Joshua-Michéle Ross

photo_josh_m.jpgJosh has spent over 10 years consulting on digital business strategy.

His focus over the last four years has been on applying Web 2.0 principles to deliver competitive advantage (from new business model development to customer engagement and communication strategies). Mr. Ross has been a guest lecturer at Harvard University and has spoken at conferences related to technology and digital strategy around the world. Past clients include Washington Mutual, Accenture, Best Buy, Autodesk, and Polycom.

Joshua holds a degree with honors in Chinese Studies from the University of California, Santa Cruz.

Josh已经投身数字化商业战略咨询领域十多年了。

他过去四年的重点放在应用Web 2.0原理来产生竞争优势(包括从新商业模式开发到客户开发与沟通战略)。Ross先生是哈佛大学客座讲师,在世界各地与技术和数字化战略相关的会议上作演讲。曾经的客户包括Washington Mutual、Accenture、Best Buy、Autodesk和Polycom。

Joshua有加州大学圣克鲁斯分校的中文研究荣誉学位。

Architecture is Destiny: A Tale of Two Cities and Lessons for the Social Business

Joshua-Michéle Ross @jmichele 2010-03-20

About three years ago my wife and I made the rash (and wise) decision to buy a 17th century home in Southwestern France . Puy L’Eveque is a 13th century medieval town situated on a hill overlooking the Lot River. Its narrow streets all lead upward to the summit - where the Mairie (the mayor’s office) and the church occupy the high ground (Puy L’Eveque translates as “Bishops Hill”). It is beautiful in the way of most towns built to withstand the long-passed threat of siege. But Puy L’Eveque is unmistakably struggling. Its shops are anemic and situated between empty storefronts. Its farmer’s markets and vidi greniers are lean affairs and it recently canceled its yearly medieval festival. It’s population still remains below pre-World War One levels. From the tourist office brochure:

“In 1880 the community consisted of 2950 inhabitants, boasted 4 hotels, 6 bars, 9 café’s, a mounted brigade of gendarmes, a charity office, a city toll booth, a ferry-boat at Escafignoux, a flour mill and a suspension bridge! The 1999 census registered 2159 inhabitants.”

Three kilometers away lies the rather bland town of Prayssac; with ancient roots but clearly developed in the 19th century. Lying on the flat plain of the Lot valley, its nothing special to behold but its cafes, markets and festivals are bustling. It was something of a mystery to us when we moved here.

Why is picturesque Puy L’Eveque struggling while Prayssac thrives?

This is the topic of many dinner discussions among the expatriates here. Usually the blame is laid at the hands of incapable administrators. I believe the problem goes deeper. It is a question of architecture and urban planning. Puy L’Eveque’s siege architecture just isn’t built for the modern age. It’s positioning on a hillside was chosen for its unassailability. The medieval town privileges control of all traffic (human and material) with choke points at top and bottom. Until very recently there was a single, one-way street leading up to the summit; a stoplight at top and bottom alternated the flow of traffic - for five minutes traffic led upward - the next five minutes, down. The prime vantage points are held by church and state. Puy L’Eveque is lovely but it is relic of the past: privilege of place, control from the top, constricted material flows, and strict regulation of its borders.

Prayssac makes no such assumptions or attempt to control - people and goods move freely in and out of its borders. Prayssac is a social town - it welcomes outsiders. Its hierarchies form naturally through assembly at any of a number of town squares and the town dissolves naturally into the surrounding countryside. There are no fortress walls. The Mairie and Church are discreetly nestled amidst the other edifices.

In short, Puy L’Eveque was not architected for the modern world where goods and people follow an accelerated flow… where commerce privileges open exchange and more porous, natural borders between town and countryside. The very thing that made Puy L’Eveque thrive in the 14th century makes it hard to survive in the 21st; its architecture.

Many of our 20th century behemoths resemble Puy L’Eveque . They are closed fortresses with strict, forbidding hierarchies. While information flow outside has radically accelerated (everyone has a real-time broadcast tower) the modern organization is marked by glacial response times and chokeholds on who is an “authorized” spokesperson. The world is divided between those inside (employees) with very fixed roles and responsibilities and those “outside” (everyone else) who can’t be trusted.

Hendrik Hertzberg’s insightful comment on healthcare as a by-product of the system of legislation rather than Obama, Nancy Pelosi or even (or especially) Joe Lieberman, provides a lesson not just for government but for business on how architecture is destiny:

"The American government has its human aspects—it is staffed by human beings, mostly—but its atomized, at-odds-with-itself legislative structure (House and Senate, each with its arcane rules, its semi-feudal committee chairs, and its independently elected members, none of whom are accountable or fully responsible for outcomes) makes it more like an inanimate object."

We tend to blame people and let architecture off the hook. But the structures we live within shape our behavior and govern what is possible just as the physical architecture of our towns both emerge from and reinforce the way we see world.

As the social norms set by the Social Web - openness, sharing, participation, become the norms of business (this to me is the key insight behind the new term “social business”) and as the information flow outside accelerates, organizations will need rethink their structures. They will need to think about whether or not they are designed like Puy L’Eveque or Prayssac.

Architecture is destiny.

Roger Magoulas on Big Data

Joshua-Michéle Ross @jmichele 2010-01-15

Subscribe to this video podcast via iTunes.

