In the previous post- I highlighted some pointers on the economics and functioning of money.

For us humans, money as the currency has become the only and lowest common denominator to success.

Everyone is after money, either by hook or by crook. Entire lives are devoted to earning more and more…money. Kids are raised and trained such that they become more and more capable of earning… money later in their lives.

Money is also a funny currency- those who have more, they get more and those who don’t have much, they have a marginal chance of being any better off in a lifetime.

The truth is- being human has little to do with money. Sure enough, it can enable a livable life, but it has little to do with being human.

A daily wage manual labourer (at the bottom of the proverbial money tree)- always ready to help others, compassionate and enabling to others- has not a chance in hell to be any better-off in life. Actually, to the society, he is a failure in life. In contrast, another person with considerable riches but with no empathy and who uses any means to get money, who does not make any considerable difference/contribution to the society, is a success in the eyes of the society. What’s more, money begets money- and it keeps on working harder for this rich guy as compared to the ‘poor’ guy.

Who is more successful? Who is more human? Which behavior should be rewarded more by the society?

The “money-only” system is not about being human. BUT society should be about being human- therefore commerce should be humane and economics of wealth should have a currency that addresses this.

So here’s the thought-

What if  all of this changed? What if alongside money, we had another currency?

Note the word- ‘alongside’. Money is integral. It can’t be removed. But surely, there can be another layer alongside Money as currency.

The “Karma Currency”.

This is how it could work:

We start an alternate currency system: The Karma Currency.

This is the currency that you earn as a reward of doing social good/contribution to the society.

Then this is institutionalized. This needs to be led by governments and policy making institutions. 30-50 acts of Contributions towards society are identified- and Karma Credits are assigned to each of these tasks.

Every act of social good/every contribution to the society will earn you Karma Currency. This would be deposited in a centralized repository- the Karma Reserve Bank- and you could use it (say, just like a credit card) in many commercial use cases. The more good you do, the more are your chances of earning!

You can use Karma currency to top up while buying a house, getting yourself or your kids admitted to schools/colleges, medical bills, etc.

Karma currency will not be an abstract thought. Its success would depend on the fact that it could supplement/top-up your money currency. By doing so, it will become practical and tangibly useful to all.

What could these acts be?

(not so )Random acts of kindness: Donating blood, community service, admitting someone to hospital, building something for the common good (contriuting to school/hostpital), giving time to local community (volunteering for local school service), volunteer work for NGOs, and other such acts.

Those acts that can be unambiguously documented and credits be given, are the prime suspects. Some of this already happens- donating blood, for example, makes you liable to get an equitable amount of blood yourself.

Religion, for ages, has propagated this (all religions). Do good- and in return you go to heaven, not and you go to hell. In Hinduism- this is called earning ‘Punya’ and the opposite is ‘Paap’ or Sin. And the concept of Karma- the concept of ‘you reap what you sow’ and the actions that you do today will come back to you- either in this life or the other/next.

Very ‘successful’ concept. Billions believe in it, and keeps a lot crime/unethical conduct at bay.

But you need rewards in this life, in this world too. And for that, actions should be document-able. Not all noble causes can be rewarded- but those that can be- they should be.

In the ideal scenario you could use a “Karma Card” to buy your regular accessories and it could be freely tradable as money today. But that has many hurdles. The goods and production costs need to be offset and one needs to put more thought on how that exchange system can be made more robust- for example.

But hey, at the least, the government could waive off taxes, or institutions can waive off part of fees where the actual money-burden is not high. They will, in return, get compensated through the Karma Federal reserve bank- (in Karma currency of course)- and they get their burden shared too!

At an advanced level, this can also act as a buffer to the money markets- economies will not be solely dependent on GDP growth- the Gross Domestic Karma could buffer any turmoils- and because this will be relatively uncomplicated (no hedging, no borrowing/lending, no short sell, no ponzi schemes…)- this could be a more solid buffer.

With this, economic recessions will not impact people and individuals so much because they can still transact using their “Karma reserves” or contribute more towards society and earn more Karma currency.

This is just a start- an initial piece of thinking. A stone in the pond. This needs to evolve. Many questions remain-

• How will the Karma currency cost be offset against actual money?
• Can it lead to more corruption (thereby becoming an anti-thesis)? (Give me money to award you Karma points)
• It will need huge infrastructural investments and a lot of convincing to do? Is it even possible?

and so on…

My belief is- there are enough intelligent people in the world that could make this happen. And when this happens, that will be the day when heavens will be a little closer to the earth.

You may say I’m a dreamer, but I’m not the only one. (John Lenon)

Think about it

Shalabh

Image attribution: Tax Brackets

Part 2 of this discussion here

Been thinking about something.

What ails the world?

The answer is simple. Exactly the same thing that makes this world go round.

MONEY.

The concept of Money- a freely trad-able, fully acceptable, completely fluid system. Been around since centuries now. It is the currency that makes the world go round.

This economics of money has proven to be quite successful. With its success, it has given rise to capitalistic markets, people and governments – the systems influencing the trade of money. These systems and its influences have been constantly expanding in scope and features.

Over a few centuries, these systems have become intertwined, complex and an entangled thread-ball – whose ends are somewhere within- but no one seems to know where.

Before I move on further  to propose a “new economics”-  it is important that I put some context by explaining the basics of modern day economics :

The money economics is based on a simple premise- Money buys you stuff. From services to goods. From personal security to future proofing your risks. It buys your kids a school education, you a health assurance and your family the necessities- a roof on head, food and clothing. If you have more money- you can get these things- and if you have more money, you can get more or higher quality things..and so on.

The more money you have, the more money you make. It gets compounded- the rich get richer. Money begets money.

This system also has an interesting phenomenon. Money never stays stagnant. The system is designed to keep the money moving. Money has to stay FLUID. If it stops rolling, it catches moss. And it stops the world with it.

Now- this system constitutes of people, governments, processes- all of these meant to play a regulatory, authoritative role. Money flow slows, Fed (Government) reduces lending rates to central banks, banks can borrow more at less cost- and then the publics get this benefit in turn. Businesses can borrow more for businesses, people can borrow more for housing..and so on. Money is made to flow- if it does not flow organically.

But in actuality, money never flows organically or systematically. It is dependent on emotions and sentiments. If people ‘feel’ bad about the future, they borrow less, spend less and save more. The rolling stone then starts to gather moss. And it brings the rest of the world to halt too.

