Year: 2009

  • #In Business

    In spite of being the gold standard in business networking, I’ve always felt that LinkedIn has been a bit slow in adapting to the needs of its audience. Quite some time back, I’d written about the ‘news’ and ‘groups’ features, and had asked for an RSS feature for groups. That feature was incorporated earlier this year, but I thought there were several other possibilities which could’ve been incorporated, specifically in company web pages – multimedia support, aggregation etc. My benchmark of comparison was Social Median (acquired by Xing, a competitor to LinkedIn). I’d also wondered if it’d make sense for LinkedIn to perhaps acquire or at least have an association with Yammer.

    Just when I was ready to give up on LinkedIn’s possibilities (completely agreed with this), they seem to have caught a new wind. First came the redesign, with significantly better navigation, a cleaner look and lesser scrolling!! And then came the sync that everyone had been waiting for. Twitter was Linked #in (or#li) with an option to selectively share tweets on LinkedIn. Good timing, I’d say, judging by a few studies. A Palo Alto Networks study stated that enterprise usage of twitter was up by 250% in 6 months. (FB at 192%) Another report (can be classified as dipstick from the number of responses) , by the 2.0 Adoption council, seemed to indicate that social computing was making its presence felt in the enterprise.

    Most importantly, LinkedIn finally opened up its platform to developers. Bring on the apps!! (no, not Link farm ville šŸ˜ ) RWW has a good post on the good and bad news and a few possibilities. Tweetdeck, Posterous, Ribbit, JobDASH, Box.net, all have integrations happening. The wishlists have started too. As RWW mentions, a ‘people you might know from other networks’ and filtered status updates would be great. Sandeep Gautam has a ‘Follow Friday’ like mechanism and @mentions in status updates in his list.

    On that note, I wonder whether the sync would mean that the twitter system of hashtags would become popular on LinkedIn, and a status search would find a place among the current crop of searches available on LinkedIn. An open platform would indicate that LinkedIn updates could appear on outside search. Also (like FB Connect) people would be able to interact with a site using their LinkedIn account, and the content could be taken to LinkedIn.

    A few twitter tools whose LinkedIn version I’d like to see –

    • Mr.Tweet (recommendation to connect) basis current network, interests etc
    • Alerts – not just recruiter, people and events that currently exist, but more options
    • Twitturly – to track the URLs that are being talked about
    • Trends (which might initially be a subset of Twitter trends?)
    • Twitter lists + Groups – It would require identification of Twitter list members on LinkedIn and then an option to add list members – create new groups/ add to existing groups

    The two places where I hope for a lot of action are groups and Company Pages. With an open platform, an integration of delicious and friendfeed can’t be ruled out. Company (and UGC šŸ˜€ ) videos and photos via YouTube and Flickr? And while we’re at it I’d like to have LinkedIn in the Google Reader ‘Send to’ (officially) and in future the option to choose a group/page with which a particularĀ  link can be shared.

    With the integration of twitter and an open platform, LinkedIn has the content and context to provide better interaction between the various stakeholders of the enterprise – employees, vendors, business partners and even consumers. I see a lot of potential for LinkedIn to become a key player in the social business design (a Dachis Group concept) we keep talking about these days. Let’s hope to see more updates soon. šŸ™‚

    until next time, business tweets šŸ™‚

  • Aftermath…..

    ‘Intrigued’ might seem an insensitive word, but as the nation observed the first anniversary of 26/11 last week, I was intrigued by the reactions of different segments towards it. Bloggers, microbloggers, all forms of media, brands, everyone had a take on it, and their own ideas. Yes, nobody forgot, but this is year 1. Doesn’t count.

    I got few mails asking me for my opinions on everything from government apathy to the twitterverse on 26/11 – the POV of a blogger. I hardly had any, and whatever I had, I usually share here, like this. (my views haven’t changed) But I had been thinking about my feelings on the day, and what, to others, and perhaps even a part of me, might seem to be apathy, until I read this well written post. (thanks to Balu) And that set me thinking on standards and ‘Who decides?’, and then on to a tangent.

    Who decides what is to be done and how?

    A nation is formed. Its popular leaders, elected by the people, decide the way the country should be run. From sectors that should be open to private investment to tax slabs and from infrastructure to relationships with neighbouring countries, a few individuals, representative, some would argue, steer the fate of the country. In a few years, the policies and processes set up to aid the smooth functioning of the conduit – between the representatives and the represented- starts to work against this desired objective, because the balance of power between the objective and the processes have shifted. In a few more years, even the objectives which should have perhaps been reviewed, have been taken a step further, and promptly forgotten.

