Social Network Overload Syndrome

Social networks and related technologies have transformed the way we connect with each other - on both personal and professional fronts. I am a huge advocate of the use of social media, however recently I am suffering from social network overload syndrome! Daily I get requests and notifications from LinkedIn, Twitter, Yammer, Chatter, Facebook - and most recently Google+.

The question I am asking myself at the moment, is not "Do I need social networks?", its more like "How many social networks do I need?".

From the outset I have operated a "church and state" approach to social media - I use Facebook strictly for personal connections (ie friends & family), and I use LinkedIn for my professional connections. However I am now seeing a lot of crossover and duplication in the services I am using;

Connections - Facebook/LinkedIn

Broadcast/Content Curation - Twitter/Google+

Collaboration - Yammer/Chatter

I know there are technical solutions to aggregate the various feeds and notifications, however with the proliferation of new social technologies is becoming increasing more difficult to keep up. Ideally there needs to be some federation or consolidation in the space - however with so much commercially at stake I can't see the major players cooperating on this front anytime soon. 

I would be really interested to hear about how others are managing this problem (if it is one at all)? Is it just a matter of ignoring/culling some of the tools (do I really need a Google+ account?) or is it a matter of using tools or process to solve it? Any thoughts?

Blogging is not dead - it just got smaller!

There is a guilt associated with writing a blog. How long has it been since my last update? Am I blogging enough? Will I loose my audience (did I have one to start with)?

If I look at my own blog, I have found that the time between blog posts is getting longer and longer. It's not that my overall level of busyness is increasing - nor has my overall enthusiasm to publish diminished - so whats happening? In a word - microblogging.

I do the vast majority of my publishing today via microblogging services such as Twitter and Facebook. Fast, easy and bite sized. If I look to innovation in the social media space it all seems to be reinforcing short form content - Squarespace (microblogging with location) - Instagram (microblogging of pictures). In addition, my current attention for video (a la YouTube) is about 3 minutes. Any longer and I'm bored.

So is long form content going the way of the dodo? Are we conceding defeat to our mild cases of ADHD?

Stay tuned for my next blog post - it just might take a while.

Putting Yourself Out Of Business

There have been countless books and articles written about industries that did not see the digital shift coming - take the music industry, or traditional newspapers as just two examples. Why didn't they see the tide turning? Why didn't they see the disruption coming and adapt? Why did they respond so late?

The major challenge faced by traditional businesses that are seeing a digital disruption is that they have to cannibalise or totally sacrifice their cash cows - and its a tough thing to do. They are typically in market leading positions - making good profits - and along comes a disruption. One of the primary characteristics of disruptive innovation is that it drives down margins and commoditises the market. One day you are selling $30 CD's in music stores, and the next you are competing with 99c singles online - or even worse - free downloads. Its a completely different business model - and adapting requires a lot of pain for traditional businesses.

As a counter-point, it has recently been reported about the potential for the iPad to cannibalise Apple's laptop and desktop sales. On one hand, a traditional view-point would be to ensure you have product segmentation and don't release products that compete with each other. Be defensive. Protect your margins.

What I would suggest is that if your products or markets are going to be disrupted, wouldn't you rather be the one doing the disruption? The only way to survive in an environment of constant disruption is to be the one making your own products extinct - even when it hurts.

Forget Realestate - Intellectual Property Development is the Investment of the Future!

Ever had a good idea? I bet you have. Millions of napkins have given their lives in pursuit of the next big idea! Yvonne Adele of Ideas Culture recently challenged me to go a day without saying the word "idea" - I lasted about 17 minutes - it's impossible (give it a try). Ideas are the spark that turn dull dinner conversations great, they can change the world, and they can change your life. That said, I wonder how many good ideas are lost? Not captured, not acted upon, not funded - not given their time in the spotlight ...

We talk about knowledge workers, and an information economy, but do you know how to capture, develop and commercialise an idea? Matt Church does. If realestate property developers take a piece of undeveloped land, see its potential, build on it and commercialise it - then Matt Church is an intellectual property developer. Just like realestate, some ideas need to be constructed from scratch, some ideas need renovating, and some ideas just need some rented furniture to prep them for sale.

Matt is obsessed with ideas and has produced a methodical process for developing them and creating thought leaders. On the back of being one of Australia's most successful professional speakers, Matt founded Thought Leaders - whose mission is to "inspire thinking and facilitate conversations that rock the planet" - a lofty but worthwhile goal ... and he certainly walks the talk. 

Ideas are becoming a new currency, and there are other innovators building businesses around the concept. Yvonne Adele, who founded Ideas Culture is one of them. Ideas Culture teaches creative thinking techniques and facilitates brainstorming sessions - even taking it a step further and tapping into the ideas of others, with a crowd sourcing product called "ideas while you sleep". Businesses are starting to appreciate that fostering and developing these talents inside their organisations pays dividends. Innovation is certainly on the corporate agenda.

If you are a knowledge professional, I would encourage you to start thinking about your assets - your personal brand, your expertise, your experience, and your ideas - they are the components that represent your value in the market - and surprisingly enough are probably where your passion lies.

What do you think about the future of intellectual property development? Do you think there is a conflict between the corporate view of IP versus the individual. What impact do you think the "open movement" has on the commercialisation and development of knowledge?

Is the iPad Disruptive?

So the big day has finally arrived and Apple have released their tablet - the iPad (not the best name in the world). It has been 8 years in the making, and reactions are mixed - ranging from "wow, this is the best thing ever" through to "ho hum, its just a big iPod".

Personally, I think Apple did not take enough risk with this product - I would loved to have seen some pushing of the touch interface and some good use of gestures - but hey, its a first generation product. It is clearly aimed at the Netbook segment, and will do well. It is well designed and well priced, and will carve out a very profitable business for Apple - but is this disruptive technology?

In answer to that question I would ask - if you attended the launch of the original iPod in 2001 what would your impression have been? Video below.

I would suggest that when the original iPod launched (I still own one), that there was already a nascent market. There were already some portable MP3 players in existence (although not particularly functional), and the true potential of the iPod (including the whole content eco-system) was yet to be seen. Always 20-20 vision in hindsight!

One of the key characteristics of a disruptive technology is that it typically comes to market with less functionality than the comparable market leader (contrast high-fidelity CD's versus low-quality MP3's) - that's what makes it so dangerous - market leaders tend to ignore it until its too late. One thing that Apple is great at is defining its own markets - this is one of the hallmarks of disruption - seeking a user base that will value the current features of your new product rather than chasing the wishes of an existing user base. 

Only time will tell how successful the iPad will be, however given their track record I would suggest that Apple have every intention of making it a success.