Governments give ‘stimulus’, ease it quantitatively, reduce interest rates..nothing works. No borrowing=no lending= money sitting, losing value=stagflation, inflation. Follwed by Negative growth, recession and depression.

What is worse is, these problems are compounded by intertwined money markets, lending institutions and investment corporations. Globalization ensures that this animal is not restricted to any geography either. A worldwide recession.

Now this is not a rant about economic theory or the failure of the capitalistic mentalities. They have proven to work. But only at a certain level.

We need something else on top of clinical, theoretical, money market workings.

We need to change the world and its economics as it exists today. And I will share some thought starters in my next muse- read it here.

Image attribution: Tax Brackets

Charity is easy. In ‘money’ sense. You have the money- you give it to someone. Job done. Charity is easy because once you make up your mind for it, you could just do it. Like that.

Charity is difficult- the more money money you have- the more opportunities you create to spend it. The more you spend, the more difficult it is to give it away. Charity is difficult because it is difficult to let go what is dear to you.

Charity is noble. It is helpful, benevolent, character building and praise worthy. Everyone should do it once in a  while, preferably consistently. Assuming that the intentions of the giver are always noble, it is also a great peer to peer support.

And yet, charity is unsustainable. It can be degrading to the subject and is never enough. Charity is not THE solution. It is only one way of extending service to the society.

Then what is the best way to contribute to the the society? Reduce its ills and support the needy?

The answer is- entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship is the cornerstone of Social service. I speak largely in the context of building businesses, but even entrepreneurship in its broader sense of the word could come into play.

You start something- you employ people- you create something. The people you employ get paid- they spend on stuff. The people involved in making that stuff gets paid- they buy more. They stay out of streets, be constructively occupied and breed their children in a more positive spirit.

You start something- you need resources- someone needs to fulfill those needs. They fulfill-get paid- pay their people.

The big wheel of society turns on the fuel of entrepreneurship. It is the biggest, most sustainable and the noblest way to do help the society.

Think about it

Shalabh

William is a working executive from Singapore. 34 years of age, he is a first generation Singaporean and works in advertising. Like many his age, he is internet proficient and a voracious technology user . Married with a lovely wife Raji and their two little children- like many from his and Raji’s generation, he and his family splurge on anything that aids convenience, status, productivity and entertainment.  

Surrounded with multiple screens, breezing through the onslaught of new gadgets & technologies and constantly connected, they are a part of a generation that lives with an excess of choices.

The ubiquitous presence and frantic pace of technology today is overpowerful and sometimes overwhelming. This somehow defines an era of change, yet what it does not appropriately depict is- a society’s and its denizens’ perspective, predispositions, character and behavior.

And it is precisely this change of perspective that delivers an overarching impact on present and future generations- their way of working, and the society’s rules, laws and values. 

We hold that thought and come back to the generation of William and Raji.

(And I define a generation not limited by an age group bracket- I define a generation as a set of people living in the same period of time, with access to similar resources and ability to use them. This puts 32 year old William alongside  a 16 year old kid from a well earning metropolis breeding family, even though they are a generation apart in terms of age)

There is something unique about today’s generation of globally exposed, nuclear family bred, high income, well educated lot. They want access to everything. The fact that something is not within reach is just not acceptable to this group.

These are the strong headed opinionated people that do not accept the boundaries of technology, geography, processes, systems, or even intellectual properties  and even legal boundaries.

But wait a minute- I am not talking about evil hackers or rebellious mindless zealots.

They are a different type of people and account for an increasingly increasing economically significant group.

And this is what makes them stand apart:

• They do not believe in hacking, they believe in hacks.
• They do not want stuff for free- if they value something, they pay for it
• They don’t just break in to the system- they find a way around it.

And this is the lot that is giving rise to a new economy. The circumvention economy.

Picture this:

William has a penchant for US TV dramas. There is something about watching them at the same day they are aired on US Telly. He tried using Hulu- but there are restrictions. As a user not in the US, Hulu is not allowed to show those shows to people outside the US. William has a few choices- 

• Use  a web based proxy serivce in the US (this has its limitations added to the fact that proxies don’t like the weight of streaming heavy video files)
• Try out online sites that have links to various TV shows (no guarantees there)
• Search the parallel market (torrents) or buy a pirated version from the parallel market.

Not surprisingly, these are not what William wants. He does not want bad quality versions and he can’t wait. More importantly, he is not willing to accept that a choice (getting good quality content at his time and terms) is denied to him. He takes another route.

He circumvents Hulu (and the system). He installs a VPN  (pays $70 odd a year for this service) and tricks Hulu into thinking he is logged in from the US. The programme acts as a virtual ISP- masks his IP- circumvents the system by using a US IP. It could also encrypt data coming to and fro from your client machine.

In a contrast to another system where web users are branded as free loaders- here he pays extra to consume content he wants. He pays Hulu for an account + pay for the VPN service just to get access to watch all the series whenever he wants to!

He abets the Circumvention economy. Illegal? Not sure. Acceptable? Surely.

After all, his friends do it for getting music all the time. And they even pay extra to get a newly released device not available in their markets.

His wife Raji gets to play too. She likes Korean dramas (even if she does not speak the language) and sure enough, gets access to content that she wants.

In another scenario, Raji likes a dress from Japan. She had visited a Japanese website and must have that dress. (Ah! Japanese fashion!). She whips out her credit card on an impulse. And then gets what felt like a ‘karate chop’ shocker. The store does not ship the dress in Singapore.

 She gives an indignant expression. And proceeds to vpost.com.sg- a (postal/delivery) service that has logistical arms in Japan. She creates an account, gets an ID (VP number) – checks out on the shopping cart at the japanese site with her VP number and a japanese physical address. She then sends off a soft copy of the invoice she receives from the Japanese shopping site to VPost. VPost then processes her order, and ships the item at her doorstep. Of course with costs attached- but no worries- at least she gets the access.

There are a few more examples demonstrating this trend- will write about them later.

The key is that is a trend (not un-noticed but certainly un-categorized- and I thought I’d classify this trend first) and it has value for Brands and companies marketing their products. It has psychological significance, anthropological and sociological significance, technological significance and sure enough- economical significance.

Do you know any more?

