The video below explores how digital media can help children learn valuable subjects in a time of information overload. Michael Levine, executive director for The Joan Ganz Cooney Center, presents his ideas on how we can avoid raising a generation of youth that are “a mile wide and an inch deep”. In case you don’t know – I certainly didn’t! – the Joan Ganz Cooney Center published a well known study that led to the creation of Sesame Street in the first place.

I encourage you to take some time to watch his full presentation below to learn, among other things, how to create a developmental trajectory for children versus an atmosphere where children are overburdened with too many different messages.

With countries like the US being ranked 15th in child literacy rates worldwide, hopefully new approaches with emerging technologies will provide new thinking about education. Regardless, it is incredibly evident that, in a short time, organizations will be customizing products and services for people who have never known a day without the internet or Google. Their approach to learning and their use of technology will be fundamentally different than it is for adults today – and it is vital for marketers to keep an eye on things.

Enjoy the video – and please note that today’s blog post was brought to you by the letter B and the number 5.

The article, entitled “Six Ways to Find Value in Twitter’s Noise“, analyzed all tweets about the iPad the weekend it launched in the US. From there, they were able to classify some key lessons that any company can garner just from listening to what customers are saying (crazy thought, I know). These lessons are as follows:

1. Learn about your competitive landscape. How many times is your product or service mentioned in conjunction with another similar brand?
2. Look for unexpected themes. An extremely easy way to seek out complementary products. Possibilities for cross promotions become more evident as companies learn what their customers use in conjunction with their product or service.
3. Dip deeper into the stream. Simply put, running a simple key word count might not reflect actual customer sentiment. For example, the article points out many uses of the word “Evil” in conjunction with “iPad”. While some may think this is a reflection of negative feelings, it in simply reflected the fact that “Resident Evil 4” was available on the iPad.
4. Look for user experiences. You may find that customers are using products in ways that you didn’t expect – it’s a great way to identify alternate product uses and applications. Similarly, this can also help your R&D teams identify enhancements for future iterations of the product.
5. Learn what negative comments come up. What are your main customer complaints, and what can you company do to address them?
6. Look for conversation dominators. What key words are most frequently used in conjunction with your product or service and what can be learned from them?

Listening to customers in their virtual environment is a great way to get opinions uncluttered by any of the biases commonly associated with surveys or focus groups. The one thing I would add to the article would be to monitor conversation levels on an ongoing basis – conversation volume is a great way to keep your finger on the pulse should something conversation-worthy surface about your brand. If it is something positive, such as a newly launched product or promotion, it may be in your organization’s best interest to further invest in that particular initiative. Conversely, should the majority of comments be negative, it could be something that your organization can quickly address or remedy.

Digital ethnography is a relatively inexpensive way for organizations to see their product through their consumers’ eyes by listening to organically generated conversations.

Have you been listening?

Some of the major themes within this report included the following:

• 21.7 million Canadians used the internet for personal reasons in 2009.
• The digital divide as it relates to size of community and internet usage rates still persists. In communities fewer than 10,000 people, internet usage is at 73%, compared with 83% of those communities with more people.
• By contrast, the digital divides that are based on the income levels, education, and age are narrowing.
• 96% of internet users aged 16 or older reported going online at home. Of these users, 75% reported going online daily.
• 92% of home users use some form of high speed connection, up from 88% in 2007.
• Wi-fi usage has doubled over the last two years.
• Canadians who had used the internet for five or more years were less likely to be concerned about online security than those with fewer years of online experience.
• More Canadians are acting as contributors to the online space (i.e. writing blog posts, uploading videos/images, etc.).
• Among all of the online activities for home internet users, the only activity to see a decrease in usage was instant messaging.

In short? More Canadians are using the internet, are plugging into it in more ways, are making more digital purchases, and are contributing more and more to the space every day.

The internet is without question a core part of everyday life for Canadians. What is your organization doing to create a strong brand experience in the space? How are you thinking beyond the banner ad?

Given this accepted fact, it’s common practice for brand managers and ad execs to clearly define the demographic and psychographic profiles of their target. While this approach has been around for years – and is still taught in academic institutions today – it is missing one vital dimension of the target. Today’s marketers need to deeply understand their target’s behaviour with regards to social computing.

We first talked about Social Technographics a couple of years ago, and since then have been excited to see a broader appreciation for understanding online behaviour. The Social Technographic ladder, created by Forester Research, is a common tool used to help define how consumers behave online. Most recently, Forester has even added a new rung to their ladder to help in classifying those who perform status updates on various sites and applications (now a very common practice online).

