Bird's Eye View

Social Networks in China?

Leaving tonight for London, with 3 meetings there tomorrow, then on to Hong Kong for our first Inner Circle in Asia this year.  The topic: How New Media is Changing Your Business and Your Life, has stirred great interest.

This time, we've made a departure from our usual Inner Circle protocol which is to engage C-suite executives from a variety of industries in an intimate conversation about a business topic of particular interest to them.

This time, we have a diversity of both subject matter expertise and seniority (some, though seriously senior, know little about new media and some, though considerably junior compared to the captains of industry who will be there, have in-depth experience in the subject.

Laura Kim, Wf360's Marketing Coordinator, is accompanying me on the trip and over this past weekend she had pre-event phone conversations with a number of our Inner Circle attendees  to prep me for my facilitation of the group.  Laura says an especially interesting call involved a woman with a senior role at the C. Melchers BmbH & Co. operations of a major German global manufacturing corporation.

Referring to the pre-event article we asked attendees to read prior to our cal, this exec said the article is of major importance.  She had previously considered social media (a major subject of the piece) something that was only, well, social i.e a way for individuals to meet and connect with others.  And because that activity is disapproved of Chinese authorities, it's not worth the trouble.

What she said hadn't occurred to her until she read the article is the opportunities for businesses to use it for marketing purposes, a practice now ubiquitous in the West.

She's eager for the Inner Circle on Jan 29 at which she figures the conversation will prove to be a primer of sorts on all things social...for business.

Stay tuned.

Texting And The Rules of Engagement

I made a new friend in the past year who is a truly special person.  She lives in Southern California and travels frequently to New York so we've met and compared notes on our businesses as well as our personal lives fairly often.  She's articulate and a good writer.  So I've enjoyed reading her emails, more letter-like than the usual slap dash stuff most of us throw out.

So it was with dismay that I read her first text to me.  She'd gotten a new phone and has discovered texting.  Her note read "I'm not used to txting.  Grt trip.  J's grt as r u."

It's a reference to her recent trip to New York where we went out to eat and I introduced her to my husband ("J"); she introduced me to friends of hers who live in Manhattan.  This text message reflects the barest of all that because, of course, it's a text message.  Not meant to be read carefully, saved, cared about.

It occurs to me that there are stages of friendship, and our options for communication tend to define them.  Each has its own rules of engagement. And perhaps my dismay here is that our friendship has not been defined by texting; it's been defined by emails and phone calls.  And I liked it that way.

I'm a strong believer that face to face communication is the new luxury.  We have lots of choices for ways to connect with others, and the one that is most costly in terms of time and psychic energy is face to face.  So we tend, at least most of us who value our time, to pay attention when we accept invitations that involve actually being in physical proximity to others, in the same space.  It's precious.  And the rules of engagement for face to face meeting are somewhat complex i.e., shaking hands or sharing a hug, making eye contact, sitting in a friendly posture, offering a place to sit, sometimes including the offer of something to eat or drink, having a conversation in which we exchange spoken words in view of one another.

How we sustain relationships that are meaningful to us is a matter of choice.  For certain relationships, the rules of engagement include sitting down and writing a letter that gets mailed in the post.  We use letters when we want to memorialize a particular experience, send condolences, congratulations, notify someone of a legal matter that requires a paper trail, indicate a milestone. 

For less significant connection, we write emails because it's expedient, knowing that it indicates less forethought and attention than a physical letter sent by post, but nonetheless signifies communication in which we have something to say, and generally expect an answer.  Most of us write emails with no thought that they will be saved or even read more than once.  But we generally give some attention to grammar and to syntax, use paragraphs.  If we have the time and inclination, our notes may contain metaphors, asides, jokes, personalization of one kind or another.

Then there is texting.  This is naked communication, starkly expressing one or maybe a few thoughts or directions or instructions or even affection.  It includes abbreviations of common words, acronyms like omg and btw and the like where simply using letters to stand in for words is deemed enough to get the idea across.   It's tough for a text message to be nuanced, subtle, operate on several levels.  We're talking bare bones here.. 

I understand that for some people, especially teenagers in many parts of the world, and people of all ages in South Korea and elsewhere, texting is now the primary mode of communication.  Surely this doesn't mean that texters have only the most superficial of relationships with each other.  Or does it?  If there are deep relationships behind the text messages, how are they nurtured and maintained?  Perhaps the rules of engagement are changing. 

Sigh. 

Avatar And The Non-3D Experience

Here is a story I'm embarrassed to tell you.  

