Historically, technology leaps that force us to rethink our world leave us temporarily overwhelmed and lost. Without something familiar to hold onto, we end-up acting like artists who are standing in front of large empty canvases, trying to figure out what to do with our infinite palate of colors.

The way to beak such creative logjams is to focus on solving specific problems. Why must we rely on the government to monitor the radiation from a nuclear power plant? What exactly is the water quality in my home town? If we could put accelerometers into every high school football helmet or mouthpiece, could we reduce the number of concussion injuries? The new innovators must focus on solving specific problems that have personal meaning to them.

2012 is shaping up to be the year of the engineer. I’m not just talking just about classically trained engineers who hold engineering degrees. I’m talking about the fact that advances in open source hardware, interchangeable modules, the Internet of Things, and the DIY movement are making engineers out of all of us.

We just need to focus on solving problems that are more important to us than to a company who is looking to solve a problem for the generic marketplace. Why does our street seem to get more potholes than those around it? Does our city have a traffic problem that could be solved by aggregating and studying live congestion data? Are there things at home or work that would better served through automation?

We also need to crank the innovation handle backward by examining the possibilities of the absurd. What if we put a sensor in every blade of grass on a baseball field? What if you could put a microprocessor in your favorite sweater? What if our local high school could launch its own satellite?

The future is either ours to invent, or ours to stare at aimlessly.

What’s it going to be?

Before World War II, most innovation came from the toils of sole inventors with well-known names such as Davinci, Copernicus, Curie, Bell, Edison, Bohr, Maxwell, Newton, Einstein, Faraday and many more. However, the role of the individual innovator changed during WWII, when a need to increase the pace of innovation outstripped the individual’s production capabilities.

The United States responded to the challenge by forming the National Defense Research Committee (NDRC) “…to coordinate, supervise, and conduct scientific research on the problems underlying the development, production, and use of mechanisms and devices of warfare.” As a result of the NDRC and other organizations like it, the roots of innovation shifted from the individual inventor to the process of Organized Research and Development (OR&D).

Leading and Trailing Technologies

Organized Research and Development is expensive. It produces leading technologies that require even more resources to commercialize. But with the pace of innovation accelerating, leading technologies don’t hold that spot very long. As new technologies are invented, once-leading technologies eventually become trailing technologies–innovations that may lack their original luster, yet fill a new role. Trailing technologies meet the affordability and functionality requirements of individual inventors.

Many examples of the leading-to-trailing technology exchange show how the innovation cycle has been affected. For example, when transistors replaced vacuum tubes, individual innovators built circuits out of cheap tubes. When integrated circuits (ICs) replaced transistors, individual inventors started building things with transistors. And as Moore’s Law compounded the advances in integrated circuits, trailing IC technologies were scooped up by individual inventors such as Steve Wozniak to build things like personal computers.

For the past sixty years, the differences between leading and trailing technologies were large enough to limit the effectiveness of individual inventors. Not anymore. With trailing technology microprocessors powerful enough to perform real-time processing, standardized protocols that allow ubiquitous communications, cloud-based storage and processing services that offer scale, and access to pools of other inventors via social networks, the individual innovator is making a comeback. The day has come where millions of individual innovators now have the capacity to solve problems more efficiently than their deep-pocketed OR&D counterparts.

So, what are they going to invent? My next post will cover the things that these new innovators must do to take advantage of their new-found bounty.

Portrait of Alexander Graham Bell: Courtesy Smithsonian on Flickr

Yet, to be blunt, no matter how much I write, lecture, or consult on this concept, most folks still look at me as if I have two heads. “That’s a nice thought, Ron, but what do I tell my boss when asked about ROI?” Unfortunately, I’ve come to understand that as long as social media budgets are controlled by those afflicted with Communications Myopia, the value of investments in social media activities will remain underestimated–that is, right up until some event forces some of those assumptions to be revisited.

This morning, I read about such an event in the New York Times article: A Dispute Over Who Owns a Twitter Account Goes to Court. The article describes how a company (PhoneDog.com) is suing a former employee (Noah Kravitz) for control over the Twitter audience that he built while working for them.

Originally tweeting under the Twitter handle @Phonedog_Noah, Kravitz had successfully built an audience of over 17,000 followers. Since Twitter allows a user to change their handle without jeopardizing that audience, after leaving Phonedog.com, Kravitz changed his handle to @NoahKravitz. Eight months later, Phonedog.com filed a lawsuit against Kravitz, claiming $340,000 in damages [(17,000 followers) x ($2.50/follower/month) x (8 months)].

