Apple doesn't talk - people talk about Apple

Jonathan Salem Baskin drives a big nail confidently into the heart of business social media theory with the neat observation that Apple doesn't bother with social media - because society is acting faithfully as its media already.

Picture this

John Sviokla's piece on data visualisation is timely - and well illustrated with some examples from the insurance industry.

New Unknown Knowns: You'd Better Listen To The Crowd's Pain

All right, so I'm not entirely sure if I'm using the famous "known unknowns etc etc" formulation correctly here, but bear with me. This is a short cry of existential pain about the connected world we live in, and how our reliance on it has introduced a whole new level of risk to business and anxiety to our personal lives.

Here's the thing: I had an email outage last week. (It may even still be going on, for all I know.) I didn't know I wasn't receiving emails until someone asked me over the phone why I hadn't responded to something. And you know what? I immediately thought that the problem was theirs, not mine. Because there's no symptom in my environment telling me my email's down - or, worse, intermittently down - and because I'm one smug, self-satisfied, savvy citizen, I just motor on, assuming that any glitches I notice out the window are nothing to do with me.

I only realised that I did indeed have a problem when I idly punched in the name of my ISP into the search box at Twitter. And, oh boy, was I enlightened. I am not alone! Also - I'm learning some really filthy new words.

Then I noticed that my spam filters aren't quite so clogged with the rubbish that normally accumulates in them. This gives me, if you will, a scientific observation that could have backed up an outage theory if I'd had one in the first place. But I didn't have an outage theory at all: the whole realm of service failure hadn't once occurred to me.

So, what should I do in the future? Become more paranoid? I'll certainly be leaping on Twitter ahead of Google next time something doesn't smell right in my environment.

As for customer support: well, who needs it? My ISP grew to prominence by embracing self-service as fully as possible to keep its prices down. The company had to improve its live agent customer service as competition increased. But now Twitter's here, it's absolutely inundated. Basically, everybody in the world can see every single complaint that's being made. You'd be a fool to go the normal customer service route and get a ticket in the closed system, wouldn't you? You're better off @-ing these guys on Twitter and getting some marketsquare attention.

My conclusion is that, after years of predicting this kind of live-action public-humiliation scenario for businesses, I missed the actual arrival of this era. I missed the moment when Google's real power over business passed to Twitter. Don't you miss it too.

Erase this belief from your memory circuits: "What I don't know can't hurt me." What you don't know could be destroying you.

IdeaPaint

Courtesy of Fast Company, here's one of those products that's so simple and obvious it's hard to believe no one saw it before. Cover your walls in IdeaPaint, and they turn into a whiteboard.

Is IdeaPaint an innovation, or just an invention? That depends on whether people want to switch to the new technology, which is cheaper and more flexible than conventional whiteboards, but which does need some extra prep work. It also depends on who fits out your office (or, gosh, home), and whether they'll go for the new process they'll need to apply, rather than install, this whiteboarding solution.

I like the idea of whiteboard paint, and I note that blackboard paint has been available for many a year. I also notice that despite the growth of online collaborative tools, most creative group work still gets done in rooms with pens. I guess the committed handyman could combine IdeaPaint with Johnny Lee's Wii whiteboard hack to create a physical/digital collaborative environment - or, at the least, a self-recording whiteboarding room.

Do Or Die? Do A Dyson

Jennifer Harris mentions the "Semmelweis Effect" in a recent Management Today piece. Semmelweis discovered that getting maternity ward doctors to wash their hands regularly cut the mortality rate of mothers from 18% to 1%. This was in 1847. He was ignored and ridiculed.

Harris says that successful people can become resistant to innovation because they begin to see success as a right, rather than the outcome of work and thought. "The way to prove them wrong is to do a Dyson," she says: that is, go off and do it anyway.

For organisations to establish innovation as a process, they need to question their own complaceny, traditions and superstitions. Change is as much, if not more, about loss than gain. Loss of status or hard-won expertise in the face of innovation is a very real, if rarely articulated, fear.

Leaders need to remind those around them that successful organisations practise rational decision making. They move forward on the basis of sound analysis of good data. If a new process demonstrates the kind of performance benefit that Semmelweis achieved, then it gets implemented - no matter how cherished the theories it displaces.