After all the conversations covering the film Avatar and how totally cool it is, and how controversial some have made it--complaining that it is anti-military, sexist, condescending to non-American cultures, you name it--my husband and I decided we simply had to find what all the talk was about.

So, following the practice of lots of New Yorkers, we bought our tickets online and hopped to it over to the theatre.  Well, not exactly hop.  It was the coldest day in New York by far--a record cold for many years--so perhaps it's more apt to say we shivered our way to the movie theatre.  We presented our printout of the ticket purchase to the ticket taker and I asked, "Do we get our glasses here?'  "No," she said.  "You don't need them for this theatre."  We thought, Wow!  They must have some super sophisticated means of creating the 3D images, so we were apparently wrong in thinking we needed to actually don those silly glasses.  Thank God!

So we amble our way to the designated theatre and are surprised to see only two other people sitting there, with less than 15 minutes before show time.  But, hey, it was freezing cold outside.  Maybe there are more wussy New Yorkers than we'd assumed.  So we sat down, maybe 30 other people showed up before the trailers ran, and then settled in to watch Avatar. 

 

Hmmm, we said to each other.  Doesn't look like the 3D I remember from the past.  Do you think this is so cool?  Nope.  What's all the fuss about?

Turns out, as you have no doubt guessed, that we had purchased tickets for one of only a handful of theatres in Manhattan that were showing Avatar especially for the narrow audience of people who simply hate 3D--get headaches, find the glasses unfashionable, whatever their reason--and demand a non-3D version so they can at least join the conversation about the movie even if they haven't had the rush from seeing planes coming directly at them, flying through the forest and the like.

In other words, we missed the entire experience of what all the Avatar chatter is about.  What I will tell you, though, since I know all of you saw the 3D version, that if you could focus just on the story as we did, it ain't much.  Clearly, it's the use of 3D technology that makes the day for this film.

And even though I was quite willing to look silly with those glasses--even anticipating them to join the Avatar conversation--I wouldn't opt for 3D television soon.  Can you see yourself with your friends all sitting around your TV watching, say, a sporting event or the ballet or anything, with those silly glasses on?  C'mon. 

"Operation Unified Response:" A New US Military Approach to Service

All Americans take pride in the fact that the U.S. military is reputed to be the best trained, the most technologically advanced, the most adaptable of all forces in the world.

It's made up of self-sacrificing men and women who take the phrase "of service to one's country" seriously.  When they sign up, the fact that they are placing themselves in harm's way by being sent into combat, is part of the agreement.  And the stories of heroism under fire, of loyalty and dedication and love for one's flag continue to inspire and motivate the rest of us.

Perhaps less well known is the fact that our military men and women, even after transitioning into civilian life, can be counted on to continue their service to others.  In fact, 92% of our veterans want to serve their communities once they return home.  It takes them a while after transitioning into civilian life, but after about two years after leaving the service, our veterans' rates of voluntarism are impressive.  Their willingness, for example, to "fix something in their neighborhood" is higher than that of the general public. 

When reading about the global response to the Haiti earthquake crisis, I couldn't help but think of this continuum of service--from combat in foreign locations around the world, to stuffing CARE packages at the local American Legion, to many tasks in between--that we assume our active military and veterans, and their families can be counted on to perform.

As for the Haiti relief effort, people around the globe assume that the US will take a major role in establishing and keeping order, provide much-needed logistical help, search and rescue, medical assistance, physical labor, whatever it takes.  And our military is meeting that expectation in a way that makes us all proud. 

What this Haitian-focused activity underscores is a phenomenon of collaboration that simply wouldn't have happened in the past.  MyVetwork's CEO, John Campbell, a banker who was a decorated Marine officer  in Vietnam, says this is new.  "Thirty, forty years ago, the military branches were truly siloed; inter-branch cooperation was almost nil.  The Navy would compete with the Marines, and the Marines with the Army...lots of time was spent keeping information and resources close to the vest as a competitive advantage.   Today, with the many joint commands (like the Southern Command in this instance), it's now a highly collaborative command structure, which means stuff gets done much faster, more efficiently."

"For example, "says Campbell, "In the past, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, were always headed by a representative of the Navy, Army or Air Force.  Only in the past decade have things changed, when, for example, Marine General James Jones was appointed Supreme Allied Commander, Europe and military head of NATO, a post historically always filled by Army or Air Force brass.  And Peter Pace, a Marine Corps General, was appointed Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the first non Army, Navy, Air Force General to take on that role."

