's apparent that no one in social networking has figured out how to do that yet . . .

So we'll just keep beta testing while Microsoft keeps building . . .

Note that when I recently installed FriendFeed and Twitter on Facebook, it went off without a hitch. They obviously aren't related to Microsoft.

What do you think?

How long will "social networks" be around, and how long is the tail?

A recent article in my not-so-favorite form of media, the NYT - addressed: Why Old Technologies Are Still Kicking. The article identified the common traits of survivor technologies as 1) some enduring advantage in the old technology that is not entirely supplanted by the new, and 2) business decisions that invest in retooling the traditional technology, adopting a new business model and nurturing a support network of loyal customers, industry partners and skilled workers.

Is that what's happening with social networking?

In The Roaring 2000s, Harry S. Dent made some interesting observations and predictions. He missed the boat on a couple of them (like the Dow reaching at least 21,500 by the year 2008 -- it barely passed 14,000 in October 2007 and hasn't been the same since). In all fairness, there have been some significant unpredictable events, but take a look at what Dent was seeing here. Dent found recently that it was typical to have a major crash and shake-out as new technologies approached 50% penetration on the S-Curve, and in 2006, he forcasted that most stocks will soar to unprecedented highs—most likely to around 20,000 on the Dow by 2009.

Dent saw and examined the impact of new technologies on the S-Curve, and I think that's critical as we examine the longevity and enduring advantage of technology like social network or networking sites (not to be confused with the activity of social networking, which doesn't need a specific site). Boyd and Ellison (2007) define social network sites (as distinguished from social networking sites) as web-based services that allow individuals to (1) construct a public or semi-public profile within a bounded system, (2) articulate a list of other users with whom they share a connection, and (3) view and traverse their list of connections and those made by others within the system.

Dent explains the growth catalysts of the S-Curve like this:

The first comes as many early stage market entrants go under as the product first moves mainstream around 10% market penetration and the field of mainstream potential options narrow down. Then there is a second and most violent shake-out as the product moves towards 50% penetration and growing competitors over-expand. That shake-out shifts market share further to the strongest leaders who bring costs down further through larger economies of scale. Once the industry matures between 90% and 99.9%, foreign or new competition often sets in and even dominant leaders have to fight to maintain market share in an era of declining growth and margins.

So where are we with social networks?

I think it depends on how you are looking at these sites. Social networking sites as they are used now ultimately serve to identify the changes in our approaches to socializing, especially dependent on the stage of life we are in. Take a look at three of these sites (my reasons for being on each of them were covered previously). We've got the mall (of MySpace), the Coffee Shop (of FaceBook), and the Chamber of Commerce function (of LinkedIn).

There is a likelihood of traditional social use -- both with MySpace and the mall.

Youth (and some adults) enjoy the time spent in "hanging out" at the mall. That's where groups of friends go to the mall to show off recent acquisitions (clothes, mobile phones, etc), to hang out with friends, and to hang out with friends of friends you can't connect with in your neighborhood.

Adults are more likely to meet in Facebook or at a coffee shop

The local coffee shop is a place way from home, perhaps an office-like environnment that can be used as a place to work or a place to relax. It's a short term stop between other personal and professional errands. It's a neutral, friendly place for informal conversation for business or pleasure. And most of them are more than a coffee shop.

People with business on their mind are more likely to go to LinkedIn or a Chamber of Commerce function.

LinkedIn has mall-like qualities, as does a Chamber of Commerce mixer. People often gather (group) together to chat, plan, or introduce others, and it's pretty clear why they are there (it's likely there's a clue on their nametag or profile). LinkedIn allows us to share details about each other and our professional interests, and provides a useful venue for introducing others.

LinkedIn also has coffee shop qualities, as it provides a place where business isn't the only thing that needs to be discussed. That's especially helpful in Chamber of Commerce mixers in some of the Southern U.S. locations, where it's taboo to conduct business before spending a minimum of 15 minutes about the weather, politics, and your choice of either the SEC or NASCAR.

Their use often differs by demographic, and their specific use and potential are different.

So where will social networking sites be in 5, 10, or 15 years?

In Metcalfe's Law is Wrong, Briscoe, Odlyzko, and Tilly say that Metcalfe's Law, which says that the value of a communications network is proportional to the square of the number of its users, is wrong. Of relevance for this topic is their observation that:

The fundamental flaw underlying both Metcalfe's and Reed's laws is in the assignment of equal value to all connections or all groups. The underlying problem with this assumption was pointed out by Thoreau in relation to the very first large telecommunications network, then being built in the United States. Thoreau wrote: "We are in great haste to construct a magnetic telegraph from Maine to Texas; but Maine and Texas, it may be, have nothing important to communicate."