How is it, then, that so many organisations seem to survive on a mixture of irrational decision making, poor innovation and luck? The truth is that they're either burning off a stockpile of good will, market momentum and inherited assets, or they're working some kind of monopoly. Everybody else gets found out.

Deep Restaurant Maths

"GBK [Gourmet Burger Kitchen] is set to launch a new style of restaurant featuring smaller-sized burgers in an effort to encourage greater frequency of visits from customers."

I've been pondering this snippet from PR Week ever since I first read it a few days ago. Much as I love GBK, I don't buy the idea that offering smaller burgers will make people go there more often. I suppose it might work on a planet where the only source of sustenance was GBK.

Mobile entertainment apps: state of play

Neil Robertson has written a very useful summary of the current state of mobile entertainment apps, via Mobile Monday.

A Ratio in the Eye of the Beholder

The Economist reports that Spotify has 6m users of its free, ad-supported service but only a "puny" 40,000 subscribers to its paid, ad-free service.

How puny is this? It's a ratio of 150 non-payers to every paying customer.

Now, if you regard the 150 side of the house as freeloaders who ought to be contributing revenues, then this looks like a poor deal for Spotify. But those 150 ad-listeners are more like folks browsing in a shop than people indulging in shoplifting. In many businesses, a ratio of 150 tyre kickers to every one buyer would look attractive. And those kinds of businesses are big ticket businesses.

So, here's the thing: is Spotify a big ticket business or a small potatoes affair? We're so used to thinking of music in pocket money terms that it's easy to classify Spotify as a small stakes player - one that can't pay for a legion of onlookers and enquirers with the revenues of its customers.

But Spotify is actually in the lifetime value game. Sign someone up for a monthly subscription, and you have a relationship with them. You're their music service, not their record store.

The Creativity Measure that Counts

"96% of business leaders cite creativity as integral to business success and recovery from the recession, yet 44% say they lack the skills and commitment to deliver it."

Marketing Week, 16 July 2009.

Read this: Lost in Navigation

Ovum's Jeremy Green writes insightfully and entertainingly on the state of play in location-based services here.

Or do I mean "location-enabled"...? Possibly not: as Green points out, visitors to London's 2012 Olympics may well spurn location-enabled services, while a location-based service for asthma sufferers is doing rather well. You see, there is a difference...

Quote of the Day

"The perfect [customer] experience is the optimal compromise, because perfection is an illusion."

- Mike Chester, Director of the UK NHS National Refractory Angina Centre, speaking at Henley Business School, 18 June 2009.

The Collaborative Car: Riversimple

Edie Lush writes in The Spectator about Riversimple - the open source hydrogen/electric car. There's innovation in every aspect of Riversimple, not just the engine.

For one thing, you can't buy a Riversimple car, you can only lease one. You pay around £200 per month and 15p per mile, and that covers everything. The company is therefore incentivised to make the car as economical as possible, and to make it run as long as possible. Instead of owning a car that rusts and depreciates, you lease a transportation service.

The open source aspect of Riversimple means that its vehicles can be adapted and evolved by other people. And, in a further marker of the company's commitment to sharing, it's a limited liability partnership rather than a limited company. And to top it all, the company's leaders are relaxed about the need to make a profit any time soon. What would Henry Ford say?

Read this: Hot Tub Technology

Hot Tub Technology

This is a gem of an innovation story. Dr Mark Barrett's idea is simple, elegant, understandable and very, very doable. It's based on a novel view of existing infrastructure, there's a clear business case and, cannily, Dr Barrett has left ample room for other people to refine the implementation plan, thereby building an active constituency for the scheme's promotion.

What is it? Well, Dr Barrett wants to switch your immersion heater on when there's excess capacity in the electricity grid. The UK's preinstalled network of 19 million heaters can then act as storage devices for power generated by "bursty" renewables such as wind and wave. And with plans to roll out smart meters across the UK gathering momentum, now's the time to make this innovation.

Read David Strahan's excellent article for the facts and figures.