Think About it

Shalabh

We meet people everyday.

Many are achievers. Successful in what they do. There are others too. Some of them doing well, others not quite. And then there are yet some more- who are just, well, drifting along.

So what makes some people ‘successful’ and others not so much? What are the elements that contribute to being recognized, being well-off and achieving desired objectives?

Success is subjective. But note I did not define it is as- ‘being at the top’- or ‘first in the rat race’, or ’highest earning’ . Let’s say it is about achieving desired objectives. If success is about achieving desired objectives, then the question of what makes some people successful and others not- has been the age old pursuit of individuals.

The factors are explained here in the “Hierarchy of Success”.

When I set out to develop this hierarchy, I had ‘Professional success’ in mind. However, as this developed, I realized that this hierarchy could well define personal success too.

So here it is:

Hierarchy of Success

At the very bottom of this hierarchy is ‘Need’. This need defines your basic purpose of doing what you do (eg Working to earn a living, meeting everyday needs, etc)

This is a little different from Maslow’s ‘hierarchy of needs’ where it relates to Food, Shelter, Sex- though its position in the hierarchy is similar- right at the base.

This ‘Need’ in my hierarchy could have complex connotations. As an example- if you are pursuing a higher degree- like, say, an MBA- the need could be do get a job to earn a living. But for others within your peer group, the need could be completely different. For some of them, this need could be about earning a  ‘Social Proof’. In many societies, this is particularly important for demonstrating status in society, and could even define your standing while looking for a spouse!

Immediately up above ’Need’ is ‘Want’. ‘Want’ defines the desire to make things happen. It takes you beyond the bare essentials of what is required.

If you were doing an MBA with no intention of ‘getting a job’ – and had a family business- your ‘want’ could be going beyond the theory and test the practical applications of what you learn. So if you are a clerk in a bank, your ‘want’ will make you attend to that last person even after banking hours are over. If you are a working executive, your ‘want’ will make you do that extra bit of research and that little extra bit of effort in prettifying a presentation slide.

It is your ‘want’- that would make you go that extra step from ‘just getting by’ to ‘strutting along’.

Superseding ‘Want’ is ‘Ability’. It is the physical or intellectual prowess. Your talent.

If you had the need and the want to be a Strategic Fund planning manager in a leading Mutual fund institution- but you never could get along well with numbers and maths, what are the chances you will succeed?

You have a need and a want to be a White water rafting kayaker. Unfortunately, you have a lower back problem. Your back can’t take the immensely-demanding-on-your-back sport. Your ‘Ability’  deters you from being successful.

Ability can be refined. If you want to be a singer- and have a great voice- that voice is your ability. Hone it, refine it- and your chances of being successful are high.

A caveat surfaces at this stage. Your abilities will be in context of others. So you might be a good singer- but there might be others with an equally good abilities. This is the stage- when your Abilities demand ‘remarkability’ (credit to Seth Godin). The more remarkable your abilities are, better are the chances of success.

At the top of the hierarchy is ‘Attitude’. Attitude defines what you think, how you feel and what you do.

We see this regularly in our lives. The most talented person might not necessarily be successful. And someone with modest talent but abundant attitude went further.

This is so because as people, we are creatures of ‘intuition’. We have a ‘gut feel’ about things- that draws us to someone with an attitude that resonates with us. Why do you think the best singer in American Idol almost never wins? The contestant that has the most ‘appeal’ does go far though. People like the ‘appeal’ not necessarily technique. Politicians play on this and celebrities thrive on this factor. Ability gives you a standing- a fighting chance. Attitude makes you a Rock Star.

Just to clarify-Attitude does not mean being highly outgoing or being ‘in your face’. Attitude could be in the way you interact with others- or it could manifest in the way you work. It could even be that ‘X’ factor that makes you or your work appealing.

So that’s the hierarchy.

Need, Want, Ability and Attitude. Four key factors leading to success.

Hang on! Many times we do see people with mediocre/questionable abilities and attitudes. But they are successful too. So if they did not meet the 4 Key criterion, how did they become successful?

The base of the pyramid has the answers. And the halo at the top. These are the extraneous factors contributing to success. The internal factors within the pyramid are something you can control to an extent. The external factors could be more difficult to control.

One key factor is your ‘Network’. The social circle. The contacts.

If you know the right people, doors open. With right contacts, you get better directions and sometimes shortcuts. In today’s dog eat dog world, this could be of fundamental importance.

One of the reasons why successful schools and colleges breed successful professionals is because of this factor. If you are lucky to be educated within one of these institutions, your network will automatically consist of other successful individuals willing to help you out. And then the effect continues.

And then there is Luck. Chance. Whether you believe in ‘luck’ or not, sometimes opportunities appear in a way that is inexplicable. And the opposite is true too. If your luck is screwed, you are screwed too. When the times are good, they are rolling. And when the times are bad, no matter how much you strive or struggle - nothing seems to work.

You need to control this by understanding the circumstances and working towards what is in your control, rather than fretting about it.

One last thing. The halo at the top. The environment.

Imagine you being a hazara girl in Afghanistan. Immensely talented, with great attitude and want to become an elected leader of Afghanistan. Your family has some contacts in the right political circles. You are lucky in many ways to have survived many opposing forces and have got an education.

But the environment. To get your way in a society that does not look favorably to your gender or ethnicity; to be an environment where war is a way of life- what are the chances of success?

So that completes the diagram and the factors influencing success.

What happens to Hard Work then? How about Motivation? And what about mentors?

Look carefully- and Think about it.

Shalabh

…still Chasing The Storm

Just caught up with Sean Rach, Prudential Corporation Asia’s Director of Media & Corporate Events over email (with help and prompted by their PR agency Burson Marsteller)

Discussions started with the fact that Prudential had launched an iPhone application on retirement planning- the first insurance company in Asia to launch a mobile phone application as a marketing platform.

I found the concept interesting- specially with the perspective that it is a first in the industry, though I’d say the real deal will be how the concept is extended and moves forward.  Media is where people attention shifts to- and marketers need to quickly adopt their marketing to fit the new tools.

Alongside, think I need to migrate quickly to the voice/video based Brainstorms as they allow for taking a more conversational approach and a more dialogue based interaction- but here it is- perspectives from Sean on his (and Prudential’s) viewpoint towards Digital Media:

What are the key challenges to the insurance industry today and how can the digital medium help mitigate those challenges?