Phonedog.com released the following statement to the Times:

“The costs and resources invested by PhoneDog Media into growing its followers, fans and general brand awareness through social media are substantial and are considered property of PhoneDog Media L.L.C. We intend to aggressively protect our customer lists and confidential information, intellectual property, trademark and brands.”

In a nutshell, Phonedog.com isn’t suing him for the handle, which has their brand in it, but instead is seeking to “aggressively protect” its assets (property, fans, followers, lists, trademark). Sound familiar?

There’s an old saying that says: “You don’t appreciate what you have ’til it’s gone.” Phonedog.com now has a new appreciation for its social media assets. What about your company? Is it still trying to figure out the ROI of a blog post, tweet, or YouTube video? Or has it come to the conclusion that its investments in social media are compounding into long-term marketable assets?

In between our games of one-on-one (Mike beat me two out of three games, BTW) we discussed my recent decision to expand the focus of RonAmok! beyond “social media for marketing and PR” to include new advances in hardware, software, and networking technologies that allow individuals, businesses, nonprofits, and governments to accomplish things that couldn’t have been conceived of just few short years ago. In between dribbles, we discussed the ramifications of crowd-sourcing, machine-to-machine communication, and the Internet of Things.

That’s when Mike, stopped, held the ball for a moment and asked, “But, what’s the link between social media and your new direction?”

“They are one in the same,” I answered, realizing that at first blush, the statement sounded crazy.

All communications require three things: a message, a recipient, and a method to connect the two. A medium carries messages to intended recipients. It doesn’t matter if that medium comes in the form of a traditional broadcast, the press, the Internet, a social networking site, drums or even smoke signals. The ramifications of easily digitized content delivered through cheap distribution networks has blurred the media lines. Therefore, rather than caring about how the message is delivered (the medium), communicators should care more about accomplishing a specific goal by matching medium with message.

The economies of scale resulting from our ability to cheaply digitize, distribute and present messages to the right audiences have opened exciting new possibilities. However, in order to take advantage of this scale, we must determine the optimum connection between medium, message, and purpose.

Communications decisions must be driven by purpose first, followed by message and medium. Ask not what Facebook, Twitter, or crowd-sourcing can do for you. Ask how they can help fulfill your company’s purpose.

• Facebook had ~30 million users; today it has over 800 million
• Twitter had ~340 thousand users; today it has over 200 million
• Linkedin had ~12 million users, today it has over 100 million
• The iPhone was just 22 days old
• Tweetdeck and Foursquare didn’t even exist yet.
• There was no Amazon Kindle, iPad, or Android operating system
• And although Google hit a homerun with their YouTube acquisition, Google Wave came and went, Google Buzz is on its way out, and Google Plus is putting up a spunky fight.

Yet, although these technological advances have forever altered the playing field of business, why have only a few companies accepted them wholeheartedly into their business plans? I mean, it’s not for a shortage of opinions. The great game of social media has enjoyed an influx of new players over the past 50 months. They’ve blogged, tweeted, LinkedIn, checked-in, liked, commented, shared, and written books on every conceivable angle of the subject. Or have they?

The answer is no. The “social media for business” conversation has been co-opted by the communications-centric. If businesses are to enjoy the optimum benefits of these new technologies, executives must extend their social media gaze beyond public relations, marketing, and customer support to consider how significant advances in the digitization, distribution, and presentation of content also impacts the rest of their businesses.

It’s time to pry these new technologies from the stranglehold of professional communicators and free them to run amok within the organization. It’s time to introduce the concept of crowd-sourcing to research and development as demonstrated through services like as Innocentive. It’s time to determine how social media can impact finance through studying businesses such as Kickstarter. It’s time to consider the competitive advantages that companies may enjoy by joining the open source movement, from the well-known open source software, to the lesser-known open source hardware movement that brought us platforms such as Arduino. It’s time for companies to evaluate the Internet of Things, considering the business advantages offered through real-time data gathering services such as Pachube. And yes, let’s not forget communications. It’s time to shake them up a little by redistributing their budgets from boilerplate outbound activities to other innovative concepts, such as philanthrotizing, as demonstrated by programs such as Pepsi’s Refresh Everything and Kohl’s Cares.