From Google to Walmart, managing vast information flows is becoming central to how you run an effective business. Beyond the technical developments that are allowing for new possibilities in managing Big Data there are also new roles emerging within companies large and small; data scientists, visualization specialists etc.

In this second of two videos Roger discusses some exemplars in the emerging field of Big Data. From the Radar community: are there any unlikely companies (read: outside of tech) that are doing a great job in managing Big Data or using analytics to drive their business? We would love to hear about them.

Part one of the video is available here.

Roger will be moderating a panel this Tuesday, January 19 at Stanford titled, “Data Exhaust Alchemy - Turning the Web's Waste into Solid Gold”

Understanding Social Business - Webcast

Joshua-Michéle Ross @jmichele 2010-01-07

The term, "Social Business" has been gaining currency over the past year among influential thinkers such as Stowe Boyd, Jeff Dachis, Peter Kim, and Jeremiah Owyang. At its broadest definition Social Business describes the systemic challenges and new opportunities social technologies present to organizations.

I have been writing for some time that organizations needs to "get" social in ways that go well beyond marketing gimmicks or pushing press releases through Twitter. It is a different approach to doing business.

So I am excited to announce that I will be moderating an O'Reilly panel discussion with Boyd (Principal, The /Messengers), Kim (Managing Director at Dachis Group) and Owyang (Partner, Altimeter Group) on January 14 to discuss:

  • What is the definition of Social Business?
  • How can Social Business impact strategy, design, technology and customer experience?
  • Who are the leading exemplars?

The panel will leave plenty of time for audience Q+A.

From the Radar audience I would love to hear about any questions you would like to see addressed.

You can sign up for the webcast here.

Airline Security and Proportional Response

Joshua-Michéle Ross @jmichele 2010-01-02

I am flying to London this coming week on business. I have no idea if I will be able to use my laptop, emerge from my seat during the last hour of flight or be required to wear my underwear inside-out during the security check-in. Do I believe that any of these measures will contribute to passenger safety? No.

After the recent foiled airline bomb incident one thing seems clear; we are constantly retrofitting our security measures to defend ourselves against the last attack. Often these measures seem like what Bruce Schneier in a great CNN article calls "Security Theater"

"Security theater" refers to security measures that make people feel more secure without doing anything to actually improve their security.
What seems equally true is that the media has ginned up a national hysteria over the incident that leads much of the senseless government action. In the wake of blanket coverage officials are pushed to show a proportional response... the more hand-wringing the more actions need to be taken regardless of whether those actions have any salutary effect. Most of the criticism that I have seen has been leveled at politicians lacking leadership.

Schneier concludes

The best way to help people feel secure is by acting secure around them. Instead of reacting to terrorism with fear, we -- and our leaders -- need to react with indomitability, the kind of strength shown by President Franklin D. Roosevelt and Prime Minister Winston Churchill during World War II.
Amen. And yet it isn't people around me that I see freaking out. It is the media, followed in lock-step by politicians. One has to wonder if the United States of 2010 is capable of the kind of leadership Schneier is asking for. Are our politicians capable of leading when they can obtain personal advantage in either fear-mongering or finger-pointing? Is the media capable of leading without the histrionics that sell ratings?

I am flying to London this coming week but I won't feel any more secure - just a lot more inconvenienced.

Video: Roger Magoulas on The Next Device

Joshua-Michéle Ross @jmichele 2009-12-02

Subscribe to this video podcast via iTunes. Or, you may download the file.

I recently sat down with Roger Magoulas, Director of Research at O'Reilly to talk about what he is paying attention to these days. I thought we would do a single, quick segment for Radar. I was mistaken. I have broken out the interview into several parts and will release them weekly... Call it Wednesdays with Roger.

This episode touches on new devices that will shape how we work and get things done in the future including Pico projectors and OLED screens.

I would love to hear from people about what type of devices we should be paying attention to and why.

Three Paradoxes of the Internet Age - Part Three

Joshua-Michéle Ross @jmichele 2009-11-07

The myth of personal empowerment takes root amidst a massive loss of personal control.

Social technologies are cloaked in a rhetoric of liberation (customers are in control, the internet fosters democracy, social technologies propagate truth etc.) that tend to obscure the fact that never before have we handed so much personal information over in exchange for so little in return.

As we move from the “web of information” to the “web of people” (aka the Social Web) the output of all of this social participation is massive dossiers on individual behavior (your social network profiles, photos, location, status updates, searches etc.) and social activity. This loss of control over personal information is on a collision course with the law of unintended consequences: MIT’s Project Gaydar can spot your sexual preference by your social ties, Facebook checks are occurring customs and every quiz you take on Facebook delivers a shocking amount of personally identifiable information to third parties.

Amidst this barrage of good news for how much power we wield in the transaction of commerce one has to wonder if we are giving away something quite precious in the bargain.

Here are links to the previous posts in this series: One: More access to information doesn’t bring people together, often it isolates us. Two: Individual perception of increased choice can occur while the overall choice pool is getting smaller

What are other paradoxes of the Internet Age? What did I get wrong above?