The Southern Command is a great example of this new collaboration, made up of all the service branches plus several federal agencies as well.  As is traditional, under the Southern Command, US Navy ships are carrying amphibious landing craft so that Marines can reach Haiti locations without having to go through devastated ports.  Not so traditional is the Southern Command's direction of US Airforce drone aircraft to help Army and Marine troops on the ground identify potential survivors and areas of specific need that have not yet been uncovered. And the Command is sharing imagery like the Haitian National Cathedral (below), collected by high flying U.S. spy drones with NGO's and relief groups in order for them to have a better picture of the situation on the ground.

And the Southern Command's use of social media in its effort to keep the public apprised of minute to minute Haiti-related disaster relief activities is impressive, belying the stodgy image many still have of our current military.  They are initiating the conversation about what's being done and what is still needed.  Check out, for example, the Southern Command's use of Twitter to keep the public apprised minute to minute of actions in Haiti.  And check out the Southern Command's website, clearly setting forth just how our military forces are mobilizing to support international relief efforts underway in Haiti.

Moreover, the Southern Command has set up two collaborative portals, one accessible to partner nations, NGOs, and academia, and a second designated "for official use only" for use by interested parties throughout the Department of Defense.

Bottom line: Our military service is being of service in a big way, far from the combat zone.  Consider how you can support their effort.

Hong Kong Inner Circle

Laura Kim of the Wf360 team and I will fly to Hong Kong next week to conduct an Inner Circle for a group of executives on the subject of New Media and how it changing every business and life as we know it.

This should be interesting, especially because we've conducted two similar Inner Circles here in New York at the NYSE and those two discussions were stunningly different from one another.  Partly due, of course, to the fact that some of the participants were different the second time around.  But more importantly, they two sessions were six months apart, and in that short time (or at least what seems a short time in the rest of our lives) media had exploded in new directions only rumored about half a year earlier.

So it will be interesting to see what's on the minds of these executives who spend almost all their business day in Asia.  Some of them have truly global businesses, but not all.  They represent a diversity of businesses and different seniority levels as well.  So this is a bit of a departure for us: we decided to include some not-so-senior execs as well as our usual "C-suite" level leaders, to get a wider range of perspective and experience with new media.  Amazing Jose Rueda is joining us.  Jose is Canadian, of Latin descent, and now lives and works in Hong Kong.  There's a global citizen for you!

I met Jose at TED last year and we had communicated for several months about the possibility of his company, called PlayLab, helping us create a video game helping those around people with PTSD to cope more effectively with the challenges of PTSD and how it affects family, friends, co-workers.

We did not pursue that project (at least not yet) but Jose was excited to be part of this conversation and, I'm sure will share with the group the latest mind-blowing stuff he is up to.  His company has a large facility (more than 10K square feet) dedicated to creation of video and animated programming, particularly for causally related projects.   I'll let you know what he comes up with.  He's asked a couple of people from his video gaming world to join us so the group should be fascinating.

What Does Conversation Have To Do With Game Change?

Unless you've been immune to media over the past week, you've already heard from many sources about Game Change, the new book by John Heilemann and Mark Halperin that has everyone talking.  At least everyone who cares even a whit about politics.  But, no, it doesn't stop there.  People that don't give a rip about politics are also intrigued.  Why?  Tis isn't just another tell-ll book by disgruntled former employees of the famous; this is a carefully researched page-turner that reveals what is just too juicy for any of us to pretend we don't care about.  It reveals conversations.  And these are conversations between and among people we've all got opinions about.

Heilemann and Halperin have revealed for us the juiciest, nastiest, roughest exchanges between people who were running for President in the 2007-8 campaign and those close to them.  So it's husbands and wives, for the most part, and it isn't all pretty.  In fact, little of it is.  As you no doubt know by know, only the Obamas emerge pretty much unscathed.  As for the McCain's, a disaster.  Ditto for the Clintons.  Sarah Palin and everyone around her?  Embarrassingly awful.

So why do we care?  For several reasons.  One is that conversations between any famous couple are interesting.  We've seen them in the media, watched them on television.  Those of us who are married or in a relationship know the complications that come from intimacy, from having someone else so close to you that they know what makes you tick...and they know some, if not all of your secrets.  So we can't help but wonder what famous couples have to say to each other when they are out of the spotlight. 

When it comes to high-level political campaigns, the truth is there is rarely a moment when the candidate, or his/her spouse, is out of media's glare.  So they are bound to say things that, once captured by media, can be downright embarrassing.  And when cracker jack journalists like Heilemann and Halperin come snooping around and capture staffers, friends, advisors, and other insiders who were close to the action--especially the behind-the-scenes action-- there is lots of fodder for a hit, hot, hot tell-all.