The technologies are just waiting to be used. Advances in the digitization, distribution, and presentation of content offer benefits for all branches of the corporation. But in order to see them, we must break ourselves out of the zombie-like state of that we’ve fallen into. Social media isn’t just for professional communicators.

To be fair, I too have contributed to this communications-centric funk. A quick re-read of my very first RonAmok! post, New Media Hyperventilation, illustrates just how far my vision has become communications myopic.

“…everyone is working so hard to scoop the next person in finding the next big thing, that we aren’t taking time to master the last great thing.”

It’s important “…to not lose site of the goal of these new tools — for people to actually use ‘em.”

So, it’s time to get back to my roots. It’s time to change the prescription on my business glasses. It’s time to start applying these technologies to tackle the really big problems faced by businesses, nonprofits, and society.

Are you with me?

Photo credit: Haglundc

As General Manager of the smaller-market Oakland Athletics, Billy Beane didn’t have the financial resources to pick from the top of that list. So, rather than following the herd, he created his own. Rather than agonizing over RBIs and batting averages, he looked at a player’s ability to get on base. He theorized that a team stacked with such players would statistically score more runs and as a result, they’d likely win more games than their competition. And the best part of Beane’s ranking system? Since the players that he desired were ranked so low by the herd, he could sign them at bargain basement prices.

When Beane fielded his team of “misfits” for $40 million, the herd laughed at him. But at the end of the regular season, he had the last laugh. You see, the New York Yankees had spent $125 million to win their 103 games. The Oakland Athletics spent less than one-third as much to do the very same thing.

While watching the movie, Moneyball, this past weekend, I was struck by the similarities between the baseball herd and the social media herd. When it comes to evaluating the value of social media investments, companies rely on the same herd-like tendencies.

• Those from the advertising side of the herd see the value of social media as measured in impressions and click-through rates.
• Those from the marketing side of the herd see the value in terms of “brand messaging/awareness.”
• Those from the public relations side of the herd see the value in terms of influence.

A slew of analytics companies have stepped up to feed the herd. Their pretty little dashboards serve tasty, herd-favorite morsels such as impressions, click-through rates, fans, and page views. They’ve even invented new measurements such as “klout” and “engagement.”

But here’s the problem. Generic measurements mean nothing without considering the reason for them in the first place. The goal of a MLB General Manager is to field a team that wins more games than the competition. The role of corporate communications is to support a customer’s entire journey to, through, and beyond their purchasing decisions. If the metrics that your company measures don’t support that goal, then why measure them at all?

It’s time to bust away from the social media herd. If your company has been investing in social media this past year, you have a responsibility to analyze it. All of it! Look underneath the pretty dashboard data. Start at January 1st and look at every tweet, every Facebook update, and every blog post. Study every retweet, comment, and “like” that a specific piece of digital content sparked. Look for patterns. What content resonated most with customers? What content did they ignore? What was the single most valuable piece of content that helped the most customers in their moment of truth? The answers to such questions will reveal two things: the value of your efforts and a digital program road map for next year.

But let’s face it. Most companies won’t do this. Analysis is hard work, which is why so few do it. Add the fact that running with the herd is less risky, and most communicators will continue throwing more money at meaningless things.

Billy Beane could have accepted his fate as a small market GM. Instead, he changed the rules. Are you willing to change the rules? Are you willing to dig deep into YOUR data and find out what YOUR CUSTOMERS need to support their journeys to, through, and beyond their purchasing decisions? Or will you acquiesce and continue to run with the herd?

The MLB herd scoffed at Billy Beane…well…that’s right up until he won all those games.

Photo Credit: freefotouk

This is what the screen is supposed to look like:

This is what it looks like on my Sony HDTV:

The smudge started out small and has expanded over the past few weeks. A quick Google search directed me to Sony LCD Rear Projection TV Problems–a very detailed page that described a good news/bad news situation.

• The good news: a known “optical block” issue caused my blue smudge.
• The bad news: The problem has no permanent fix. Not only is the optical block problem costly to repair, but the problem will likely recur due to a design flaw.

The article lead me to the I have a Defective Sony TV Facebook page, where I learned that Sony was offering discounts on new televisions to replace those with the optical block problem. I made contact and got a quick email response from Amanda of Sony’s “Social Media Advanced Resolution Team.” The email suggested that I call a special number where I could purchase a new television at a “significant discount.”