Three Paradoxes of the Internet Age - Part Two

Joshua-Michéle Ross @jmichele 2009-11-05

Individual perception of increased choice can occur while the overall choice pool is getting smaller

This gem from Whimsley makes the point - with extensive statistical modeling supporting the argument - that our algorithm-obsessed, long tail merchants are actually depleting the overall choice pool despite the fact that as individuals we may be experiencing a sense of more choice through recommendations engines...

Online merchants such as Amazon, iTunes and Netflix may stock more items than your local book, CD, or video store, but they are no friend to "niche culture". Internet sharing mechanisms such as YouTube and Google PageRank, which distil the clicks of millions of people into recommendations, may also be promoting an online monoculture. Even word of mouth recommendations such as blogging links may exert a homogenizing pressure and lead to an online culture that is less democratic and less equitable, than offline culture.

In short, the long tail has gangrene at its extremity - the niche. More disarming is the conclusion that it isn't just the output of our recommendation algorithms that is leading to what the author calls "monopoly populism"and the end of niche culture:
"The recommender "system" could be anything that tends to build on its own popularity, including word of mouth...Our online experiences are heavily correlated, and we end up with monopoly populism...A "niche", remember, is a protected and hidden recess or cranny, not just another row in a big database. Ecological niches need protection from the surrounding harsh environment if they are to thrive. Simply putting lots of music into a single online iTunes store is no recipe for a broad, niche-friendly culture.

The network effects that so characterize Internet services are a positive feedback loop where the winners take all (or most). The issue isn't what they bring to the table, it is what they are leaving behind.
here is a link to yesterday's post: More access to information doesn’t bring people together, often it isolates us.
Tomorrow: The myth of personal empowerment takes root amidst a massive loss of personal control.

Three Paradoxes of the Internet Age - Part One

Joshua-Michéle Ross @jmichele 2009-11-04

In the circles that I travel the Internet is often breathlessly embraced as the herald of all things good; the bringer of increased choice, personal empowerment, social harmony...and the list goes on. And yet, as with any powerful technology, the truth of its consequences eludes such a singular and happy narrative.

Here is the first of three paradoxes of the Internet Age. I would love to see Radar readers point out others.

More access to information doesn’t bring people together, often it isolates us.

Elizabeth Kolbert has a piece in this week’s New Yorker reviewing Cass Sunstein’s new book, “On Rumors: How Falsehoods Spread, Why We Believe Them, What Can Be Done." In the review she lays out the concept of "group polarization"

People’s tendency to become more extreme after speaking with like-minded others has become known as “group polarization,” and it has been documented in dozens of other experiments. In one, feminists who spoke with other feminists became more adamant in their feminism. In a second, opponents of same-sex marriage became even more opposed to the idea, while proponents shifted further in favor. In a third, doves who were grouped with other doves became more dovish still.
The Internet is becoming a vast petri dish for the group polarization phenomena. As Sunstein puts it “The most striking power provided by emerging technologies,” is the “growing power of consumers to ‘filter’ what they see.” (Thanks to Jim Stogdill for surfacing this link via email)

Participant Sensing -An Interview with Deborah Estrin

Joshua-Michéle Ross @jmichele 2009-10-30


Subscribe to this video podcast via iTunes. Or, you may download the file.

While the iPhone doesn’t ship nearly as much as its humbler brethren - the iPhone opened up many minds about the potential of phones to do a whole lot more than talk. In that regard it is a peek into the future.

The iPhone is a rich portable computer with onboard sensors. Specifically, it is a location-aware (GPS), motion-aware (accelerometer), directionally-aware (digital compass) visually aware (camera being used to scan QA codes or serve as visual input), sonically aware (microphone and speakers), always-connected (wireless or 3Gs) handheld computer. Every operative word in that sentence is deeply meaningful and rich with possibilities we have just begun to explore. The iPhone does a whole lot more than display information. It is an environmental sensor.Its value lies just as much in sensing information as it does in displaying information.

While the iPhone has the richest set of onboard sensors even basic feature phones are allowing for some remarkable innovation (see my interview with April Allderdice of MicroEnergy Credits) This is an enormous leap forward when our devices are not only connected but context-aware. It is a core theme behind Tim O’Reilly and John Battelle’s “Web Squared” definition that see concepts of Web 2.0 moving into the world.

This concept of “humans as sensors” was the subject of the Web 2.0 Summit panel led by Radar’s Brady Forrest last week. I caught up with panelist Deborah Estrin before to discuss her UCLA group’s work on participatory sensing. Deborah is building multiple applications to express the value of the phone as a sensing device; from large group projects to collect data on an area (such as www.whatsinvasive.com) to personal applications that blend GPS and accelerometer to constantly map your location in time and space then overlay valuable information upon it such as air quality and so on. In the case of air quality - this data might help inform your decisions about where you go jogging or take your baby for that morning stroll.

John Hagel on The Social Web

Joshua-Michéle Ross @jmichele 2009-10-24


Subscribe to this video podcast via iTunes. Or, you may download the file.

I am releasing my conversation with John Hagel in three segments. In the first segment we discussed the real-time web. Here we discuss the move from the information web to the Social Web.