It's so interesting that in the end, conversations are what can do people in, or set them up as icons.  If it's true that how you speak to your spouse and children is how you are in your life, what wold that say about you?  DA wise man once said to me that relationships do best when--before saying something to a family member--you stop to ask yourself, "Would I use this tone of voice when speaking to a good friend I care a lot about?  Would I say something like this to someone I want to respect me?"  Hmmm.  Sometimes we take liberty with those closest to us that we wouldn't with others we care deeply about.

It's important to monitor our own conversations before we speak.  As to this crew in Game Change, it's clear their personal monitors were off.  Really off.  And it's highly instructive to the rest of us, not only because their conversations are downright entertaining, but because their conversations reveal so much about what they are really like.  And in most cases, if we knew then what we know now, thanks to the Heilmann and Halperin team, we'd have thought twice about voting for most of them.

So Who's Your Frieder Keller?

Frieder Keller is a young man from Stuttgart, Germany, who has been an intern here at Wf360 for the past couple of months.  He's 20 years old with a world view that is at once sophisticated and youthfully exuberant.  He's going to be missed.

Frieder's impact on our team has been remarkable.  He doesn't just join in the conversation; he often initiates it, around an idea or concept he'd like us to consider.  "How about...?"  "What if we...?"  And sometimes he simply acts on an impulse he's got and then shows us the finished product.

Since Frieder joined us, I've looked back on my experience as a University of Vienna student, on a typical "junior year abroad" boondoggle.  I spent most of my time hanging around with Americans, occasionally including Europeans in our conversation, but we were very much a group unto ourselves, somewhat smug as ex-pats and oblivious to the bigger opportunity to learn as much as we could by getting out of our comfort zone and practicing our German with the Austrians and Germans all around us.

We saw everything through an American lens.  And our conversation was distinctly American.  We were Americans in Vienna.

That's not Frieder's approach.  He's totally at home midst Americans, and is clearly taking in all that he can of New York, adding it to his life experience in a way that expands what he already knows.  He is a global citizen.

We welcome his broader view of what makes Brandversation work on a global stage.  It doesn't hurt that he's already deeply knowledgeable about new media and has a marketer's perspective, which seems to come to him naturally.  Frieder has been the one selecting--often creating--the pictures that accompany this Bird's Eye View blog.  He's extraordinary in his skill at finding the essence of the post, then figuring out how to capture the meaning visually.  Usually he makes up the image himself, using what he can find on the web.

And if something interests him, whether or not it's included in his "work specs," he's on it, contributing to the conversation even if not asked.

Do you have a Frieder Keller on your team?  If not, find one.   Find lots of them.  By including perspectives, backgrounds and experiences that are diverse, you enrich the conversation--and the opportunities for innovation multiply.  Besides, it's more fun. 

I'm wondering whether American people Frieder's age who are studying or working in other countries are as adventurous and as engaged in the conversation at hand as Frieder.  I hope so.  He tells us he's learned a lot here.  I figure we've learned a lot more from him.

TED Talks Are Indeed Ideas Worth Spreading

I love my time at TED every year. And since, under Chris Anderson's leadership, TED has become the Super Source on-line for video content focused on "ideas worth spreading," it's made me enjoy it even more, despite the fact that I could stay home, save the expense and time of going to Long Beach, and still peruse all the content afterwards.

So I'm going, and can't wait to meet old friends as well as garner new ones. One of the ways I've justified my going is by sharing my experience not only with readers on this blog, but also with my friends and family in an even more personal way. 

Here is the note I sent to my family and close friends:

"One of the ways I feel I can justify the expense in both money and time of participating in TED this year is by sharing it with you guys.  Take a look at the program guide, below, that I just received.  I know you’ll find someone or some topic that you are highly curious about. Let me know so that I can make sure I learn all I can and share it with you."

And here is just one of the notes I got back: Carole said, "Wow - what an inspiring list of people!  Here are a few I'm interested in hearing more about, if you have the time: Michael Shermer, Nicholas Christakis, and Michael Sandel."

One of the side benefits of this exercise is that it gives me insight into what is of special importance to each of those who responded.  I am fascinated, for example, that of all the amazing speakers at TED 2010, Carole is most interested in hearing more about skepticism (see the fascinating background of Michael Shermer here), philosophy (especially around matters of justice; here's the scoop on Michael Sandel), and how our involvement in social networks affects our health and happiness (check out Nicholas Christakis here). Listening to these three speakers will give me some great material for my next conversation with Carole.

How about you?  If you want to take a look at the TED 2010 speaker lineup, Feel free to let me know if there is someone in particular you'd like me to listen carefully to on your behalf.  I'll be your eyes and ears at TED, too.