Innovation threat, innovation fatigue

from: Alain de Botton, Status Anxiety, 2004

"Employees must in addition worry about the consequences of the pressure put on companies to introduce new and better products into the market place. For long stretches of history, the life cycles of goods and services were longer than those of the human beings who produced and consumed them. In Japan, the kimono and jinbaori went unchanged for 400 years. In China, people were wearing in the eighteenth century exactly what their ancestors had worn in the sixteenth. Between 1300 and 1600, the design of ploughs did not alter across northern Europe - a stability that must have given artisans and workers a reassuring sense that their businesses would outlive them. But product life cycles have sharply accelerated since the middle of the nineteenth century - destroying workers' confidence in the long-term integrity of their careers.

"Rapid defeats at the hands of new products and services are to be found in almost every area of the economy: canals after the invention of the railway, passenger liners after the introduction of the jet engine, horses after the development of the car, typewriters after the birth of the personal computer.

"The market's passion for change has a propensity to involve companies in product development costs so high that their very survival can depend on the successful launch of a single item. Companies can resemble palpitating gamblers who, instead of being allowed to retreat cautiously after a good run, are continually forced at gunpoint to risk their assets and the livelihoods of their employees on the outcome of a few wagers or even a single bet, as a result either amasssing vast but precarious riches or self-destructing."

Review: Reinventing Banking by Johan Kestens

• "We have learned that risk awareness should be as much a part of a banker's DNA as commercial astuteness."
  

There's no shortage of 20-20 hindsight masquerading as confident prediction now that business is getting used to the turmoil of the markets. But this paper from AT Kearney's Johan Kesten is that rare commodity: a clear and well-argued agenda for getting banking back on track, complete with convincing examples and actionable advice.

Kestens summarises the origins of the current financial crisis, focusing on the drying up of public debt in the late 90s, the systemic errors made in the risk ratings of new types of credit derivatives, and the breakdown of mark-to-market valuation models. He also pinpoints issues of governance, organisational culture and regulatory failure. Acknowledging that customers' appetite for innovative investment products is unsurprisingly low in the light of evaporating confidence, Kestens suggests that memories are short: "Will greed surface again over the next three years?"

Kestens marshals seven ideas that banks can use to rebuild their capabilities and reputations. His first area is risk management, where he calls for proper appreciation of risk management throughout the management ranks, more equitable compensation schemes, alternative risk assessment models, scenario planning and simulation ("war games"), new reinsurance strategies and improved risk reporting.

His second area is the redefinition of business scope, starting with an improved understanding of the organisation's actual versus stated scope. He advocates concentrating on core competencies, citing winners who've stuck to the knitting and losers who've diversified away from what they know best. He advocates shielding lines of business from capital markets by making greater use of internal financing - implying that institutions have been lazy in their use of their own resources. Kestens remarks that organisational excellence, including reporting, is a competitive advantage. He recommends focused acquisitions and disposals, and greater use of outsourcing.

The third area of attention is product reinvention. Here Kesten advises banks to counter the natural commoditisation of banking products through the use of affinity, emotion and loyalty - offering real ideas for repositioning product lines. He also discusses product and feature bundling, and customer life stage modelling.

The fourth area for concern is the rebuilding of brand and trust. Consistency, emotional connection, and full and transparent communication are the keynotes here. This section segues neatly into "Do real marketing", an appeal for banks to get better at event-based marketing, and to work harder to understand online behaviours - especially the wealth of intelligence being generated in social networks.

Kestens' last two areas for attention concern distribution and IT. On the distribution side, he urges better mastery of online channels and greater recognition of contemporary customers' savvy, while advocating better management of the purpose, design and location of physical branches. In the IT arena, Kestens makes good arguments for service oriented architecture (SOA) and, perhaps surprisingly, careful systems design - the days when it was okay to assume that computing power is free and limitless have gone. He also makes sound points on the need for careful sequencing of change in IT; programme management is a notorious tanktrap for IT transformation.

The full text of the paper - which includes a valuable appendix on the future of investment banking - is available here.

On Provocation Selling

Here's an idea: tell your customers what they should be worrying about. That's the proposal made by by Philip Lay, Todd Hewlin, and Geoffrey Moore in a recent issue of the Harvard Business Review (In a downturn, provoke your customers). Instead of trying to sell people the products you've made, or listening to their needs and matching them to the goods and/or services you supply, you take them a big, juicy issue and show them why they should be really, really concerned about it. Instead of asking them what keeps them awake at night, bring them something that will destroy any sweet dreams they're still capable of harbouring.