John makes the point that the rise of the Social Web feels “a bit like Back to the Future” for people who have a long history with the Internet. In the early days the Internet functioned to link people - scientists, researchers etc. The advent of the World Wide Web saw the Internet functioning more as a publishing platform. Now, with the Social Web, we are back full circle to a network that connects people together. When you connect people to people (as opposed to just brokering information) you are able to surface valuable tacit knowledge that is difficult to express in documents.

Abandon Stocks, Embrace Flows - A Conversation with John Hagel

Joshua-Michéle Ross @jmichele 2009-10-23


Subscribe to this video podcast via iTunes. Or, you may download the file.

John Hagel spoke yesterday at the Web 2.0 Summit on the panel, Web Squared and the Economy of Work

I met with John beforehand and wanted to discuss three “Big Shifts” that have dominated 2009 (1) The move to the real-time web, (2) the move from the information web to the Social Web and (3) the rise of mobile. Since John co-chairs Deloitte’s Center for the Edge I wanted to get his take on each in terms of its impact on larger organizations.

This first video covers the Real-Time Web.

Only Connect - Should Broadband Access Be a Right?

Joshua-Michéle Ross @jmichele 2009-10-17

Finland has announced that it will guarantee broadband access as a right for all its citizens:

Starting next July, every person in Finland will have the right to a one-megabit broadband connection, says the Ministry of Transport and Communications. Finland is the world's first country to create laws guaranteeing broadband access. The government had already decided to make a 100 Mb broadband connection a legal right by the end of 2015. On Wednesday, the Ministry announced the new goal as an intermediary step.
Second, Yochai Benkler and the Berkman Center released a study of broadband Internet transitions and policy. A global review of how connected various countries are - and the policies that have performed well to stimulate connectivity, both in-home and mobile. While the U.S. has over 7 billion in stimulus dollars going toward improvements in rural broadband, money isn't the same as policy, and it is hard to dispute that we have fallen behind:
On those few measures where we have reasonably relevant historical data, it appears that the United States opened the first decade of the 21st centuries in the top quintile in penetration and prices, and has been surpassed by other countries over the course of the decade.
Benkler makes it clear that government policy has played a role in our decline. The U.S. began lagging as soon as the FCC abandoned it's position of "open access" and allowed telecom companies to lock down networks. (see page 12 of the report).

As our economy continues to lose mass in favor of information-based goods (U.S. exports lost 50% of their physical weight per dollar from 1993 to 1999*) and we continue to see the decoupling of workforce from workplace, connectivity is a critical factor in economic exchange and competitive advantage. Countries that build wide, fast networks to the last mile will have a huge leg up.

If government works best when it creates the conditions that allow citizens the maximum opportunity to succeed, two things seem clear. First, broadband access is a key piece of infrastructure and a necessary condition to many new jobs and opportunities. Second, our policies should steer back towards open access to support that right. Benkler is pretty clear that countries running half a generation ahead of the US (Japan, Korea etc.) are doing so as a result of open access policies. Achieving these ends does not necessarily require the government to own (or pay for) the solution. As Benkler notes on page 13 "there are models of high performing countries, like France, that invested almost nothing directly, and instead relied almost exclusively on fostering a competitive environment."

On a personal note, I divide my time between the US and France and I can tell you, my French broadband (in a rural, medieval village mind you) crushes any corporate workplace connection in the US. What do you think? Should broadband access be considered a right? Is "universal connectivity" just too big a job? And what should government's policy-making role be in all of this?

A Conversation with Dr. Walter Scott of DigitalGlobe

Joshua-Michéle Ross @jmichele 2009-10-17

You may also download this file. Running time: 00:07:26

Dr Walter Scott founded Digital Globe - a company you are likely not familiar with though you probably interact with their satellite imagery on a regular basis via Google Maps, Bing and others.

WalterScott.jpg
It is only recently that mapping technology and production has been driven by mainly commercial interests especially in the area of satellite imagery. With this commercialization corporations and media have access to information that was once considered closely guarded state property.

The potential for social good - from assessing and responding to natural disasters, to exposing political issues such as prisoner camps, to finding out where Richard Serra is keeping his massive sculptures… is enormous. In this discussion we cover DigitalGlobe's business, the state of commercial satellite imagery and the advantage of commercial vs. government ownership of GIS data.

Dr Scott will be delivering a HighOrder Bit at the upcoming Web 2.0 Summit.

Real Time Search with Wowd: A Conversation with CEO Mark Drummond

Joshua-Michéle Ross @jmichele 2009-10-13

You may also download this file. Running time: 00:05:57

During last year's Summit I had the good fortune to interview Kevin Kelly (see Technology is the Seventh Kingdom of Life). In the interview Kevin made the case that we have only scratched the surface on how to coordinate group activities on the web: there must be hundreds of effective methods to run an auction, crowdsource products etc. We have only scratched the surface so why stop at eBay and Threadless?

MarkDrummond.jpgSo too in the area of search and discovery. As the web moves real-time, it exposes the limitations of reference based search. Wowd is among the new crop of companies looking to find ways to implement search and discovery in a real-time context.

While Google measures relevance based on PageRank and Digg measures topical relevance based on explicit user action (promoting pieces of news), Wowd is trying to measure attention across the web in real time. Attention can be an implicit indicator of interest and another form of harnessing collective intelligence.


Mark will be doing a High Order Bit on "A Conversational Approach to Search"at the upcoming Web 2.0 Summit.