The authors noted that if Metcalfe's Law were true, it would create overwhelming incentives for all networks relying on the same technology to merge, or at least to interconnect. These incentives would make isolated networks hard to explain. They introduce Zipf's Law, which says that if we order some large collection by size or popularity, the second element in the collection will be about half the measure of the first one, the third one will be about one-third the measure of the first one, and so on. In other words, the kth-ranked item will measure about 1/k of the first one. They also propose their own calculations, which states that the value of a network of size n grows in proportion to n log(n). They note that this cannot predict the value of a network from its size alone, but if we already know its valuation at one particular size, we can estimate its value at any future size, all other factors being equal.

Here's the n log(n) law in application:

Imagine a network of 100 000 members that we know brings in $1 million. We have to know this starting point in advance—none of the laws can help here, as they tell us only about growth. So if the network doubles its membership to 200 000, Metcalfe's Law says its value grows by (200 0002/100 0002) times, quadrupling to $4 million, whereas the n log(n) law says its value grows by 200 000 log(200 000)/100 000 log(100 000) times to only $2.1 million. In both cases, the network's growth in value more than doubles, still outpacing the growth in members, but the one is a much more modest growth than the other. In our view, much of the difference between the artificial values of the dot-com era and the genuine value created by the Internet can be explained by the difference between the Metcalfe-fueled optimism of n 2 and the more sober reality of n log(n).

There's a lot more to their argument, but I think the key is that as the shakeout in social network sites continues (are you listening AOL, Google, and Microsoft?), the real valuation can be estimated, but only based on a previous real valuation. If we look at the anticipated growth with the expected mergers and acquisitions, it's possible we may avoid the kind of pain we saw with the bubble bursting in the late 1990s.

And so, Metcalfe's law is trumped by Zipf's Law and the law of n log(n) -- leading us to The Long Tail of social network sites for which we still don't have an assigned value.

So how does this fit with our look at social networking sites?

If an enduring advantage and a retooling mindset are the keys to success, then social networks should be around for a while. These sites didn't invent the social part, nor did they invent the networking part, so the enduring advantage is there. They facilitate acquaintance and reacquaintance, and are run (at least initially) by technology entrepreneurs -- with a retooling mindset built in. I think the question is not whether they will last, but in what form they will emerge, and how many mergers will we see before the shakeout is over.

As note in a previous post, I see a tendency toward focusing on specific social networking sites, but in the future I think many of us will simply be using what was "learned" in these sites to just be more social -- out in the open, on an Internet without walls. The people we relate to, the relationships we have with them, and the use of available communication tools are the keys to success in this space, not “the site.”

What do you think?

References:

Boyd, D. M., & Ellison, N. B. (2007). Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), article 11. Available at http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol13/issue1/boyd.ellison.html

Dear John, Where's the Beef?

There's been recent news in the social webspace about not one, but two marriage proposals on the micro-blogging site Twitter (more discussion here). But marriage is only one demonstration of the relationships that can be strengthened with the support of the social web. It is about the relationship, but do we really understand how that works?

I found this little gem thanks to Doc Searls, who received it from Keith Hopper.

Don't read any more until you watch this (it's short - under two well-invested minutes):

The Break Up
by geertdesager

As we wrote in The Emergence of The Relationship Economy, all business requires a medium of marketing, communicating, and selling means that drive customer awareness of the business proposition. Where companies screw this up is their focus ONLY on our awareness by failing to find the right balance between marketing, communicating, and selling.

Perhaps the perspective needs some adjustment -- let's look at it as a "communication sandwich," where marketing and selling frame the communication. Companies can bring their intent to the communication -- consumers are OK with that -- it's nice to know what the other person aims to get from a relationship, but we're getting to the point where we are wondering whether there is marketing just for the sake of marketing? Wendy's (provider of very excellent hamburgers sandwiches) had a commercial a while back that asked "Where's the Beef?"



In a communication sandwich like we've had for many years now, we should be asking the same thing!

So how can we get that message to the companies who keep pushing their products and services on us, without so much as a real follow up?

Perhaps we should just walk out on them and take our business elsewhere . . .