Lay, Hewlin and Moore advocate that you identify a critical issue, develop a provocative proposition based on that issue, and then secure a meeting. At the meeting, you lodge the provocation - and see what comes back at you. If the reaction isn't positive, you "retreat with dignity". If the reaction is good, you can move on to discussing war stories, and then offer to conduct a short, diagnostic study. 

I don't know that this approach is unique to the downturn, because I've seen it used effectively in boomtimes too. If it's done with too little preparation, the perps get known as scare consultants: they turn up every few months with a new strain of business-birdbrain-birdflu that's going to wipe everyone out unless the correct vaccines are ordered immediately. Most targets pass on these scare tactics, waiting to see if anyone else buys the line.

But if you have a good working relationship with your customers, then they won't see this approach as scare tactics. They'll accept that you're bringing the issue forward - together with a means of tackling the issue - because you care about the relationship and its continuance. 

This ought to be common sense; but I've noticed that some service suppliers have incorrectly internalised the principle of offering "no surprises" and now interpret it as meaning "no bad news". It's worth remembering that if there's something in the environment that's going to bite and maybe swallow your customer, that's a kind of surprise they don't want. As a trusted partner, it's part of your duty to zap these incoming asteroids before they hit the surface.

A further warning: don't feel you need to manufacture an issue in order to justify a provocation. Do some real research. Ask your people what the issues are in your domain, and you'll quickly discover the topics that your best folks feel aren't getting the airtime they desperately need. With so many of the old certainties stuck in intensive care, now is a good time to reflect critically on where your customers are heading - and how you can help them avoid the obstacles lurking over the horizon.

MoSoNe: Mobile Social Networks: 2 - Mind versus Theory

Which term to use: “mobile social networks”, or “mobile social media”? I used to think that the two phrases meant the same thing. But I've changed my mind. (I'm allowed to change my mind: it proves I've still got one to change.)

When I think of “networking”, I think of goal-oriented behaviour carried out by people who have a theory of the social space they are investigating. The theory in play may be complex, and it may be dynamic, but it is still a constricting force. Networking doesn't have to be aggressive, but it is always instrumental. When people network, they are looking to match other individuals against predefined criteria. Wherever you have matching, you have narrowing. That's why old-fashioned checkbox-based online dating, and to some extent newer-fashioned speed dating, are so good at helping people repeat their previous relationship errors.

But when I think of “media”, I think of bits of dialogue, of jokes, strokes, pix and li(n)ks. I hear conversation. And conversation is fluid. Even where conversation begins with an agenda in mind, it often strays into unplanned areas. Media enables and encourages undirected exploration, and co-discovery by members of a community. Those members don't define themselves by attributes; they reveal (and conceal) their interests through their engagements with others, and via the materials and observations they choose to share. The activity in the “social media” space is surprising and creative. When commercial interests infiltrate these spaces and try clumsily to assert their own agendas, they are quickly ostracised. Social media, then, is self-cleansing.

So, “mobile social networking” is for people with a theory, and “mobile social media” is for people who want to participate in an emergent, collaborative space. Mobile social media is, I believe, a new state of mind: a truly shared experience that its participants are generating and evolving moment by moment, message by message.

Cig Int: the new smoking gun

I happened to walk past a building where I used to work recently, and stopped to see who is now using it. It's what you might call an iconic building, but on a homely scale. That's because it's a converted Victorian church. The old name is writ large in the brickwork, but to read the nameplate on the door you've got to get up close. That's how I met the guy on the cigarette break.

He asked me if I needed any help, which is a reasonable query to throw at some nutter who's squinting at your nameplate, and getting all dewy-eyed. And he told me what the company he works for does, and I thanked him, and I went on my way – knowing much more about... Okay, I won't say.

I mentioned this micro-event on Twitter, and my Twitterfriend @reyes responded, wondering if “you could do a London tour of technology just by being at the right cigarette break at the right time?” He went on to say that you could probably blag yourself a free seminar series.

And that's a pretty good idea. The spooks have “sig int” - signals intelligence. We could have “cig int”.

I'll stress that the guy outside the church didn't tell me anything confidential, or express any opinions about anything – he simply told me what I could have found out from the company's website. But it's possible that if you were less scrupulous than me (or do I mean smarter?), and you were targeting someone less alert and less honourable, you might be able to find out something interesting about the operations, prospects or mood of your target organisation. I know that if I were a recruitment consultant, and that if anyone was recruiting anyone for anything, I'd be learning to smoke (I'm sure there are courses) and getting myself out there.