Software for Civic Life: An Interview with Mike Mathieu of Frontseat.org

Joshua-Michéle Ross 2008-12-29




In this interview Mike Mathieu, founder of Frontseat.org, discusses how he is helping to build “software for civic life”. Using publicly available data and web services (many of their applications use S3 and EC2) Frontseat creates simple, highly functional tools like Walkscore (rating neighborhood walkability) and Countmore (helping students in the recent elections decide which state to cast their vote in). Mike is also behind obamaCTO where you can add your opinion and cast your vote for what the new CTO of the USA’s priorities should be.

With the recent election there has been a lot of talk and enthusiasm for the possibility of a more open, modern government that operates with transparency and makes data available for remixing by it’s citizens. People have their eye on government to change…This is a worthy goal to push for but don’t hold your breath. The government of the United States is a behemoth that, all told, employs 12 million people and is preternaturally territorial and risk averse…

Pressing government to change is necessary but is not the only bet we should place. Mike makes the point in this video that we don’t need to wait for data that can improve civic life or increase transparency in government.

If you know of other examples of citizens improving civic life that deserve mention, please share them in the comments.

Part one of this interview is available here.

Zappos: If You Are Great at Something - Let It Go... (Or Resell It)

Joshua-Michéle Ross 2008-12-22

ZapposInsights.jpg I am fascinated by what I see as Zappos' ongoing evolution from a simple, online retailer to a leading online innovator. A few months back I wrote about Zappos pioneering what I called “Experience Syndication" with their Powered by Zappos (PBZ) service. In brief, PBZ syndicates the end-to-end value of shopping with Zappos - from the online store experience to shipping, to returns, to the call center - everything. Clarks Shoes, Stuart Weitzman and many other online sites are providing a customer experience entirely syndicated by Zappos. Last night I saw CEO Tony Hsieh’s tweet about Zappos Insights - a paid membership site “that allows 'Fortune one million' companies to gain insights from the learnings of Zappos.com. The site will allow access to Zappos.com management and contacts and provide guidance and direct answers for user generated questions via video responses.” If PBZ syndicates the customer experience, Zappos Insights is syndicating the internal business experience; providing a window into the leadership and culture that has made Zappos such a successful business. What is so radical about this is the notion that Zappos is willing to let go of the very thing that makes them so exceptional. What other company would you like to see create a similar service?

Catch 22: Too Big To Fail, Too Big To Succeed

Joshua-Michele Ross 2008-12-07

Hat in hand the U.S. Auto Industry lined up for their slice of government aid and it appears as of this posting that they will get the money they are asking for. These titans spent years hiding behind the “free market” shibboleth when convenient (the market wants gas guzzling SUV’s) and when punished by that same market we hear that they are victims of factors outside their control and that they are “too big to fail.” It has become a hackneyed expression precisely because it summarizes the situation so well; this is the privatization of profit and the socialization of loss.

The very concept of “Too Big To Fail” points to a deeper truth: the U.S.’s auto industry does not operate within the “free market” at all. Far from it. As their moniker suggests, the “Big Three” are an oligopoly with a long record of eschewing innovation (electric cars, hybrids etc.), killing off alternatives like mass transit and bullying public policy (lobbying against CAFÉ standards, environmental and tax policies [Hummer owners get a $34K tax credit!], the threat of relocating factories etc.) all in an effort to conform the not so “free market” to its lumbering non-strategies of pursuing short-term profit.

Now that their short-term thinking has met with long-term reality we are faced with bailing them out. Fair enough. There are millions of jobs connected to the automobile industry. But do we now trust these same institutions to deliver and execute the plan for a sustainable U.S. transportation industry?

If these are the flaws of the industry, consider their current leadership; The CEOs of these failing behemoths flew in on corporate jets, asked for $25 billion dollars, brought literally not one shred of documentation on what they intended to do differently and couldn’t explain how they arrived at the 25 billion dollar figure in the first place. When asked if they would accept a $1 dollar per year salary (Iacoca style) in exchange responses from GM and Ford ranged from non-committal to sarcastic (“I don’t have a position on that today” - Rick Wagoner of GM, “I think I am OK where I am today.” Ford’s Alan Mulally who earns $22m per year).

Oligopolies like The Big Three thrive on standardization, scale and market manipulation - not innovation. It is precisely their structure, size and leadership DNA that I believe precludes them from any chance of successful innovation. So there is the Catch 22. They may be too big to fail - but they are too big, bloated and corrupt to succeed. If we are the taxpayers funding the bailout, what are the alternatives?

“Technology is the 7th Kingdom of Life” - A conversation with Kevin Kelly

Joshua-Michele Ross 2008-11-24

Kevin Kelly doesn’t need much in the way of introduction to Radar readers. He is a big thinker looking at the intersection of biology, technology and culture.

Kevin gave a great High Order Bit at the Web 2.0 Summit and I caught up with him afterward. This interview covers:

  • The impact of the web on our recent elections
  • The rich new possibilities for interaction and collaboration afforded by the web
  • The Wisdom of the Crowds vs. the Stupidity of the Mob
  • Technology is the 7th Kingdom of Life… looking into “what technology wants”


This last section (at 7mins 30 secs) is the deepest and most provocative. Kevin assumes the point of view of technology to assess its needs and wants. This line of inquiry leads to some surprising conclusions.