Is it that easy? Do you think they'll get it? NO!!! Not without a united effort by the people formerly known as the audience . . . we touched on the need for new strategies in our post on marketing in The Relationship Economy. Remember the peanuts that brought Jericho back? Well, that campaign worked (though not for very long), but this one is different, and it won't cost you money.

How 'bout this?

. . . go to as many company feedback sites as you can in the next 7 days.

Post something like this.


I (and a lot of people like me) have been trying to convey our sincere desire to have a real relationship with those who provide products and services for our consumption and enjoyment. The benefit of this relationship for you is that you get to know EXACTLY what we need, not only what you think we need, based on your research, focus groups, and late-night brainstorming with people who are so entrenched in the marketing model of the 20th Century that they wouldn't know a real conversation if one bit them on the nose. We want you to know what we need, when we need it, and why . . .

If you really care about our relationship, please invest two minutes and three seconds in it, by watching this video - http://bringtheloveback.com/2007/05/16/mdas_europe/

Sincerely,

Yournamehere

What do you think?

P.S. A hamburger is first a sandwich . . . verify here.

NEED HELP with Social Media & Online Business Networking Must-Reads

I could really use some help building this list. I'm trying to include all the books that relate to the business-oriented social space.

My list at present is located here. Any method of response (blog comment, twitter post, email, or any of the communication methods to the right) ==>>> would be appreciated!

Thanks!

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?

Everything I ever knew about Twitter (as of 4PM this afternoon)

If interested in Twitter discoveries and more, check out the Retrofitting the Education Space Blog post -Yesterday's technology today.

The CIO versus the CMO - slow and steady (with the right strategy) wins the race!

Once upon a time there was a Fortune 500 CMO who, boasting how he could generate business better and faster than anyone else, was forever teasing the company's CIO for his limited contributions to customer acquisition and retention. Then one day, the irate CIO answered back: "Who do you think you are? There's no denying you're fast, but even you can be beaten with the right strategy!" The CMO squealed with laughter.
"Beaten in a competition? By whom? Not you, surely! I bet there's nobody in the world that can win against me, I'm so good at what I do. Now, why don't you try?"

Annoyed by such bragging, the CIO accepted the challenge. A competition was planned, and the next day at dawn they stood at the starting line. The goal was to generate new business by engaging new or lost customers. The CMO had been honing his craft for several years, and his marketing team was the best in the business. The CIO had only recently begun testing a strategy that included reaching out to customers and potential customers to engage them in communication -- even building relationships . . . It started when he realized that this strategy produced the best crop of employees, and he was interested in testing to see whether it worked for company business, as well.

The CMO yawned sleepily as the CIO trudged slowly off to his office to send a Twitter message to his team. When the CMO saw how painfully slow his rival was moving, he decided, half asleep on his feet, to have a quick nap instead of rallying his top-notch marketers. "Take your time!" he said. "I'll have forty winks and catch up with you in a minute."

The CIO's team got busy, posting on their well-read, cross-linked blogs, updating the internal and external technology wikis, and brainstorming (on Skype, and Free Conference Calls, of course) ways to get the word out. One of the team members had his video camera, so the team shot a quick (amateur) video announcing the challenge, posted it on YouTube, and then posted it on their blogs and their networking profiles.

The CMO woke with a start from a fitful sleep and gazed round, looking for the CIO. But the CIO was only a short distance away, having barely moved at all while blogging for the third time that day on Social Media Today and Always On: The Insider's Network. Breathing a sigh of relief, the CMO decided he might as well have breakfast, and off he went to eat at the new Cinnabon he had noticed across from the mall. But the heavy meal and the decaf latte made his eyelids droop by the time he made it back to the office.

With a careless glance at the CIO, now engaged in a webinar with over 100 new contacts from LinkedIn and another 75 from Facebook, the CMO decided to have another snooze before rallying his team for a winning last-minute marketing push that afternoon. And smiling at the thought of the look on the CIO's face when he realized the CMO's intellectual superiority, he fell fast asleep and was soon snoring happily, with his feet kicked up on his desk.

The sun started to sink below the horizon, and the CIO, who had posting (and linkinng) to related posts in the blogosphere since that morning, was getting up for his last Jolt. At that very point, the CMO woke with his own jolt. He could see the CIO walking toward his office from the break room and off he dashed. He set up an on-the-fly conference call with his team at record speed and gave them all news of the challenge, his tongue dragging, and gasping for breath. Just one strong push and he'd be the winner. He called a handful of his fellow CMOs and asked them to negotiate some quick dual-branding strategies so he could claim a superior follow-on strategy, and typed up a press release in a matter of minutes.