    Humans get together and aggregate, communities are formed, communities agglomerate, society is formed (in the original usage, not the housing kind :|) The society builds in conformation. Even with the non conforming kind, there is an understanding. Belief systems evolve, religions are formed, and rules are made. Do’s and don’t s are established in societies and sub societies. Popular culture is created and social ethos are formed. In a few years, the reasons for why things are done, and in the way they are, get forgotten, a mindless following ensues. Non conformists emerge, but then, we’ve been there before. Trading one system for another.

    A few people get together and form an organisation, knowing that they can create a better product/service than the places they have been working in. The founders have a vision for their work place, they set up systems and processes to achieve this, they hire more people, who can implement these. In a few years, a conglomerate is formed, the founders are at the top of the heap, there is a new breed that manages daily affairs, the process diktats are in place…. you know where I am going with thisĀ  šŸ™‚

    In all these cases, there would probably be a disruption at the end, and the start of a new cycle. It is what seems to be expected. In general, nations will sit up and take collective notice only when they are themselves under attack. The travails of another city, much less country are viewed only through the prism of how it would affect us. Society will take up cudgels when they feel a threat to the status quo. Those in power will want to retain it. Organisations collapse when they are unable to see macro changes and lack the foresight to adapt. When they begin to get affected, and they react, in many cases, its too little too late.

    The common factor is the LCD, no, not the screen kind, the kind you learned in primary school – lowest common denominator – the human. Recently, when taking some personal decisions, I tried watching my own mind work, drilling down from the seemingly obvious reasons to the unstated ones, and from there, down to the foundations of why i thought the way I did, and therefore did the things I did. Belief systems, created and maintained by experiences, peer metrics etc, and thought structures, the changes to which were only superficial with time (contrary to expectations), they were all there, with the reasons buried under multiple layers built over time. My experiences, my perspectives, so I decide, on hindsight, objectivity was perhaps impossible.Ā  Autopilot. This is perhaps what gets reflected in everything that I am part of – organisations, society, nation.

    The realisation was pretty simple. Standards and decisions are on auto pilot, though they seem otherwise. Humans. Us. Living in bubbles, deciding objectives and setting up structures to get there, and then forgetting why.Ā  Even when I think I am deciding, what is deciding for me is the baggage of the past.

    I thought of the poor souls in Leopold, Taj, Nariman House on that fateful day….who till then had built a structure and process to their life. Is that what it takes to get one out of autopilot? A cataclysmic moment – the moment when beliefs and structures scarily slip away, and the illusion of control becomes exactly that – an illusion. In the aftermath, calculated scenarios mostly don’t count.

    until next time, deciding the questions

  • (Non) User Generated Content

    World AIDS Day – a humble contribution

    condom

    Much to the brand’s credit, they RT ed my work, on Twitter.

    And that little stunt led to the image being viewed some 2000+ times and my 15 seconds of fame as India’s most popular twitterer for a brief few hours, thanks to more than a 100 RTs from the twitterati. I also got a Samsung Galaxy from Tata Docomo. Ok, I made that last one up. :}

    Twitterer #1

    Yes, yes, don’t worry, I’ll still be posting here :p

  • A Dunbar’s number for brands?

    Seth Godin had a very good take on the Dunbar Number recently in the context of connections made on Twitter and Facebook. (Wikipedia: Dunbar’s Number is a theoretical cognitive limit to the number of people with whom one can maintain stable social relationships. No precise value has been proposed for Dunbar’s number, but a commonly cited approximation is 150) Godin was of the opinion that “You might be able to stretch to 200 or 400, but no, you can’t effectively engage at a tribal level with a thousand people.”

    A few months back, I’d written a post wondering whether smaller organisations were better placed to use social media effectively. This was based on a post by Chris Brogan. Smaller organisations with a flatter structure, and a culture more open to ideas. In that post, I’d questioned whether ideas becoming products/services and then further on brands, meant that the large audiences developed by brands would dictate the kind of communication used, and if mass media one way messaging became easier then. Also, I’d wondered whether larger organisations could handle the empowerment required to work in a social media environment.