My favorite quote from the conversation: “We are the sexual organs of technology”
Indeed.

Online Communities: The Tribalization of Business

Joshua-Michele Ross 2008-11-12

Recently I spoke with Francois Gossieaux of Beeline Labs about the role of online communities in the enterprise. Francois has been evangelizing the learning gained from his recent study “The Tribalization of Business” (see here for the Slideshare presentation).

The interview is broken into three parts. Francois is a great storyteller, bringing case studies in to support nearly every point. Here are a few insights I took away from our conversation:

Community for community’s sake: most businesses begin planning a community with traditional objectives (lower support costs, drive innovation, increase customer loyalty etc.). On the Social Web this is the equivalent of entering a personal relationship with an ulterior motive (which never works out quite right). Businesses should begin with the question, “how can I satisfy the needs of this community?”- and then follow the community’s lead. Be open to the unexpected.

In my experience this is one of the hardest things for companies to get behind and relegates this kind of "enlightened" community effort to either top-level leadership or skunk works development. Middle management is typically the most reluctant to deviate from standard practice and place a bet on community for the community’s sake.

Communities require a social framework to thrive - most companies have a mindset that reflects the legal, contractual and hierarchical underpinnings of their business and carry these behaviors with them into the community. This informs their planning, measurement and how they encourage contribution. These incentives have little sway on the Social Web where the mindset is social and trust, reputation and relationship are big drivers of contribution. As Francois says, “The most successful communities occur when you tap into that social framework”

Consider stories as a success metric: While there is a fair amount in this interview about measurement - this was my favorite: A great anectdote about how one company views the stories that emerge from their community as a key metric of success. Great stories are inherently viral and can have a profound impact on decision making in an organization.

Think Bigger: Most large companies are satisfied to have small communities; basically bringing a focus group online. Doing so misses the potential of the online community to transform your business. Consider how Intuit is now embedding live community directly into their application - allowing users to seek help and get questions answered directly.

Transformative communities blur the lines between company and customer and portend a future where retail ecommerce sites go well beyond ratings and reviews and provide problem solving, shopping mentors, product development and other services directly from the community. Where internet sites are co-evolved (from interface to feature-sets to codebase) in cooperation with community, where complex applications (desktop and cloud-based) meld standard functions with community functions. Communities are certainly helpful in providing feedback on customer behavior but that is just one small part of the story.

Technology, Politics and Democracy

Joshua-Michele Ross 2008-10-20

Recently I spoke with Jascha Franklin-Hodge, CTO and co-founder of Blue State Digital about how technology is affecting politics and democracy in the U.S.

Blue State Digital was born out of Jascha's experience helping Howard Dean’s seminal run for the White House in ’04. and is the technology and strategic services company powering Barack Obama (and many other Democratic leaders and social justice causes like Save Darfur and We Can Solve It).

These videos (there are three total) are timely in light of the staggering September figures from the Obama campaign:

  • 630,000 new donors (bringing total donors to 3.1 million)
  • 150 million dollars raised
  • Average contribution: $86

Here are a few observations I took away from our conversation:

Online U.S. political communities will morph from a campaign fundraising role to a governing role. Regardless of whether Obama or McCain wins in November, every 2012 political campaign, even the laggards, will be as sophisticated as Obama is today- and any campaign with that much momentum won’t be able to stop community participation at the White House door or the Capitol steps (“thanks for all the money and support, I‘ll see you in four years”). Online communities will follow politicians into their governing roles. This summer when MyBarackObama experienced the FISA revolt within his own community this became clear. This has far more transformative potential than the fundraising juggernaut we are seeing now. Powerful communities may come to dominate the agenda of incumbent politicians providing feedback, direction and policy input.

Microcampaigns and Swarm Politics: Rather than one centrally governed behemoth, MyBO is enabling a thousand small campaigns to flourish. MyBO puts the tools into the hands of anyone that wants to get active; from having your own blog, downloading voter lists to make calls with “Neighbor to Neighbor” or having your own fundraising dashboard to mark your progress. This kind of swarm politics has generated enormous amounts of energy (and money) from ordinary citizens. Jascha sums it up best “We are helping them run thousands and thousands of little local campaigns that roll up to a central set of issues or candidate or goal” That is unbelievably powerful.

Technology (infrastructure and know-how) will become a necessary core competence in all U.S. political campaigns. Jascha points out that campaigns traditionally mirror movie productions, with all of the resources, technology and logistics brought together for a short burst of activity and then disappearing once the final scene is shot; this results in an enormous loss of knowledge and skills that need to be relearned once the next campaign begins. Campaigns that maintain or are able to tap into a continuity of software, infrastructure and human capital will have serious advantage. Blue State Digital was conceived to fill that gap on the Democratic side of the aisle…

Open Data and transparent government. Part Three of the video series digs into the value of open data in government to allow citizens to hack and remix at will. When lobbyist data, earmark data etc. is available in standard formats it will be a great leap forward for more transparency in government. Great stuff.

Thanks to Brady for putting me in touch with B.S.D. and thanks to Jascha for taking the time to talk.

