Lipstick on the pig

Last week I was talking to a headhunter seeking to fill a senior contract management role for which I had been recommended. I had polished up the resume and sent it as requested, and he had browsed my blog and Linkedin profile, but the conversation was awkward, filling in and rehashing the detail of my long career to the exclusion of the bigger view.

Towards the end, I simply asked him what he was looking for, and the answer surprised. His response was “virtually everyone I see who I have not met before substantially embellishes if not outright lies on their resume, I am looking for the inconsistencies”.

What a conversation stopper!.

All I could say was “what you see is what you get”. No lies, no embellishments, no credit taken personally for successes of the teams I have led, no walking away from the blunders, no lipstick on the pig.

 

 

 

Google + on air, an anti-facebook bomb?

This new avenue to live broadcast, as distinct from posting a video on Youtube, seems to me to be a game-changer.

Social media lives by interaction, engagement, that is what gives it its power,  and to be able to go live to an audience, even if it is just your own family at first, offers the opportunity for the networking capacity of social media to accelerate at a logarithmic rate.

For a while I have wondered at the task facing Google competing against Facebook, which has an established base now of a billion, they have built formidable barriers to exit and entry, but “on air” could just change the equation.

The momentum seemed to be moving slowly towards Google, but this innovation will give it a great big shove, particularly in the light of the facebook IPO, with the shares currently being traded at 10% less than the issue price, and 25% below the peaks reached on the big day. There appears to be a healthy dose of cynicism  that has suddenly emerged as a result of the obscene amount of wealth facebook insiders have skimmed, whilst the gullible have done their dough, and this cynicism can only assist Google+ build some much needed competitive momentum.

Digital Darwinism.

It is simply a fact of life that digital media is evolving faster than the existing institutions around it, particularly the regulatory ones.

The decision during the week to reverse the Federal Courts decision on the streaming of “almost live” NRL and AFL games by Optus, determining that after all, it was a breach of copyright,  is a case in point. Regardless  of the merits of either sides case, and the logic that the continuing success of the professional codes relies on funding from TV rights, the world has moved on, but the business model of the professional games has not.

We will wait around for another year or so until the high court comes down with a decision, and there will be a winner and loser, but from a long term perspective, both will be losers, simply because another year has been wasted trying to shore up the gunwales against Digital Darwinism, and we all know how successful that has been in the music industry, newspaper publishing, and a host of others.

If both games wish to engage with youngsters, those who will be around for a while to fund the games by watching, buying branded gear, attending events, they need to consider how these youngsters consume entertainment, and adapt.

The current copyright law was conceived in the 1700’s, and whilst it has evolved, it no longer is a reflection of society, but a distorted shadow vainly trying to keep up with technical changes happening at digital speed.

What we share and how we are seen.

Emotional intelligence, EI has a whole lot of psychological mumbo jumbo surrounding it, a search will turn up almost a million articles. So, I’ll simplify all that by saying it is the capability a person has to empathise and then engage with another individual and/or group.

It is the thinking that underpins effective use of social media. We can all figure out how the algorithms work, and the how the interactions play out, but it is EI that creates the engagement.

I get a lot of stuff in my inbox , some, obviously, gets deleted immediately, some I share very selectively across my contacts, some I share with specific people, and some get spread via Twitter, Linkedin, et al. Why? Because what I share, plays a role in how others see me, and I want to be seen differently by different people, and groups of people.

It also varies by platform. 

For example, there are a lot of hits on celebrity foibles when reported in online news sources, but they do not get shared much. However,  we tend to share the pictures and stories of the tsunami in Japan, or the interesting article we find on a blog. 

We humans are social animals, we spend a lot of effort to shape the way others see us, as that will contribute to our acceptability in differing groups and situations, and what and how we communicate is more important in this connected age than ever before. 

Cognitive Surplus

This is a term coined by Clay Shirky to describe the ideas, skills, knowledge that resides in peoples minds, and on enterprise shelves, unused, ignored, and sometimes actively avoided.

His argument is that there has been a huge shift in behavior, no longer are we passive consumers of media, our expectation now is that we are also able to produce and share, and we all want to, hence the growth of social media. The story of the little girl looking for the mouse behind the TV screen towards the end of this talk on his notion of Cognitive Surplus, says it all.

It seems to me however, that we can push the idea a bit further, fragmenting it, focusing our thoughts a bit more, to recognise the potential value of the pieces. 

A product development brainstorming is nothing more than an effort to identify the knowledge, that sits around in peoples heads, research labs archives, unwanted prototypes, incomplete projects, solutions to customer problems suppliers have but do not recognise, and so on, but they are wasted because nothing is being done.

An Innovation surplus?

An idea that has exploded around Australia is that of “Mens Shed” an organisation that uses the skills of older blokes to make a contribution to their community, some retired, others just wanting to do something useful . This may be an example of a “Social Surplus”.

When you look around, there are many situations where unused brainpower and skills can be used better than they are now, finding a way to do that is leveraging the surplus that exists, and we all benefit.

 

 

Social branding brilliance.

Content is the new creativity.

In the “old days” a core part of developing advertising that had brand building as its purpose, was a need to be memorable, relevant, deliver a proposition, and cut through the clutter on TV (or magazines, or radio, our only choices) all in thirty seconds. Then you repeated the message, as the common wisdom said, until you were sick of it, because the punters were only just getting to recognise it.

All that is changed, now media choices are numbered in the thousands, and you need to engage punters, one by one.

The content of the communication therefore is the still the key, but you get only one shot at it in most cases, and you rely on, perhaps pray for, the recipient to pass it on to like minded  people they know.

Makes it pretty hard.

How do you market a bookshop? Common wisdom would say get really deeply into a niche with a few enthusiasts, or get out while you can, as it is all going on-line.

However, every now and again, a piece of luck comes along, that when combined with creativity and truly great understanding of what your  market, wherever they are, may be looking for, you get something like this short bit of brilliance from Barter Books.

Would you go anywhere else?