That sounded fair to me. A “significant discount” on a new TV to replace an out-of-warranty defective one. I called and was offered 25% off a 46″ (smaller) TV and 30% off of a 55″ (larger) TV. The offer had two stipulations:

1. it was only valid for one week
2. in consideration for accepting this “significant discount,” I had to sign a “…release and hold harmless…” waiver.

The math didn’t make sense to me. If I needed to spend that much money to replace my HDTV anyways, shouldn’t I also consider Sony competitors?  I found many competitive choices within that price range, so I explained my dilemma to Amanda in an email. Her politely worded response officially ended my multiple decade love affair with the Sony brand: “…the prices aren’t negotiable…”

Game over. Thanks for playing.

I get it. From a business perspective, what is Sony supposed to do? According to the Sony LCD Rear Projection TV Problems article, the company had sold over 3.5 million of these sets, generating approximately $8 billion in revenues. Since most of these sets are out of warranty, I totally understand its decision. Sony doesn’t have to do anything.

So, I’m going to watch my defective Sony HDTV set until I’m blue in the face. During this period, I’ll likely develop a deepening distaste for Sony televisions. When I can’t take it anymore, I’ll replace it with a competitor’s. Will my actions affect Sony? Probably not. Will I feel better? Probably not. But we all have choices to make. Sony made its and I’ve made mine. And without upper management’s support, there’s nothing that the company’s “social media” team can do about it.

BTW, anyone have suggestions for my new, non-Sony TV?

The secret to understanding Twitter resides within its constraints. By understanding how to use brevity and timeliness as an advantage, companies can use Twitter as a lead generation machine. Take the following example:

At 11:44 a.m. on September 12th, Twitter user, @suburbanmama (Marcie Taylor), published the following post:

“Also right now I am evaluating #socialmedia analytics tools. Any suggestions? #smmoc @hubspot @radian6 @lithium”

From a business perspective, this tweet represents a prospect reaching out to her public network for opinions. For those not used to Twitter shorthand, let’s parse the tweet:

“Also right now I am evaluating #socialmedia analytics tools.”

Marcie has told her 3200 followers that she is looking to evaluate tools that track conversations in social mediums.

Her use of two hashtags (#socialmedia & #smmoc) aid those who are tracking specific Twitter conversations. For example, by tagging her post with “#smmoc,” she’s seeking the attention of a local social media support group called Social Media Masterminds of Orange County.

Finally, she’s called-out three of the top social media analytics companies through their Twitter handles: Hubspot, Radian6, and Lithium.

Marcie posted her question at 11:44 a.m.

Radian6 responded within seven minutes.

@suburbanmama Happy to help where we can. =)

But Radian6 wasn’t the first analytics company to respond. A competitor called ViralHeat had already responded five minutes earlier:

@suburbanmama Have you considered @viralheat as an analytics tool as well? Take a look & let me know if you have any Qs! #socialmedia #smmoc

(Note the use of her hashtags #socialmedia and #smmoc)

Twitter is a simple platform that allows direct correspondence between companies and their prospects. Marcie reached out to her followers via Twitter. Radian6 responded directly to her. Seeing an opportunity to add its name onto an exclusive list, Viral Heat also responded. Both use Twitter as a strategic sales tool.

Is your company monitoring and responding to prospects who are asking about your products and services? If not, consider the fact that your competition may be responding for you.

In the past, SDGE’s crisis-communications options would have been limited to press releases and press conferences. And although those activities still occurred, SDGE had another option available to it–one that would allow it to speak directly to its customers in real-time. Specifically, the company used its Twitter account to publish 107 messages between 3:52 p.m on Thursday and 9:17 a.m. on Friday.

This mini-case study looks at how SDGE used Twitter to communicate through the crisis, and then it offers some lessons that other companies can learn from the event.

Setting the Foundation

Although San Diego Gas & Electric created its Twitter account (@sdge) on April 24, 2009, it didn’t start posting to it until the following September. During its first twenty-four months of tweeting, the company grew its audience to over 16,000 followers by sharing helpful tips pertaining to energy safety, conservation, and ways for customers to cut their energy bills. Examples of such tips include: changing the filter on your air conditioner, using tankless water heaters, and closing window drapes to keep the sun from heating up your house.

During these first 24 months, the company had established a fairly consistent publishing schedule, averaging 34 tweets per month (median = 31), but that would all change the day the power stopped flowing to all of its 1.4 million customers.