Guest Blog: In US, TV Talk is Trivial

Hi, my name is Frieder and I’m currently interning at Wf360. This is my last week of my eight week internship, so it’s time to share some interesting findings in my guest post. I just finished the Gymnasium (a kind of High School) in Germany and wanted to see something completely different before attending a university in September and that is why I decided to spend 3 months in NYC.

After a long day the only thing you want to do is sit on your coach with some chips and watch TV. There are many differences between the US and Germany but I would like to focus on what I found most interesting: the difference between German and American TV. 

In Germany, we have all the American TV-Series from the Simpsons, House, CSI and so on (with about a year delay because of the localization)… so the content is fairly similar. That’s where it all ends.  The first difference I noticed was that there are a lot more commercial breaks in the US compared to private German TV stations, which consist of only 3 breaks per hour.  I was also really surprised when I first saw an ad for an antidepressant drug.  Promoting prescription drugs isn’t allowed in Germany because your doctor should decide which drug is best for you and should not be determined on a TV ad. 

In one commercial break I saw an ad showing amputated fingers and legs… talking about how bad smoking is and what it can do to you. There are many of these educational ads out there about smoking, drunk driving, etc...  and you would never see that kind of content in Germany.

Although these findings are odd to me, I really want to focus on the difference in the news broadcasts. The biggest news show in Germany is the Tagesschau on ARD (a public TV station). About 10 million people (25% market share) tune in every evening at 8 to get information on both national and international issues in the 15 minute slot with the 30-second weather forecast.  A few weeks ago, when I first saw some nightly news in the US, I was surprised.  It was all about the weather and what has happened recently in New York City. Why do you need a long weather forecast? Where is the international news or the news happening outside your city?  I thought this was just an exception and not normal for the daily news broadcast.  Maybe there was nothing special happening in the world?   I was wrong.  After a few weeks of watching news on several different stations, it was the same thing. Even during the climate congress in Copenhagen back in December, I didn’t see any news about it because of all the Tiger trouble.

If there isn’t a huge story like the Tiger scandal or the man from the Newark Airport sneaking from the security, they go on the street and pick the first story they get. In my time in NY, I’ve seen a lot of trivial stories - ones that I did not find interesting at all. For example a story about a man who beat up his dog in the elevator, or one about a police officer who rescued a dog out of the cold water in the harbor on new years eve, and so on. But the icing on the cake was a story I saw just a few days ago. It showed how subjective some of the news can be here. It was about a broken elevator in Queens and how the renters are suffering from this problem.  At the end of the ‘report’ the reporter started insulting the landlord, and they didn’t even censor his face, giving the audience a very biased view.

And as far as the time allotted for the weather... as I said, in Germany it is about 30 seconds long.  It’s brief and you get all the information you need.  In the US, I‘ve noticed that the weather forecast takes at least 25% percent of the news time. I find this ridiculous!

 
I know that there are many ways to get the news, but I ask myself, "Is the news on TV just about entertainment? Am I supposed to go to the newspapers or the internet for additional news?"

I found this video on YouTube that sums up what I’m saying. Check it out:

Does the news industry affect how people communicate? Are you just interested in the local gossip or are you curious about what’s happening all over the world? Is today’s communication all about breaking news instead of long-term news?

Children of Cyberspace: Whole New Conversation For Kids

Brad Stone's article in last Saturday's New York Times blew me away.

Stone talks of technological change now so rapid that young people with only a few years of age between them are having completely different experiences with technology, which means that how they work, how they converse, how they think, differs markedly from the experience of people only 3 or 4 years younger or older than they.

He gives examples of very young children and how their expectation – even before they can talk – of how the world works is influenced by iPhones and Kindles in a way that differentiates them from siblings just a few years older who must unlearn behavior and expectations – for example, "what is a book?" – before they can learn whatever the new approach is, in this case reading on a Kindle or other ereader.

The continually evolving approach to communication – from face to face conversations, to telephone conversations, to emailing, to texting to instant-messaging – has been rapid and game-changing.  

One who ignores or avoids these changes – in work life as well as personal life, does so at one's peril.  If peril seems too strong a word, consider the workforce of tomorrow with no patience for training programs and book learning and is used to instant feedback and experimental "let's try it" approaches to getting work done.  Those same young employees will be skilled at multitasking seven different things simultaneously. How does an older worker survive, much less thrive, in those circumstances?

And as for home life, it's expected we'll be regarded as old fogies when we reach middle age.  Who expected that, as Brad Stone suggests, the kids of today will be old fogies in their 20's?

Check out his article and let me know what you think.