Being Social

Social networks haven’t grown exponentially just because people enjoy the warm and fuzzy social interaction that leads them to think oh I can spend hours doing this. The fact is they bring their friends, family, colleagues and clients together because the information created in social networks is extremely important and valuable.

In a previous blogs, My wife is the Typical Facebook User, I argued that my wife’s killer App was the NCT Nappy Locator. This app allowed her access to valuable, time sensitive, location specific information on where to change our daughter’s nappy.  This incredibly powerful tool was available for free, in return for simply adding her views to the greater discussion.  And that’s ‘being social.’

If we don’t have access to the information held in social networks, we are less valuable as an information source in our own right. We collect information such as who knows whom, a politician’s comment on a news article alongside views of hundreds of readers just like us, a personal blog from someone that does the same job as us for a competitor, a personal blog by a client on something that is important to them, and we add to it. We add our own perspective that is informed by what we have collated and we decide how to use it.

Detractors of Trip Advisor (as seen on Channel 4 in the Uk the other night) argue that its system is faulty, mainly the part about letting everyone add their comments without more robust validation. But because we can see every review that person has posted (and maybe their Facebook profile if they allow us to); we can make our own mind up whether we value their opinion. Do they appear to moan about everything, or does this post appear to be a genuine gripe. We decide, not the hotel. And the insight is valuable, not just because of it’s independence of the vendor, but because we can add our own perspective and correct it if our experience differs. And that’s ‘being social.’

And the price to access all of the information that we can add our own unique perspective too? Be social and engage in it.

Doing Social

I was fortunate enough to catch up with the Martha Lane-Fox of pensions for coffee this week; the brilliant Mackenzie Nordal.  After swapping photos and stories of our babies, we reflected on how much the asset management industry has achieved in the two years since her and I first met and mallowstreet was launched.

Mackenzie and Co’s launch of mallowstreet coincided with my own efforts to convince colleagues that social media has a role in client engagement. So it made perfect sense for us to combine intellect to achieve mutually beneficial outcomes.

The challenges we faced then were, in no particular order, ‘this stuff is just for kids,’ ‘I don’t have time for it,’ ‘compliance will never let you do it,’ and my favourite, ‘it’s just a fad and will never catch on.’

The inertia was akin to convincing a small child to wade into the sea. Now while there are clearly children that take to it like the proverbial duck, most need a combination of coercion and encouragement. We took baby steps, establishing small beachheads that we share learning from. This built confidence in those that we showcased and the determination to overcome their fears in everyone else.

So here we are, 18 months on, and standing with the sea up to our middles. Confidently splashing our hands in the water with a random blog written according to our agenda and engaging with the occasional passing beach ball with a random forum post. We all have the correct kit now, updating our profiles and ensuring we log in just often enough to ensure nothing looks out of date for too long.

This is doing social. I don’t mean this harshly, as we have all come a long way to get to this point; but this is ticking all the boxes to satisfy the people that sit in the offices where the air is a little sweeter and the carpets a lot thicker, we are in social media. 
Doing social is not being social; that’s the next bunch of fun we’re going to have together.

Economists should come with a health warning

People that know me well know I like to share my economic views.  Those that know me really well, know those views probably aren’t up to much.

The mainstream broadcast media and tabloids go to extraordinary lengths to explain why important economic situations are happening, and in certain print media opining who is to blame. However, they don’t assert some important health warnings.

Putting aside my opinion that the economics of the UK aren’t as bad as the media would have us think, I believe these health warnings are an important omission that should be articulated explicitly with every major market movement.

Firstly, all economists look at a situation through their own etymological lens. There is never a consensus on what will happen next; which means a fair few are right or wrong, some or all of the time. And like all investments, past performance is no indication of the future. You only have to look at the splits on the Bank of England's Monetary Policy Committee for first hand evidence.

Secondly, the models used to generate the statistics that are moving markets that can contain spurious data, are open to manipulation, calculated differently by nations, given different levels of importance according the economist and are most importantly, definitely laggard indicators to what is really happening.

Media has an obligation for balance, which they deliver with varying degrees of success. While they succeed in covering these different views, they should also point out that the views of all economic experts and their data should be taken with a considerable pinch of salt.

Play Nicely

I read the incredible story in Fortune this month about how a CEO of a global company that allegedly played favourites, second guessed decisions, micro managed, humiliated colleagues and was a workaholic that eventually brought the organisation to its needs.

I highly recommend the article as a lesson on how important team working skills are in every leader.

http://features.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2011/07/28/pfizer-jeff-kindler-shakeup/


The kind of behaviours described in the article are what we would expect a new line manager or a junior operational team leader under immense pressure to exhibit; not in a team led by someone that has been in the executive team of successive public companies

All of my working experience has helped me to understand the importance of personal relationships in getting things done. In fact, I attribute most of my success in delivering projects and campaigns within large organisations to building consensus across different teams with often conflicting objectives. I call this approach “play nicely.”

Playing nicely means show respect and be transparent in your decision making as none of us get it right and deliver 100% all the time. There is no "perfect". If we judge ourselves against this benchmark we will never be happy. Equally, if we judge everyone else in this way, they will only ever disappoint us.

The kind of products that are offered by learning development teams that help people to become practitioners of all the competencies that help people to "play nicely” have been thin on the ground in most companies in these lean times. I’m sure there is lots of evidence based academic studies to support the case either way, but having read the Fortune story, and from own experience, this is one cost that should never be compromised on.