In keeping with our brand credo – - “Always Listening, Always Understanding” – - we understand that consumers and our customers are using digital media everyday in many ways. We are exploring ways that we can appropriately reach out to prospects, as well as, serve our customers through our digital platforms. As we have a very large agent network, digital media is becoming key in providing our agents with the latest customer information, product details, and training.

Could you elaborate on why and how the idea of the ‘Retirement calculator’ iPhone app was conceived? What exactly are the main points it is trying to address and how has the audience reaction been till now? There are many insurance calculators/retirement planning tools on the internet- could you elaborate what is special about migrating an app like this to the mobile web? (going beyond the fantastic point that it is a first in Asia)

Background and key points

The “What’s Your Number?” Retirement Calculator is an evolution of PCA’s existing – and very successful – “What’s Your Number?” retirement campaign, which was established to address growing retirement protection needs across Asia.  Prudential is committed to helping people understand that careful planning is critical for a carefree retirement – people need to understand what their retirement goal should be and how to get there.

Migration to mobile

Seeking to reach people via mobile is natural given the penetration and usage of mobile phones in Asia – in most markets much more than the penetration of the internet. Mobile marketing via SMS is a very common and effective way of reaching out to prospects, customers and even our agents.

We developed this application as a “branded utility”, which aims to drive greater awareness and understanding about the importance of retirement planning. Taking learnings from our web-based calculators, we have sought to create an intuitive way to determine your “retirement number” – the first step to effective retirement planning.

In testing, we found that by placing this calculator in their hands, we allow users to determine a range of scenarios that they might consider. This is the power of mobile – the most personal form of media.

Audience reaction

As we have recently launched the application, we are receiving comments on a daily basis. Most users find it very user friendly and surprisingly comprehensive. It has been noted that it has started conversations among family members and increased the realization that a retirement plan is needed.

What are some of the other ways in which you are using the digital medium for marketing purposes? (It could be anything related to branding awareness, customer engagement, agent empowerment or closing sales) How do you measure success for these activities?

Prudential has for some time sought to leverage digital media. Whether with consumer websites, extranets, intranet, email newsletter, or sms, we recognize the opportunity to reach out and appropriately communicate using these media.

Measurement is key to any form of marketing, especially digital marketing in the financial services industry. We use a range of web and mobile analytics tools to monitor and optimize the success of our campaigns. Digital media, as the most measurable media platform, provides a valuable listening opportunity for Prudential.

What roles did your various agencies play in developing this app?

To develop this application, we worked with a team from both OgilvyOne and Cherrypicks.- – with OgilvyOne taking the creative lead and Cherrypicks leading the technical implementation.

What role do you think the various ‘types’ of agencies could play in the near future when it comes to digital marketing? Especially with respect to mobile marketing? Which of the existing agency ‘types’ is best suited for leadership in the digital space? (PR/creative/media/digital). Do you think there is a future for digital ‘specialist’ agencies?

This is a rather broad question.

Having led a leading digital and direct marketing agency for several years, I view your question in a slightly different way. Given consumer’s media consumption habits, I feel that the best marketing solutions come from understanding all the possible ways to reach and influence your desired audience. This may be through earned media (PR), paid media (advertising), word of mouth, direct marketing and the list goes on.

A truly integrated solution can be accomplished with one lead agency coordinating partners as there is no “one-stop shop” or with a selection of agency partners coordinated by the client.

Digital specialist agencies do offer a great deal of value in understanding the intricacies of how the various media options work, especially regarding mobile media. As digital is often technical, this understanding of capabilities can mute some of the ability to manage the interplay between media options. Thus, digital specialist agencies run the risk of pursuing ideas that fit their particular media versus ideas that can be integrated and brought to life across various media platforms.

From my point of view- this stands for all types of agencies- digital or non-digital. The non-digital ones have difficulty porting the concept to digital, and in many ways, vice-versa. Though in the not-so-distant future, both will do each other and everyone else’s jobs.

Think About It

Some random ramblings I wrote in Jan 2010- but publishing only now.

I love the punchline for TED. This is how punchlines should be- packed with impact, attitude and clarity of message.

Quick meaning:

TED is an annual event where some of the world’s leading thinkers and doers are invited to share what they are most passionate about. “TED” stands for Technology, Entertainment, Design — three broad subject areas that are, collectively, shaping our future. And in fact, the event is broader still, showcasing ideas that matter in any discipline. Attendees have called it “the ultimate brain spa” and “a four-day journey into the future.”

But that is not the subject of this post.

While I have heard many people speak at TED. Most speakers are huge achievers. They are masters in their field and area of expertise.

But there is another peculiar thing. The really well accepted ones are the ones who – apart from hold on the subject matter, can also articulate it. Ar-ti-culate. Being a subject matter expert is almost secondary. The primary thing there- is to be able to express what you want to say in the most engaging manner.

Now this is curious.

If Einstein existed today, it would not have been enough to ‘just propound the theory of relativity’. He would be expected to Ar-Ti-Culate. In a manner that an audience- possibly not from his line of study, could understand what that theory meant.

In today’s time and age- you have to be a “bollywood Star”. You no longer have to be good with just acting. You need to not only be able to act- but also dance around trees, look good, Action expert and what not.

If we see some of the more famous writers of today for example, most are great orators and have a great stage presence. They use it very effectively to market their works and spread their ideas.In my line of work, I could take the example of  Malcom Gladwell and Seth Godin- two of the most prolific (marketing philosophy) thinkers and writers of recent times.

They ‘package’ themselves- both through articulation and presence. Seth with his shiny bald top and Gladwell with his curly beehive growth.

Malcom Gladwell

There are others that one sees- people who use the web as a platform to position themselves. I am not talking about the likes of the popular ‘Robert Scoble’ or ‘Michael Arrington’ here. They have been more like web journos for want of a better word. I am talking about people who are from other industries but have achieved success largely due to the internet- which has helped distribute and spread their ideas.

I wish I had some Asian examples to balance the perspective. But I do not. Yet.

Then there is Gary Waynerchuck of the wine factory who uses the Internet very very effectively. And his main business is selling wines. Not of the same intellectual level as Godin and Gladwell, but what he lacks in intellectualism, he makes it up by his passion. The unbridled enthusiasm just oozes through his talks and that’s what amazed people.