But the CMO's last minute leap was just too late, for the CIO had beaten him with his slow and methodical relationship-building strategy. The CIO's team was just shy of having 500 new relationships that day -- a third of which were with former customers, and over 150 had placed rather large orders. Poor CMO! Tired and in disgrace, he slumped down beside the CIO who was leaning against the wall silently smiling at him.

"Slow and steady (with the right strategy) wins every time!" he said.

This contemporary re-write of The Tortoise and the Hare, one of Aesop's Fables, was designed to provide you with a glimpse into the paradigm shift that business has to make in order to survive The Emergence of The Relationship Economy.

What do you think?

Corporate Online Relevancy in The Relationship Economy

Let's talk about corporate online relevancy.

In a recent article, Lee Gomes observed that, "Back in the '90s if you didn't have a Web site you were irrelevant; the same was true with having an e-commerce site in 2001. That is where social networks are right now." See Talking Tech - WSJ.com

Is that acccurate?

I agree that social networks are important. I understand that it is not in the best interest of many companies to venture into the space by launching their own site and trying to draw customers and potential customers to it. I have seen the mistakes by those who try to use Marketing 1.0 techniques to attract a Web 2.0 customer. But can we be so bold as to suggest that companies without a social network presence TODAY are irrelevent?

Perhaps.

Perhaps if they don't realize that they should and are scrambling to do something, anything, to be seen as "in the know." Perhaps if they have hired a consulting firm and thrown tons of cash at every and any idea and wasted countless hours training their employees on the proper way to represent the company in the new online world. Perhaps if they don't pay attention to their teenagers (representing their future employee base) and see that this is where they "hang-out."

Christopher Carfi and Dan Greenfield have asked the question "does 'if you build it, they will come' work for social networks?" My keen eye and memory allowed me to spot the classic movie inspired metaphor right away, and then I got curious. I was blown away when I Googled social network field dreams in the blogosphere.

Here are some of the hits:

Dan Greenfield cautioned that "in launching a social network, it is tempting to create a FaceBook page and declare mission accomplished. Yes you can check off that item on your social media to do list. But having friends on your company page rarely taps a user base looking for a meaningful forum to engage with your brand or company." He then addresses the needs and goals that must be in place in order to make the project measurable, observing that "Critical mass is about relative measurements, not absolutes."

Dan wraps up with "In successfully targeting your audience and reaching critical mass, the problem may not ultimately be whether they will come, but what will you do when they come." That reminds me a little of the ad earlier in this decade (as I recall) where the startup was watching their hit counter roll so fast that they were out of action before they had been open long enough to consider a profit.

Marshall Sponder wrote a follow up to Dan's that "we’re living though all that - figuring it out as we go - which is exciting but also makes me want to pause and figure out if we’re missing something."

I, too, love it that we are all excited about being excited, but what message can we really deliver to those in need, desparate need, of an answer? We can tell them that the tide is coming in and the surf is looking good -- that's about it! Don't get me wrong, I feel strongly (and previously said so) that Corporations should embrace (and more) the activity known as Social Networking. As we previously posted, Networking, especially Social Networking, can be used to leverage time. But every company that wants relevance in The Relationship Economy needs to first understand what it is!

The downside is, there are no cookie-cutter solutions. Each individual and organization has to see 1) where they are, and 2) where they want to go. Then and only then can they map out 3) how they are going to get from 1 to 2.

Chris Brogan lays this out pretty well:

"First, know what the intent of your social media and networks will be. Are you hoping to improve awareness and open communication about your organization? Are you looking to reach new markets and open channels for sales or membership or market adoption? Are you hoping to use these tools as collaboration platforms? Are you making informational products? Are you just virtualizing your water cooler? Knowing your intent drives which path you take."

In addressing the new strategies needed in this space, Jeremiah Owyang observes:

"What’s key? It’s having a plan to kick start your community. Secondly, understanding to consider joining the community before building one. Lastly, marketing (and your community) may not even be on your own website or domain, distributive, amorphous, and ubiquitous."

With all the confusion that this can cause, there will be quite a few well-meaning and not so well-meaning scam artists who will promise solutions they have no possibility of delivering. That's about the only place the rules haven't changed for this new era -- there are still people who will take advantage of someone in need.

Hopefully, the CEOs, CMOs, CIOs and CTOs have read our post about "The CEOs new social network strategy."

What do you think?