Wikitecture - Radical Collaboration in Architecture

Joshua-Michele Ross 2008-10-16

Many of the precepts that began with Open Source (collaboration, shared IP, crowdsourcing etc.) are migrating from software development into a series of ever more surprising disciplines. Today old-school institutions like Proctor and Gamble go outside of their own R&D teams to innovate new products while Best Buy opens APIs to allow outside developers to build on their catalog data.

Now here comes “Wikitecture”; applying these precepts to the very complex process of designing buildings. I want to dig into some of the details of Wikitecture and summarize what I think it has to teach us about collaboration.

My friend Jon Brouchoud is the co-founder of Studio Wikitecture, a group dedicated to bringing collaboration into the architectural process. He and Ryan Schultz have been pioneering "Wikitecture" for the past two years using Second Life as a proving ground.

Recently Studio Wikitecture won Architecture for Humanity’s Founders Award for their submission; a health facility in Nepal. There were over 500 entrants to the contest. Many of Studio Wikitecture’s contributors (roughly 40) were not architects but each brought specific, local knowledge that benefitted the project. A few examples:

  • Adobe and gabion wall construction was suggested as among the most viable design material given the exact (and remote) location and the ability to utilize local labor. Other materials would not only cost more but could even be prohibitive in terms of shipping into the area.
  • In Nepal an odd number of steps is considered inauspicious so all stair plans were designed for even numbers.

Jon told me that Wikitecture achieved a level of depth and detail in research that would be extraordinarily difficult and time consuming for one firm to manage alone. This gets to the first benefit of Wikitecture; it brings local knowledge into the design process. This video shows the building process:

As for how Wikitecture handles the more subjective task of reaching consensus on designs, Jon and Ryan developed a tool they call the "Wiki Tree," a 3D version control and voting system that uses a tree metaphor. As designers create submissions they are displayed as a new leaf on the tree that is then made available to the rest of the community to review. Positive votes on that design "green" the leaf, votes against the design turn the leaf red. Red leaves eventually fall off the tree as the tree prunes itself over time, leaving only the more popular design ideas as options for further development. The result is a visual display of design builds, enabling participants to assess, vote, comment and contribute toward the project's design evolution. This gets to the second benefit of Wikitecture; it uses a structured process to ensure quality collaboration. This video highlights some aspects of the Wiki Tree functionality:

Many businesses are wrestling with the notion of “collaboration” and its possible benefits. Wikitecture reinforces some important points:

  • Nothing is off limits: Collaboration can successfully occur in the production of almost anything (if architects can do it anyone can…).
  • Diversity adds value: The more people from differing backgrounds the better the information pool to draw from.
  • Structure drives behavior: Collaboration benefits from a clear structure to facilitate results. The wiki tree works in much the same way that Wikipedia does in setting specific rules up front that drive a successful outcome and allow many people to contribute harmoniously.
Wikitecture is first sophisticated tool I have seen in 3D where programmed logic provides a clear structure to facilitate collaboration. Are there other radical examples of collaboration taking place that we should be looking at?

A Star is Born? NY Times syndicates outside blogs but that's not enough

Joshua-Michele Ross 2008-10-07

asib_loRes.jpgRecently the New York Times announced that it will be syndicating content from three well-known blogs, Read/Write Web, Giga Om and Venture Beat. The New York Times is using these blogs as an extra-sensory organ; they can dial into what is happening in the tech sector (and particularly the West Coast with this trio) without allocating a lot of internal resources to it. Smart move.

As newspapers are locked in a desperate bid for survival I get the sense that we are watching the business equivalent of A Star is Born. In this case the iconic, shaggy-maned newsman falls for a feisty blogger with a horrific perm. Two strangers meeting in life's stairwell; One headed down - the other headed up... Let's hope this pairing has a better ending.

Syndication seems to have one goal - leverage that content to build online ad revenues. I hope the Times has more up its sleeve because this is just a “more of the same” strategy. Ad revenues for newspapers dropped $3 billion in the first six months of this year. With the Wall Street implosion it looks like revenues will continue to collapse as overall big-spend, ad budgets decline. I say this despite predictions of growth in '09 online ads because big print newspapers need both online/offline revenue to stay viable. Bumping online ad sales in place of plummeting offline ad revenue will not come close to solving the fundamental problem.

In order to survive newspapers need to:

1. Get better at their core revenue business: advertisting. Use behavioral targeting to maximize ad prices - better user profiles equal higher revenues. Currently traditional newspaper ad networks are outsourced, weak and generic. Understanding these technologies should be a core competence inside a modern news organization.

2. Aggressive online diversification. U.S. Newspapers missed a chance to claim the classified space. Craigslist got there first and locked the newspapers out (in most U.S. markets). Schibsted, a pioneering media company in Europe, has a very healthy online classified business because they got there first. (Similarly Schibsted is competing with Google for search b/c they have huge data assets in content and video etc. that they are using to compete). Online services like this feed off of network effects - leaving precious little for runner-ups. It is too late for US papers to compete with Google or Craigslist but there are other areas that have not been claimed. Newspapers need to move aggressively to create services that deliver value; all-things-local; niche classifieds, local real estate, political polling data, creating decision markets with their readers etc. Newspapers still have assets that are hard to rival: large sales teams with great relationships; top-notch content-creation teams; established brands with public trust and, last but not least an online readership that can help become a pillar of new innovation.