Lights out

SDGE’s first tweet about the event occurred at 3:52 p.m on Thursday:

• We understand power is out, we are working on the cause and solution. We do not have a restoration time yet.

During the next sixteen hours, the company published 106 more tweets containing information that fell into four different categories: updates, insights, tips, and help.

Fifty percent of the tweets included updates–real-time news such as the number of households affected (1.4 million), neighborhoods affected, and areas which were getting power back.

Insights offered customers a glimpse into the company’s thought process. For example:

• Think of the system as linked by springs, when one part goes out the rest are affected.
• SDGE prez said he has been with utility since 1971 and never seen anything like this. There was no warning. Started at 3:30.

31% of the tweets contained tips, which were split into five different sub-categories: safety, help, energy saving, coping, and preparing.

Of these 33 tips SDGE published during the crisis, 36% were devoted to safety. Such tweets included:

• Safety is key at this time. Prepare to stay home tonight without power.

• The outage has affected street lights. Please drive safely and treat street signals as four way stops.

• If you have a personal family emergency plan, please activate it now.

• If you’re using a portable generator, for safety never plug the generator into any electric outlets. cot.ag/mPEO6f #sdoutage

• Candles can be fire hazards. Never place them near curtains or other flammable material, or leave them unattended. #sdoutage

27% contained pleas for customers to help SDGE bring-up the grid.

• Remember to turn off air conditioners to prevent them from unexpectedly coming on when the power is restored. #sdoutage
• During this power outage turn major appliances off and unplug all small appliances to avoid a surge when power is restored. #sdoutage

12% contained coping strategies:

• Keep your refrigerator and your freezer doors closed to help prevent food spoilage. #sdoutage

and 9% were related to preparation for when the power would be turned on:

• To prepare for when power is restored unplug sensitive equipment like microwaves, computers and televisions. #sdoutage
• To prepare for power restoration: Leave one light on so you’ll know when the power is restored. #sdoutage

When the lights came on

During the course of the crisis, the informational needs of SDGE’s customers changed, so the company adjusted its content accordingly. For example, as power was being restored to their customers…

…it began shifting its messages from updates to tips. The following chart illustrates both the volume and type of tweets the company produced during the crisis.

Lessons from SDGE

Companies can learn a few lessons from how SDGE used Twitter:

1) Dig a well before you are thirsty

SDGE had invested twenty-four months and 825 tweets into building its Twitter channel. During that time, not only had it gathered 16,000 followers, but it had simultaneously established the channel as a credible place for corporate information. Had SDGE waited until the event before using its Twitter channel, it’s likely that the company wouldn’t have had the experience to know how to use it effectively.

2) The media follows Twitter
The media is interested in more than just press releases and press conferences. They also monitor Twitter, as evidenced by the Los Angeles Times which lead its first online article of the event with a screenshot of an SDGE tweet.

3) Create a hashtag
Within one hour of its first tweet about the event, SDGE started using the hashtag “#sdoutage.” Hashtags are useful for people to monitor all conversations about the incident, above and beyond what the company is saying about it.

4) Ask for help
Turning on a power grid is much more complicated than turning on a light-switch, and therefore, SDGE needed the cooperation of its customers to help bring the system back online. It did so by asking them for help, such as turning off appliances and spreading the message to other customers.

5) Adjust the message
During the course of the event, the informational needs of the audience changed. At the beginning of the crisis, people needed to know two things: what was happening and what the company was doing to fix the problem. Once those messages were delivered, the company switched to help customers cope until power was restored. As neighborhoods were reconnected to the grid, the company prepared them with steps to take before the lights came on. Finally, after power was fully restored, the company switched to advisories that asked customers to conserve power until network stability was achieved.

Conclusion

In all, SDGE showed how companies can use a channel limited to 140 character messages to communicate in real-time during a crisis.

Is your company prepared to do the same?

While writing, I came across an amazing success story that demonstrated some of the book’s most important principles. The story involves a young musician by the name of Julia Nunes, who used social media to raise $78,000 US in thirty days–for her yet-to-be-recorded CD!

The story demonstrated so many of the book’s concepts that I wanted to release a case study immediately. The result is the following e-book: The Rule of Thumbs.

Please feel free to download a copy in your favorite electronic format: PDF, Kindle, iPad, or EPUB. The e-book is free and requires no annoying sign-up shenanigans.

Please let me know what you think of it!