In conjunction with the Forrester ladder, it is also important for organizations to understand the purchase behaviour of consumers as it relates to their product/service. Permuto recently released a diagram populated from data from the US Census Bureau. It shows the percentage break between e-commerce versus in-person sales. Although this source data encompasses telephone and catalogue sales in addition to those happening online, it demonstrates a significant amount of purchasing being done from the comfort of the consumer’s home or office.

In addition to understanding the where of consumers’ product purchase behaviour, recognizing variation in the “information seeking” and “evaluation of alternatives” stages of the average purchase process is equally important. No longer do customers have to rely on their immediate peer groups or cluster of local stores to obtain product information. Making quick use of a basic web search or mobile phone app like Google Shopper, consumers can immediately be connected to global price comparisons, consumer reviews, and much more. In fact, because of an abundance of authentic consumer reviews are now available online, main brand sites are no longer the first place where customers seek information about new products.

We are in an age where information is abundant, practically free, and easily accessible. Having a thorough understanding of how customers use this information and navigate through this technology is crucial to strategies on and offline.

So, how well do you know your customer?

We can’t wait to attend as many sessions as possible including “Defaulting Privacy: Personal information and the social web” run by our very own Brad Buset.

Session overview:

How does our desire for privacy balance with our increasing propensity to share information and enjoy personalized services? What are we responsible for as educated online citizens and what could (or should) be legislated? What can we do to ensure responsible usage of information?

As the lines blur between online and offline worlds, an educated discourse around online social norms and personal information security will become increasingly important. Join Brad for a presentation and discussion for all online citizens, marketers, developers and anyone who shares information online.

With only 16 days to go, make sure to register today. Look forward to seeing you there!

Living in the digital age, I find it fun to watch how print media is responding to how consumption behaviour is changing. The following are two recent videos that found their way online that show two different print organizations address this change.

The first video does a great job at representing the printed newspaper – helping to show that you never have to worry about a newspaper running out of batteries. The UK’s Sun newspaper version 4.0 truly presents itself as the ultimate handheld accessory.

The second video was created by Time Inc., the largest magazine publisher in the US. Instead of trying to fight the shift in media consumption, they embrace it. Don’t believe me? You can just ask their Time Inc. twitter identity, or check out their InStyle 3D cover.

Traditional print media has survived the invention of the radio, television, and the internet thus far. But with computers becoming more portable and mobile phones becoming more like computers, will its propensity for survival remain the same? Will there always be a place for print, and how do you see it shifting?

Wikipedia defines open source as follows:

“Open source describes practices in production and development that promote access to the end product’s source materials—typically, their source code.”

In the past, software and web organizations focused on getting the end product to the consumer, then periodically charging for newer versions or iterations of the same software. In the past bunch of years, however, an excellent shift in this model has started to reach critical mass, whereby lots of organizations are starting to treat their initial release of a product as simply that: the starting point. By sharing the blueprints behind the software, these organizations provide users worldwide with the ability to modify, adapt, and enhance the software as they see fit.

Instead of relying on a software development team within the walls of one organization, companies receive input from thousands of people around the world. Additionally, these external contributors become strong advocates and highly active users of the particular software. High-engagement users doubling as programmers, ultimately makes for one very useful piece of software.

Several companies have used this approach and become very successful. Linux, Apache, OpenOffice, Firefox, and, more recently, Google have been embracing all that is open. The other week, in fact, Firefox celebrated their fifth anniversary by posting this video:

The best part about the open source approach is that it doesn’t have to be limited to software. An example of someone that knows this well is Rob McEwen, former Chairman and CEO of Goldcorp. Way back in 2000 he decided to share his blueprints with the world, but instead of releasing code for programmers, he sent out mining and sample data to geologists. This was a great move on his part as the insights gained helped transform an underperforming mining site to one of the most profitable properties in the industry.

Put simply: don’t let the almost instinctive traditional “need” for secrecy blind your organization to the possibilities that exist with true global collaboration. What else do you think you could do if you tried implementing a few of the open principles?

While I can’t definitively say whether this new service will be as big a hit as Google Street View (have you self-stalked yet, staring at your house and trying to see in its windows?), I can say that the collaborative optimist inside of me wants it to be. If you have yet to hear about wave, check out these videos!

(Still want more details? Feel free to watch this video – sure it’ll run you an hour and twenty minutes, but no friend will be able to out-geek you!)