It is no longer about the object ONLY (seat of the president, the book or the movie) It is hugely about the personality.

It is not a new phenomenon- it has been there before- we have seen politicians like Nixon, Kennedy, Churchill and Nehru and even those who are infamous now- Hitler and Mussolini- touted as orators who could  move the crowds.

However the difference is that with the advent of the internet, this difference is HUGE.

Think Apple. Now think Apple without Steve Jobs. If Steve Jobs had a different personality- and if he never introduced his new products would Apple still be the same? Maybe it would. But with his personality the whole Apple thing gets such a boost, it is not funny.

The crucial difference? The Steve Jobs brand rubs off Apple. Not the other way round.

Think about it. If you are a blogger- go speak in conferences. If you are a photographer- go write a blog (and have a personality), if you are a wine taster bring attitude in selling wine.

Be ‘Bollywoodtized’

Think About It

PS: Wrote this piece in jan 2010 but publishing only now. Needs better articulation ironically- but better it sees the light of the day than rot in drafts :p

Clifford Stall is a scientist. Or an astronomer. Maybe he is a physicist.

I am not sure actually. But just listened through his talk on TED- and this DEMANDS a mention and sharing.

A maverick scientist, he fits the eccentric scientist stereotype to the ‘T’. Fidgety, restless and full of things to talk about, he is seen talking almost in a state of hallucinated paranoia – and for the first few minutes made me wonder if there is substance or a theme in the talk, or just plain showmanship for entertaining the audience.

Blown up zero volume glass containers, a science experiment and an amazing, possible real life chase story that led him to the TRUTH- all in one TED talk!

But towards the end- it all seems to make, well, a bit of sense.

Stall epitomizes constructive rebellion- the theme of ChasingTheStorm.com.

“Once I do something, I want to do something else.”

Sums it all up.

Enjoy.

Think About It

Shalabh

“Think About It”- Ideas shaping digital media and marketing in the new decade

The new book will be launched by mid February in both Kindle format and paperback format.

We had seeked your inputs and opinions on which cover design layout did you like the best.

Thanks everyone for not only helping us choose the right cover but also with your critique and suggestions for improvements.

We went through all the suggestions in detail and tried to achieve a balance. And that brought us to the final choice.

And the Winner is- Cover design no. 8

Of course this design will not be used as it is here- but with further changes and more cleaning up. Will keep you posted.

A whole lot of friends commented and decided us to choose the right cover- across platforms- Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn and emails.

Truely, a cover design chosen by you. Some of the responses here:

Excerpt from Twitter:

Excerpt from Facebook:

Some, like Maria, CEO and co-founder of Linqia from Barcelona- had some gems for all the designs

(We loved it!)- her comment:

=============================================

Dear Shalabh,

Hope my comments help in some way:

• Cover 8: Very clean, illustration offers insight into the theme of the book, great font
• Cover 7: Icons are effective showing humans however overused throughout the industry. Also the font doesn’t work at all.
• Cover 6: Warm design which weakens the overall affect you’re trying to achieve by making the statement ‘Think about it’. It’s also quite busy.
• Cover 5: The lines at the top make the cover too busy and conflict with the colorful people icons. Again – these icons are used heavily throughout the industry which could connote ‘another web 2.0 book’
• Cover 4: Very beautiful design however on first impression the book looks to be about financial matters
• Cover 3: Extremely busy! Too many design elements.
• Cover 2: The wireframe of the man is effective and would work well with typography from cover 8 with no additional graphics.
• Cover 1: Great colours. Strong typography. Lines are also strong in ‘thought’ and ‘landscape’

The 2 that really stand out and project a positive first impression are covers 1 and 8.

Maria

===============================

I can’t put all the comments here- but some friends went to the extent of finding the right font and asking us to use those in the text instead.

It was great. We tried to follow as much as we could (and as much as our Art Director would allow us to)

Now just if the economics could allow us to collectively arrive at the cost of the book too.

Think about it

Shalabh

Twitter- @shalabhpandey

Keep in touch for further updates.

“Think About It”- Ideas shaping digital media and marketing in the new decade

Its love’s labour. Really.

After more than a year of running ChasingTheStorm – with loads of loving time spent- and acquiring loads of loving friend circle, this is it. I put together a book.

“Think About It” is a book inspired by Ideas from this website. With more meat, more thoughts and well, in a different format. The title of the book is actually the signature I use in most articles.

The book covers Digital Media and Marketing trends in the new decade, Mobile Media, new marketing paradigms and Marketing Case studies.

It is written not as a tutorial to digital media platforms or Digital marketing 101. Rather- it attempts to raise a storm on specific Digital media issues. Offering an easy read for the evolved, thinking marketer, it is a book to raise debate- and expects a degree of interest in Digital Media.

I’ll talk more about it later- but since I am quite excited about it, I decided to put up the news anyways.

It’ll go in print soon (and available online and on the Kindle)- but as usual, not without your support in its making. I need you to help pick up the right cover design.

My good friend Ankur Khurana volunteered to get the cover design done- and boy- he did get them designed in two days flat. Many thanks buddy. And many thanks to MG Harti- the Art Director who helped the idea come into reality by doing many iterations.

So here are the designs- (the copy/text and some elements are dummy).

Just from a design layout perspective- let me know which ones do you like the best?

You could comment here, or

Email me: shalabhpandey at gmail dotcom

DM or @ at Twitter : @shalabhpandey

The cover Designs for “Think About It”

GROUP 1:

Cover One

Cover 2

Cover 3

Cover 4

GROUP 2:

Cover 5

Cover 6

Cover 7

Cover 8

Comment here, or

Email me: shalabhpandey at gmail dotcom

DM or @ at Twitter : @shalabhpandey

Think About It

Shalabh

This article was published in iMediaConnection. For readers of ChasingTheStorm, pasting it here too.

You can see more on what I have written for iMediaConnection here.

The article on What to expect from 2010:

It is that time of the year again. Prognostications by industry watchers on the big next thing in (digital) marketing/media are all over the place. This is truffle sniffing season and we are all dogs in the jungle trying to sniff out truffles. I have had some success at this in the previous seasons, and here’s some I sniff this time around. Whoof!