    When I read the post by Godin, I wondered if there was a Dunbar number for brands, dictated by the number of peopleĀ  the brand can connect with- internally as well as externally? There are two things I read recently which added to the thought. One was the idea of the Intention Economy (via Surekha) which “grows around buyers” and is “about markets, not marketing”, and which is builts beyond transactions alone – conversations, reputation, authority, respect all of which are earned by the sellers and buyers. This is a provisional idea, the other is a report from 360i (via Mashable) which states that “that a majority of social media search listings that appear for brand-related queries are created by individuals not affiliated with the brand”, an increasing trend.

    Meanwhile, another interesting thought occured to me when I read Jeremiah’sĀ  post on #OperationBlueWater – where he proposes sharing one’s personal goal plan with online and offline social networks to help people achieve it. I wondered if organisations could ever approach this scenario- not so much as an objective, but the openness and the willingness to share and collaborate along the journey.

    With or without Dunbar’s number, brands would have to involve either consumers or employees (ideally both) to thrive in a ‘social’ world. If its employees, it means hiring people who are passionate about the stuff they’re working with. Yes, the communication has always been that way, maybe the virtual and social forces will make it happen in reality. As for consumers, in most mass advertising, we have been seeing for sometime now, what Godin describes as “politician’s glassy-eyed gaze or the celebrity’s empty stare”

    until next time, social goal setting šŸ™‚

  • Progress report

    One of the most memorable parts of the Andaman trip was the conversation I had with D, on the day we went aimlessly walking on the promenade. The conversation also seemed to understand the mood and was in its own way, aimless. As i wrote in one ofĀ the posts, I am fascinated by night lights, especially by the sea shore. It reminds me of Cochin, and sends waves of nostalgia at me.

    The entire trip had also made me wonder about human ‘progress’ and the motivation behind it. In a few minutes, the conversation that began there navigated itself to individual motivations. The comparisons with the Leh trip that I’d madeĀ  a couple of hours before at Corbyn were still fresh in my mind. I had set expectations for this trip even before i started out – expectations not based on any previous trip to Andaman, but on previous vacations. I thought loudly on what these expectations were – the beauty of the place? the feelings the place and people evoked in us? a getaway from the daily grind? A new setting and a scope for ‘discovery’? Comfortable stay, good food? Probably any or all of these. Anyway the expectations were set.

    And then D brought up one unacknowledged aspect – our projection of how wonderful the trip was, best characterised by the photos we share on FB and other private albums. (earlier, family gatherings and conversations) Isn’t that an expectation in itself – a proof of good times? Sometimes for ourselves, sometimes for others. I thought that was a good place to start understanding our motivation.

    From childhood, when we had richer cousins/friends flaunting their better toys, or showing us snaps of places they’d been to, or talking about the wonderful food they’ve eaten, a kind of motivation existed – to match better that at some point in the future. A driving force that dictated the choices made in life, which justified the ‘sacrifices’ made. Study hard to get better grades, to get a better job, to make more money and to finally get all the things that the cousins/friends had, even if it was a couple of decades late,Ā  all the stuff that can be a justification for what is (in a sense) euphemistically called the rat race. And then to look back at the proof of achievement and let out an audible sigh of accomplishment.

    The problem arises perhaps not from being a rat even at the end of the race, but probably the realisation that a personal motivation got subverted into a generic rat race, which then became a motivation in itself. The rest of the life story would depend on the stance towards the original motivation. In many cases, the race stops, the baggage is dropped and a path of ‘self discovery’ is started.

    In my personal map, this is the place where I see a ‘You are here’ sign. I would’ve been happy with this, if I hadn’t realised that it has the same ending as the rat race. The path is different, and because there are no obvious indicators like the rat race, I have to evolve my own set of indicators. But the desired end is the same, simplistically put, personal growth, with previously decided benchmarks. The consolation offered is that it was reached on one’s own terms. I wonder, is it really one’s own terms if the destination is no different?

    Ayn Rand said “Man’s ego is the fountainhead of human progress”. Human progress, not just from a humankind perspective – the places and things he builds, but a deeply personal one too, as the ‘ego’ would indicate. I was conscious of this when I shared the Andaman photos, conscious that somewhere, someone was setting a benchmark and the beginning of a race, just like I had, and continue to do, even outside the rat race. And I wonder whether I’ve really replaced one rat race with another in my case. And I still continue to wonder about ‘progress’.

    until next time, progress cards with my own signature :]