The way people communicate with one another and technology is continuously changing. Logically speaking, the way organizations communicate to consumers should mirror this. I believe that centralized conversation will greatly lend itself to interpersonal and organizational communication. Instead of fearing that information may have been lost in some abstract email forward or reply, people will be able to rest assured that everything is contained within one place. Perhaps one day soon we will be creating waves instead of sending emails.

So, what is your company doing to speak to consumers the way they speak to one another?

In his piece, Mintzberg observes that there is a tendency for people within organizations to focus more on self-centric goals while completely blurring or ignoring those of the larger corporation. This is mainly attributed to the corporate culture that resides in most organizations. As he quickly pointed out in relation to the recent mortgage crisis: “Executives didn’t know what was going on, and employees didn’t care what went on”.

So how does an organization create a corporate culture that deters the focus from the individual to the internal corporate community? That question, of course, becomes increasingly difficult as you increase the size of the organization. For example, Zappos, a company renowned for its fantastic internal corporate community, has critiques questioning if this culture will hold strong since its recent procurement by Amazon.

With regards to this question, Mitntzberg suggests the following to establish a strong foundation for larger organizations (paraphrased of course):

• Seek your roots. Most organizations, at one point or another, had some sense of organizational community. Instead of attempting to build something net-new, look for what may have previously existed.
• Create an atmosphere of trust. In a nutshell, treating people as human beings not resources is paramount to building communities. A stronger emphasis on Theory Z Management above all else needs to be happening at the running of your ship, whether that ship is an entire company or a small team within a department.
• Define your raison d’être. Create a mission for everyone to stand behind and believe in. This isn’t something that it is simply put up on a wall, but something that can be felt through all corners of your organization. Google’s mission is “to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful”, and Wikiversity (a subset of Wikipedia) wishes to provide free education to the world. Each is strong statement that the company’s employees can truly believe in. No matter what your mission is, look beyond the dollars and cents and look towards something that inspires and motivates.
• Leadership at the centre. As opposed to relying on the top down approach from disconnected executives, rely on middle management to champion the transformation.

Once you have a strong foundation that can foster a true community-based culture, Mitntzberg suggests the following developmental steps:

• Seek small groups of committed (middle) managers to champion the change.
• Allow these groups to slow down and become immersed in the make-up of your company.
• Allow the insights of this process to spark small initiatives that drive change. (The beauty here, of course, is that such small initatives can quickly grow into much larger strategies.)
• Give visibility to the teams that are promoting change in order to inspire others.

As your corporate community begins to set hold, at what point can you confirm that a real community has been established?

For this, Mintzberg offers a well thought out measure of success. He states that a corporate community is truly established when “its members reach out in a socially active, responsible, and mutually beneficial ways to the broader community”. A company without a strong community couldn’t be expected to look beyond its walls, whereas an organization with a strong internal community quickly realizes their dependence on the external community and wants to give back.

So, whether you are a company of 40,000 or a company of forty, a true sense of community is pivotal. In this day and age, there are a multitude of technologies that can help foster internal community building and allow for it to spill out beyond the walls of your organization.

What is your company doing to foster its community?

Buskers on the street are noticing that more and more individuals are listening to their MP3 players and tuning out the music of the street. These buskers are saddened by this, not just because of the loss money, but because they feel that the music and culture of the community is being ignored and as a result is slowly eroding away. However, the busker doesn’t realize that the music being listened to through the MP3 player connects the users to a much larger community – a group of individuals from around the world cultivating and sharing music, then ultimately listening to it during their walk to work.

This story is a great representation of how technology is enabling individuals to connect with others virtually and as a result is changing the traditional model of a community and personal interaction.

Communities online are enabling users to connect with people from around the world with similar interests. An array of hobby, gaming, music, and intellectual groups are connecting easily through technology and idea-sharing. Look at online dating, for example – what used to be whispered in hush tones (“We met online…”) is now the norm.

“In Britain alone, 8 million active singles went on 24 million first dates in 2008, with seven out of ten (69%) of these arranged online.” – Forbes.com

Virtual connections ultimately leading to real life meetings are enabling people with similar interests to quickly find one another and share their experiences face to face. This results in a reduction in random personal interaction, replaced with relevant interaction based on interests.
With this shift occurring, however, it begs the two following questions:

• Does this reduction of random personal interaction with those in a physical community in any way limit the potential for creative thought or innovation?
• Similarly, does hyper-interaction of individuals that are passionate about a specific subject allow for the development or advancement of that subject at a faster rate? At what point does this mass interaction become too many voices such that the sense of direction gets lost?

Put simply, do you think that this technological transition of community is a good thing is a bad thing? Or, as always, if it’s something in the middle, how do we best manage it to push the good and limit the bad?