Digital disciplines: From a digital marketing ‘discipline’ standpoint, social media and web analytics will gain huge traction. We will see more organizations deploy web analytics managers or make their system administrators get trained on web analytics (poor guys). Within a year, they will move to hiring new staff, realizing that the previous strategy was not exactly working out well. This might happen with in-house digital marketing staff too.

Social media and web analytics together will be the biggest force in 2010. If you thought you had heard enough about social media in 2009, are a ‘social media basher’ or are waiting for the ‘fad’ to die off, you have my sympathies on your disappointment. Not the least in 2010. As a matter of fact, analytics and social media will get closely intertwined. We are going to see this reach a different level of sophistication from a user and marketer perspective. More pain for the marketers, and cheerio to the users.

Omniture has realized that off site analytics needs to be tied in to onsite analytics in a seamless fashion and with one single tool. This is just the beginning. We will see multi-purpose tools for social graph management and we will see one tool attempting to aggregate reports being generated from multiple current tools like PeopleBrowser, SocialOmph, Hootsuite, Scoutlab, Radian6, Spiral16, Lazyfeed, etc. We will see many players entering in to this field and will see many acquisitions. The bigger sized companies will acquire the smaller companies to help provide a holistic interface. Whether or not this integration can truly happen is a subject of debate. There might not be a Swiss army knife for multiple reporting formats, but this will be attempted at the least.

Along with the maturing of the social media space, both from a user and marketer perspective, we will see mobile coming to play — finally. Social networking apps, location based apps and better, more robust mobile payment solutions will emerge. MOL buying Friendster is already being seen as social networking marrying casual gaming, ecommerce and mobile. I am tempted to mention color codes/QR codes in places other than Japan, but there is no evidence to see it coming next year (which is a pity). I will give it a miss at least for the first half of 2010.

Platform: From a platform perspective, expect to see ads on Twitter. Not really a prophecy since this has been in the offing for some time. But expect to see ‘differently’ targeted ads on Twitter. Expect to see contextual targeting acquire a new meaning. Facebook and LinkedIn will become more aggressive in advertising and we will see the emergence of more intelligent ads based on user behaviour, metadata information and interest.

Format: From a format standpoint, we are going to see the emergence of video. Not only will there be more marketing via video, there will be a further explosion of user generated content on video, specifically with an Asian perspective. And this will have an impact on both software-led and hardware-led services. Apart from the conventional players in digital imaging, we have heard about Cisco (acquiring) going full throttle with their Flip device, and there is no reason why there will not be a Chinese counterpart (maybe more loaded) — at half the cost. With all of this, happy videos to you.

Apart from video, we are going to see the reinvention of the banner space. Ads will be more rich, interactive and at the risk of sounding clichéd, ‘engaging’.

Off-site analytics: In off-site analytics (I don’t know if this is a term yet, but what I mean by this is  measuring all actions with respect to the brand happening outside of the ‘website’) I see the action-attribution phenomenon picking up steam. How different disciplines come together to achieve ultimate results will be the talk to watch out for (I am already working on this for the past few months). There will also be a marriage of offline metrics and online metrics. Online GRPs will be talked about a lot.

Alternate: Towards the second half of the next year, I see a wave of cloud-based services. Added to that, Chrome-powered net books — specialised single-purpose $100 laptops, towards the end of the year, will rule. How will that affect advertising/marketing? I would say this is still early days for this, and something to keep an eye on.

Client demands: From a client-agency relationship perspective, I see clients asking agencies for real digital expertise and holistic digital marketing offerings. They will demand subject matter specialists from the agencies. No one in advertising/marketing is pureplay ‘offline’ nowadays, so clients and agencies will quickly realize the difference that pureplay specialists bring to the table. Of course communications has always been ‘integrated’, hence we will see a re-emergence in demand for digital professionals. I also foresee them being groomed in TV/print advertising, in a shift from what we have seen in the past.

I hoped to write from a practical on-ground approach rather than something drastic and way too futuristic.

Web^sys: It surprises me when people, in their enthusiasm over sounding ‘cool’, say that the next big thing is semantic search, augmented reality or even brain/retina scanning technologies. Realistically speaking, before they mature, they are still pretty much ‘star trek’. Not unachievable but just immature.

There will be no ‘Web 3.0′ (as a term) but what I think is coming, as the next version of the web, is this — and this will happen from 2010 onwards:

The web 2.0 or conversational space will see a new level of sophistication. There will be better organization of content and more structured creation of content. Simply put, we will see the chaotic and unorganized nature of today’s conversational web become more systematic.

We will see the emergence of the ‘Systematic Web’ or Web^sys. The name itself will lead to the meaning unlike ‘Web 1.0′, ‘Web 2.0′ or ‘Web 3.0′ — which have been open to interpretation.

What do I mean by ‘Systematic’ and what are the findings that led me to this? I have covered this phenomenon in detail here. I invite you to give your opinions. The more truffles, the better it is. Happy Holidays. Whoof!

Think about it

Shalabh

OK. I give in. I succumbed to writing my Digital Marketing predictions for year 2010. The past few years have been spot on and I thought it might be good to pen down some thoughts- and revisit them later next year to get a pervert pleasure of how much and how many of them have been right.

iMediaConnection published the article, but a quick post explaining really what is the next wave for the digital media.

Essentially, my 2010 Digital media predictions are from a grounded and rational perspective. Of course, all of us are like Truffle hunting dogs at this time of the year- hunting for trends instead of truffles- and trusting our noses to get us there. But key is to keep expectations in place and have a more grounded perspective on what is practically achievable in the next 12 months timespan.

I have mentioned a few things- that you can find in another article , but I wanted to highlight one special point.

Of all the prognostications surrounding what the next wave around Digital / Social Media going to be, here is mine.

Translated, it means- The Systematic Web.

This is the next real wave on the internet. Actually, it is already happening in a way.

After Web 2.0, surely there will be no Web 3.0 (as in the term). Web 2.-0 as a term has also been less structured and open to interpretation in a lot of ways.

With Web 2.0 and the conversational wave on the internet, came the unorganized, free-for-all culture. Your digital conversations and footprints became haphazard, cumbersome and clunky.

The new paradigm and the next phase of the internet will focus on organization of this content.

The web 2.0 or conversational space will see a new level of sophistication. There will be better organization of content and more structured creation of content. Simply put, we will see the chaotic and unorganized nature of today’s conversational web become more Systematic.