3. Gene Therapy: This is what I call “the harder stuff.” Traditional newspapers require a DNA transplant. Many of the tenets of the social web: innovation from the outside, publish-then-filter, rapid adaptive behavior (fail forward fast) and learning from failure all meet with stiff organizational resistance. If newspapers do not empower their online businesses, take more small risks and get out of the way there will be nothing left in a few years to reclaim.

Newsgathering organizations serve a vital civic function - but without a clear revenue model they will become an artifact of the last millennium. Time is not on their side.

What else do newspapers need to do to save themselves?

Customer Service is the New Marketing: Interview with Lane Becker(客户服务现在就是市场营销:采访Lane Becker)

Joshua-Michele Ross 2008-10-01

The Internet changes the power relations between companies and customers.

Social technologies like blogs, social networks, ratings and reviews etc. allow customers to share experiences; good and bad to the 1.4 billion people on the Internet. Zappos exemplifies the positive benefits of extraordinary customer service while Comcast shines a light on the perils of getting it wrong.

Lane (co-founder of Get Satisfaction) speaks better than anyone about the power of building relationships via a strong customer service focus. During the Web 2.0 Expo New York we had a discussion that digs into
· What is meant by Customer Service is the New Marketing
· The challenges of moving to a customer-service-as-marketing model

The most insightful moment, in my opinion, comes when Lane talks about how even smaller companies, and companies not structured to provide superior customer service, can use new technology to get it right.

My favorite quote: "Historically, customer service has actually been customer avoidance" Remember that next time you need to schedule Comcast!

Lane agreed to answer some of the comments to this video post - so if you have questions - fire away.

(Disclaimer: OATV is an investor in Get Satisfaction)

翻译:yuwen

互联网改变了企业与其客户之间的权利关系。

像博客、社交网络、打分以及评论这样的社交技术使客户能够互相分享自己的消费经历;好的和坏的,与互联网上14亿人分享。Zappos是这种超级客户服务获益的榜样,Comcast则是反面典型。

Lane(Get Satisfaction创建者之一)比其他人更适合谈谈通过强有力的客户服务来构建这样的关系。在纽约Web 2.0博览会上我们曾经讨论过:

  • 客户服务就是新的市场营销是指什么?
  • 转向客户服务即营销模式面临哪些挑战?

在我看最有见地的是Lane认为众多小公司或者没有提供很好客户服务的公司如何能够利用新技术实现客户服务即市场营销。

我喜欢:“从历史的角度看客户服务已经变成客户躲避了”,下次你再约Comcast工程师时最好记着这句话!

Lane很愿意回答一些读者读过这篇文章提的一些问题——所以如果有疑问请在讨论部分中提出来。

(报料:OATV投资了Get Satisfaction。)

Getting Web 2.0 right: The hard stuff vs. the harder stuff…

Joshua-Michele Ross 2008-10-01

I had a powerful conversation recently in Europe with one of the top executives of a major industrial company. They have 100K+ employees in over 50 countries. When he joined five years ago their business was struggling and in need of major transformation; their stock was at two dollars a share, they had ethics issues and product quality problems - you name the malady, they were suffering from it…

Fast forward to 2008 and now they are one of the most extraordinary success stories in Europe - stock is over $28 a share, great profits, growing operations, well regarded in the business community etc. When you fly through a European airport they are everywhere.

I asked him how they were able to turn such a large, multinational ship around.

He told me most executives talk about “the hard stuff” vs. “the soft stuff”. Their focus for success in the organization is on the hard stuff - finance, technology, manufacturing, R&D, Sales - where the money is to be found, where costs savings are to be made. The soft stuff - leadership, culture, change and implementation - is there in rhetoric but not in reality (e.g., “people are our most important resource”). But the truth is that it is not the “hard stuff” vs. the “soft stuff”, but the hard stuff vs. the harder stuff. And it is this “harder stuff” that drives both revenues and profits by making or breaking a decision, leading a project to a successful conclusion - or not, and allowing for effective collaboration within a business unit or an organization - or not. He told me it was a consistent focus on the harder stuff that allowed them to turn their company around.

This is an apt description of the problems we face in bringing Web 2.0 into the enterprise. Web 2.0 is a game changer - it holds the potential to turbo-charge back office functions, foster collaboration and transform every business unit in the enterprise. Yet the resistance occurs when it comes down to implementing Web 2.0 because it represents a series of shifts that challenge traditional business culture and models of leadership. How often have I heard the knee-jerk reaction, “we can’t let our customers talk to each other” or “we don’t share our data” or “we are going to upgrade to a new platform - we are on a three year plan to get it done” (I keep a list of these reactions so please help me add to it). If developing a web 2.0 strategy is the hard stuff - moving that strategy forward is the harder stuff - and the bigger the company I work with - the harder the harder stuff is.

user/josh.txt · 最后更改: 2010/01/02 由 radarman
O'Reilly Home | O'Reilly Beijing | Ignite China(点燃之夜在中国) | Privacy Policy ©2005-2010, O'Reilly Media, Inc.
All trademarks and registered trademarks appearing on oreilly.com are the property of their respective owners.
京ICP备05003502号