I also think that marketers could probably learn plenty by sidling up to smokers on their breaks. I mean, you know where they work – more or less, because they may have been told to stand a little way off from the office. Now you can subtly also ask them where they do their grocery shopping, or who they would vote for tomorrow, or whether their boss is looking stressed.

Legend has it that long, long, ago, when smoking was compulsory, agents of the tobacco companies used to steal butts from the ashtrays in selected bars so that they could see what brands were being smoked in which types of establishment. They ran a sideline in reporting on the most popular shades of lipstick, as revealed by the butts, to the cosmetics companies.

Now that only the most committed people continue to smoke, and they're forced to indulge their habit in the street, they represent potential points of intelligence vulnerability for the organisations that employ them. It's no longer what they leave behind that's of interest: it's the fact that they exist at all, and might be up for a chat.

Small World: How do we know the people we know?

My good friend and lightning co-farmer Brendan Dunphy was one of the select group of people who bullied me to look at Twitter way back, when I was convinced it wasn't for me. Of course, Brendan was right – as he is about everything, darn him. Twitter's perfect for me, because I can't shut up. And because I'm nosy. And because I like bumping into new people.

I've met a bunch of new people through Twitter. Not by trying to describe myself, or by looking for points that I have in common with other people – but by starting conversations, and joining in conversations.

How do I know the people I know outside of Twitter? Through shared experience. I went to school with them, I worked with them, I danced with them in a cage in a sleazy warehouse joint in Budapest – the usual sort of thing. We found ourselves occupying the same patch of earth at the same time, and we got talking.

But the data stream generated by Twitter hints at tantalising new possibilities for making connections. A couple of weeks ago, I hooked up with Brendan for a coffee. He was going on to an event run by NESTA, the UK's leading light in innovation. That evening, as I thumbed through my Twitter feed, I noticed that another guy I follow was tweeting from the very same event.

Not surprising? I mean, if I'm into researching and writing about innovation, surely people I know are going to cluster at the same waterholes? But the thing is, the person tweeting from the NESTA event wasn't part of my “innovation” cloud. He's in my follow list because I found him, at random, on the public timeline, where Twitter presents a real-time sample of current tweets. And I was interested in him because he was tweeting about a train service I use. When I looked through his past tweets, I got the impression that he and I were, so to speak, fellow travellers. I wanted to follow his train comments – because I've often thought I'd like to see inside the heads of other commuters. (They don't say what they're really thinking when they use their mobile phones. They say: “I'm on the train”, and “Mummy really wants you to have your bath, darling”.)

My dilemma is: do I introduce these two people to each other? Fans of networking say I should – that I must. My more rational self points out that this pair could have met each other IRL at the waterhole – they don't need me to matchmake.

I haven't connected Brendan with my train-travelling friend, and for a very good reason. I don't know what they would talk about. I need more than a coincidence of place to create a genuine connection between two other people. I learned this last summer when I introduced the only two people I'd ever met who'd been to Antarctica – and they had nothing to say to each other. (“Cold, innit?”)

Do the Hoxton: innovation by critique

Sinclair Beecham, co-founder of Pret a Manger and originator of the Hoxton hotel, talks about his approach to creating innovative businesses in today's Times.

He hates the "breakfast buffet" that other hotels do - that spread of pre-cooked bacon and eggs, sweating under lights - so he banned it from the Hoxton. In fact, he designed the experience of his hotel by refusing to do all the things he doesn't like as a hotel guest. So, out go the ruinous phone charges, and the WiFi fees.

But as well as taking the nasty stuff out, he's injected virtuous practices from other leisure outlets. Chief among these is a yield-managed approach to room prices. Prices rise the later you book - just like at EasyJet. "At least five rooms a night go for £1", acording to the Times.

Pret reinvented the sandwich by returning to what real customers wanted. It's one of the few companies that has the moral right to that overused word "passion". In Beecham's case, it seems passion is a key not just to customer insight, but to empathy. He's building his hotel business by critiquing the practices he sees around him, and gearing his actions to his own judgements. His clarity puts him in a distinctive line of entrepreneurs who don't just think about their businesses, but who feel them too.