We will see the emergence of the ‘Systematic Web’ or Web raised to the power of system . The name itself will lead to the meaning unlike ‘Web 1.0’, ‘Web 2.0’ or ‘Web 3.0’- which have been open to interpretation.

We have seen Twitter organization via lists- and Facebook organization with Live Vs News feeds. We have seen more privacy controls and better content organization by platforms themselves.

Not to mention the huge third party ‘organizers’ that have cropped up in the system. We have seen Friendfeed, Hootsuite, Tweetdeck- and so many others. Essentially what do they attempt to do? They organize content in a more meaningful way than the original platform owners. The Systematic Web.

Multiple platform fatigue syndrome? We have Posterous. Problems with finding the right conversations? We have many conversation monitoring services- that could systematize random conversations by various attributes- sentiments/influence/volume/topics- you name it. On the move?  Web 2.0 ratings not enough? Welcome Foursquare, Rummble,  Gowalla and what not.

Need to port your persona? Need one key to many sites? Easier than Feeds and Open ID? No worries. Facebook has Facebook connect, Google has Google Friend connect.

And now Google also has another one- Google Social Search.

Talking about search, It is not just Google- Twitter launched better search options a while ago- and included the ability to add an additional search modifier- location (and even sentiments) to the search (You could search ‘fit’ with a smiley to see positive or happy sentiments about fit and ‘fit’ with a for negative sentiments). Facebook too now allows for searching only your network or across Facebook.

This is not just Web 2.0. Think about it, it is all about Systematizing the present web. It is Web^sys

Systematization implies:

The next wave is already upon us- and it is not Augmented Reality (yet). Not sending ad messages by brain scanning. Not even the semantic web. It is the Systematic Web.

Web^sys

Think about it

Shalabh

Avinash Kaushik is one of my favorite Web Analytics professionals.

Just had a string of conversations with him recently- and I am sure he won’t mind my sharing this with readers of ChasingTheStorm.

The conversation string stemmed from one of his posts where he discussed analyzing Twitter. This is also interesting because usually Web Analytics professionals  speak about “on-site” elements.

While I agree with many of things that Avinash has to say, I had some points of difference.

It is always a challenge to be  speaking to someone of his calibre on Analytics- but this is something quite close to me and I decided to out forth my 2 cents.

I am including the conversation here as it happened:

Thread 1- My response to Avinash’s post (with references to points made in his post):

Avinash had mentioned (amongst other things) that

• “Number of retweets per thousand followers” is a good metric as a measure of efficiency and value provided and people voting with their clicks, all rolled into one.
• A metric like “Follower:Followed” ratio is not worth it

To this, my 2 cents (with humility and some apprehension)

*Number of retweets per thousand followers is a good metric.
However, due to the nature of twitter- this would probably not be fair to someone who tweets less Vs someone who tweets more often.(Assuming ceteris paribus).
So if A has 1000 followers and sent 10 tweets a day out of which 1 gets RT-ed, my ratio is 0.1 RTs per thousand followers; and if B has the same 1000 followers and send 100 tweets a day of which 10 gets RT-ed, my ratio is 1 RTs pe thousand followers

I think (number of updates / number of retweets*100) could be a good indicator.
In the above example, this percentage would signify that A is actually equal to B- because the propensity of his tweets to spread is equal to B- irrespective of the number of followers (that is 10%)
This number would signify more closely what is the propsensity of messages to spread and perhaps also the quality of tweets sent (a larger score would mean more of my tweets are found valuable)

“I don’t care about Follower/Follow Ratio-
I think it is disingenuous to follow everyone who follows you just for appearances sake when you have no intention of reading what they all say. Why be fake?”

Quite true. On its own self this ratio is probably not so useful. But maybe this is not a metric to be seen in isolation- rather in a combination with other metrics.

At the least, it could ‘flag’ certain cases:

*There could be some more ways to interpret this metric- significantly more people following you then you following them could denote less ’socialbility’ but more ‘authority’. I mean if I am a celeb/authority – I cannot meaningfully listen to all- so I have a high follower-follow ratio. On the flip side, a low ratio could imply a twitter-er who follows people recklessly (in the hope that they would follow you back)- and in turn follows a significantly larger number of people than other people follow them.

This metric- coupled with a metric like, say- “rate of follower adoption” could give more meaningful insights into the “genuine authority/sociability” IMO

It is quite simplistic yet not entirely useless IMO- if we know what are we using it for (like most other metrics)

Shalabh

=============================================

Thread 2: Avinash’s response to this (This is not on the post- we communicated over email- but I am sure Avinash would not mind sharing this):

Thanks so much for the kind suggestions, they are wonderful good for thought.

The reason for making the metric per thousand followers is precisely to “democratize” the comparison, so someone with many followers and another with a lower follower count can be compared. The other goal is to set a higher bar for the person with high followers – if you have lots of followers and they are relevant then they would all retweet.

Your alternative is very nice, but it provides a different perspective (note: I am not saying a bad perspective, I am saying a different perspective).

To the last point, I am afraid by using terms like “sociability” and  “authority” you are falling into the trap I don’t want to. Sure there is a difference between how many people a “celebrity” can follow vs how many a normal person like me can follow. But in the end the Dunbar Number dictates that there is a pretty hard limit as to how many anyone can follow, and listen. 150. That makes the ratio even less valuable.

=================================================

Thread 3: My response to Avinash

Hi Avinash

I know you have a packed schedule and I don’t want to make it a long thread, but somehow this is taking me a while to get convinced. I am quite passionate about “Conversational/social media” metrics, and so will reply with some more of my doubts  :

Shalabh:

My doubt is this:

• Does the propensity to be retweeted depend on quality of followers or quality of your tweets? Probably it is the latter- and not the former.

• Also, due to the nature of Twitter- an average tweet stays in the stream for a few seconds. If I have a lot of followers from a different time zone (say I am from Singapore and have a lot of people from the US following me), the propensity of getting RTed would be reduced- because maybe many of my followers don’t even get exposed to that tweet.

Whereas if you compare this to the number of tweets I sent Vs the number of retweets, it might be a little more fair for comparison.

Yes I agree both of these achieve different objectives. But even then, I would contest that using ‘followers’ will make the analysis result a bit- well, wide.

