Tag: Web

  • Password…protected?

    I sometimes end up passively watching ‘Moment of Truth’ – passively because it plays in the background while I’m surfing on the web. In the beginning I used to have a healthy disrespect for not just those who indulged in spilling out details of their life (mostly of the skeletal variety found in cupboards) but those whose voyeuristic inclinations made them watch it intensely.

    But now, it has also made me wonder about the almost cyclical nature of transparency. Wasn’t there a state when everyone knew everything about everyone else? Or, rather, one protoplasmic entity with a single consciousness? And then it evolved slowly until everyone had secrets. And now we have people willing to reveal their secrets for money. Of course, it doesn’t take us back to the original level, but still…

    In a comparable context, sometime back, there was also an interesting discussion on twitter, on privacy issues on the web, and people getting to know passwords. Like i said there, I’d classify these password hunters into basically two types – one for whom your identity is just another information source – banking passwords, credit card details etc, this guy wouldn’t be interested in  say, your clandestine relationships; two would be the guy who knows you personally and would like to really like to find something personal about you via your virtual life.

    Do we fear the second kind more than the first kind? Because he will break the persona that we have built over the years, in front of others, show them what we are beneath the veneer, and more importantly force us to face ourselves? Isn’t that the reason we are so jittery about privacy. It can’t be just the fear that he might use our accounts for something bad. When I look at it objectively, personal accounts (mail, blogging, social networks etc) are just data- data that we might choose not to share, what we call personal data. But what exactly do we mean by personal? Isn’t it just something, that if told to someone else would shame us to some extent? Isn’t that what we are trying to protect? Or am I missing something? What really is privacy?

    I really wonder if these privacy issues will somehow (in the long run) force us to have characters that are more spotless, a sort of utopian existence, when people are so transparent to each other, that there will be no reason or room for secrets? I think it’s possible, you?

    until next time, translucent lives

  • Organisational Chats

    There was a very interesting post over at WATBlog, on whether Indian companies should provide employees the freedom to engage online. The advice to organisations is to at least listen to the conversations happening about them, since these conversations will happen anyway. The solution the post offers is to use prolific users of social media as brand evangelists. It reminded me of an earlier post on the evolution of the brand manager. And I agree almost completely to the WAT post.

    Almost, because, I lean quite a bit towards extreme transparency, and am of the opinion that it’s not just the evangelists who should be online and doing their bit, it should be the whole damn system.  Why not only the evangelists? Evangelists, to me are slightly utopian styled creatures, who love transparency, and organisations, which are just giving this whole conversation idea a customary spin, might have a problem dealing with it. There are two options then – the evangelist gets ‘corrupted’,  (I’d hate compromised use of social media) or he refuses to conform. In the second scenario, the organisation will strive for ‘control’, and the evangelist will be sacked, but what if the whole system is doing it? Which is one of the reasons why I think organisations will fight this thought. But there might be hope yet, check out Unilever’s efforts in this direction.

    There’s a great argument here on candour at the workplace, it also gives some interesting links. That last link looks at a ‘getting to know you’ level before complete transparency. The article calls this tact, and I have a problem with that too. It is precisely these kinds of convenient gray areas that led to white lies, which in turn spawned the complete opacity that we see around now.

    Meanwhile, there’s something else that might be forcing organisations- Users/Customers. Because once the conversation about the organisations, which will happen with or without their assistance, reaches a deafening pitch, it might force them to listen. To quote from this neat post on Enterprise 2.0, “when the irresistible force of social media hits the immovable force of a traditional enterprise, it makes a loud noise”. The last part of this post also throws light on this.

    And hey, its not any favor that the organisation is doing. In the long run, this will only help the organisation’s equity from an HR and Brand perspective. As talent sourcing becomes even more difficult, this might be the edge that an organisation can get.

    The earlier generation of organisations did not  ban the water cooler though it was reputed to be the source of a lot of conversations. Lets hope today’s organisations can look at the internet in a similar way, recognise that their employees are simultaneously part of not just their workplace, but a larger world outside, in which reside the organisation’s stakeholders and think carefully on how it makes sense to let their employees talk to the world at large.

    until next time, break the walls down

  • Stuck in a web

    I happened to read this a while back, and this recently, and finally, the presentation below
    While the last two are quite obviously connected, the first one is too, albeit in a round about way.
    Having worked now for over 4 years in a brand role, out of which at least 2 have involved quite some work in the online space, i tend to agree with what Mr.Desai says, especially this part, “The real problem is our mental model of the brand. We see it as a fortress which we must defend against all interlopers.”
    I have seen this in all the 3 brands i have worked on, and this is exactly why internet marketing is still in its infancy stage in India. In fact, even among the brands that do some stuff in the space, a majority are those who make internet strategy decisions on an excel sheet as part of the media plan – print – x lakhs, outdoor-y lakhs, internet- z lakhs. Nothing wrong with this, except that the strategy ends up as an adaptation of the print/outdoor creative, and the activity on the web is limited to that.
    And the next step, if it happens – in the typical knee-jerk reactions that are a regular sight everywhere, the CEO ‘discovers’ blogging, and wants someone to start a corporate blog, without even pausing to think what is going to be done there and whether it is sustainable. I know at least one example. 🙂
    The problem is in ‘letting go’. Brands and brand managers cannot come to terms with it, and are still stuck in a web that refuses to look outward except for the token market research, and we all know how that gets done. Ask the creative guys in agencies and they’ll tell you horror stories of subjective likes and dislikes being thrust upon them, not just those, but whims and desires, as well. And one of the mandatory things to go online is the understanding that you will get some brickbats and your brand will be tossed around. The key is in dealing with it, and converting that into a better consumer experience. Are you game for that challenge? The answer, in most corporates (from what i’ve seen, and maybe i haven’t seen enough) would be a resounding no!!
    Knowing the RGB configuration of the brand takes 2 minutes of mugging up, but understanding the dna of the brand and working on it is a different ballgame, and if there are consumers willing to help, i wonder why brand guys have difficulty in accepting it.
    and i bid adieu, brandishing my love for the internet 🙂