Just because all people using Twitter are not the same. And this would make it a little more complex when diving deep:

• This would demand more answers like: what is the mix of followers- (a more homogeneous mix will react similarly to a message) , time zones, how influential are the followers themselves (are more influential people less likely to retweet you), how many people are the followers following themselves- and so on.

You are being humble, but of course you know you are a celebrity.

Apologies on the terms. The idea was not to indulge in “buzzword play”- rather defining what exactly could this measure.

So how I would put it is this way – on channels like Twitter it is difficult to have a meaningful and personalized one to one communication. By the Dunbar number, anyone who has more than 150 people in their network is doing injustice to everyone.

Relationships on virtual networks are different from real life relationships, in my opinion. And realistically speaking, even in real life, we filter communication and respond  to only a fraction of communication from even our close ones.

To that- the ideal “follower to follow” ratio need not be ’1′ . As you mentioned- you need not follow everyone who follow you.

But if we put “cut off points” it might have more to say.

Like if the difference is more than 30%- you either follow everyone recklessly (30% more following than followers) OR do not want to follow a third of people that follow you (which means either you are lethargic or plain “unsocial”).

Couple this with “rate of follower adoption”- and it could tell you whether you acquire followers organically or inorganically.

Just my 2 cents. Reminds me of that meaningless REM song (Losing my religion), where they quip:  “Oh! No I said too much”

==========================

Think about it

Shalabh

Earlier on, I discussed the philosophy behind the marketing services agency of the future.

As a next step- here’s some food for though on the skill sets required to steer such a company.

I wrote this in two parts- featuring 6 new skill sets for an agency.

• Part 1- 3 skill sets discussed in Part 1 in iMedia connection article-
• Part 2 is here- the other 3 skill sets

The earlier three skill sets I proposed were those of a social scientist, a psychologist and a TransMedia Planner.

But that’s not all- there are more people that will be required to steer this boat. Take your picks.

Of course the future marketing agencies will be dominated with professionals with ‘digital mindsets’- so many of my recommendations will have that bias.

The Channel Specialists

First understand my usage of the difference between a ‘channel’ and ‘platform’-

If we take the example of search engines,

Channel= Search;

Platform= Google, Yahoo, Bing, Baidu, etc. (my version- not necessarily industry speak)

Who are they?

These are specialists in understanding how a channel works. Specifically for the digital medium, we need Channel specialists. It is no longer enough to have a generalist media planner- to start off with. We need channel specialists- and groom them into appreciating other channels and their interplay- but have a focus on one channel first.

So we will have a search channel specialist- keeping up with all the changes in the search engine space, to a social networking specialist- who takes care of those platforms.

We need guys to own the space- alongside appreciating other channels.

What are the marketing implications?

Better understanding of channels enable marketers to create specially suited campaigns for these platforms. Each of these platforms has an affinity audience that behave in a particular way on these platforms. Be where the customers are and get involved.

Why is this important now?

The fragmentation brought about by the digital media is too dispersed and too fast moving. Not only individual platforms (like Google) – but entire channels (Like the Search engine landscape). Then there are digital signages, and mobility based media channels.

If this is not enough, there is gong to be further fragmentation ahead and the impact will be both deep and wide.

The Numbers Champion

Who are they?

They are professionals- comfortable with numbers (Cheeky I know. But you get the idea). I would go a little far. I would say- marketing agencies could get such people from non advertising domains- like, say, investment banking analysts (of course we can’t to pay them in the industry that we are. Or wait a minute from 2009 onwards- maybe we can) or ‘stock market analysts’.

Statisticians would also do just fine. Great actually.

What are the marketing implications?

Marketing will be more science oriented. More about facts than gut feel. Till now, it has been 80% art and the rest is science. Now it will be more like 50-50 split. We would see- better trend mapping, response modeling and cross media impact measurement.

Of course this does not replace creativity or gut feel. But it could put them on steroids.

Why is this important now?

Again- with the advent of “digital” in the marketers arsenal- over the past few years- analytics and data and reporting and dashboards have become mainstream and not just buzzwords.

This will soon be used across media and not just digital media. As a matter of fact, analytics would start being used for cross media impact measurement.

Even within digital media- the importance never ceases- with the advent of ad exchanges- media agencies are becoming more arbitrage oriented (they already were arbitrage agencies to an extent). Soon enough- with agency exchanges- we will arbitrage at a more cut throat level.

Even if we forget arbitrage, we are increasingly looking to quantify the value of any action by the consumer- and that is best achievable by redefining data crunching away from sales orientation to action orientation.

The Trend Watcher:

Who are they?

Well- just like the trans media story planner- this is not a profile you will get by searching on the job sites. You will probably need to spot someone from within the agency or give a dual responsibility. Like the social scientist we talked about- or the existing account planners- etc. Best is to build a culture and a system in the company to spot and report trends.

What are the marketing implications?

Today, communications- and marketing need to be a little opportunistic. Trends (buzz) happens overnight- has a shorter life span- and goes up and comes down pretty much very fast. Like fireworks. I call it the Buzz Life Cycle.

marketing today needs to take a ride on the Buzz Life cycle- and get additional mileage.

Why is this important now?

Trends never had the momentum they have now. Memes are abound- in Twitter trends to Facebook News feeds to YouTube home page mentions to slideshare features.

With TV becoming interactive (social) and Newsprint becoming digitized- memes are going to spread like wildfire.

I am also tempted to add that the CEO of this agency would be a mix of Chanakya and Socrates.

Great business manager and a thinker combined.

Alongside- to string all of this together- the agency will also need a manager. Someone who could think across all of this, and could manage the skill sets while understanding the nuances of each.

Not your usual Account Director. This is Account Director- on Steroids. (well- in a good sort of way)

Think about it.

Shalabh

In part 4 of this 4 part video brainstorm, we discuss how to market a start up.

Start ups usually do not have the luxury of huge advertising spends- and this pushed the boundaries being creative and using only the most efficient mediums for maximum bang for their buck.

Thorben highlights how he uses the Influencers (what I call the MicroInfluencers) to gain traction.

I had lots to discuss- but this was about them- and some good points were made .

Enjoy

Shalabh

In part 1 and part 2 of this 4 series video brainstorm, we discussed Orsiso and Advertising on social networks previously.

In Part3, we discuss whether downloadable appplications have a significant advantage over browser based or web based applications. Also another point- the funding story- the issues- what do investors look for, and the like.