December 2013

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31        

« The Margin of Utility: Keeping the Ordinary Expectation...Ordinary | Main | Meetup? Embarking on a 41,000 mile Tour »

October 02, 2009

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83452eab969e20120a5b58fe2970b

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Compelling Compilation: Videos That Make the Case for Something:

Comments

football customized jerseys

As far as Paul Seaman goes, I agree with him that social media "just is" - its a set of tools that are neutral - meaning how you use them is how good or bad they are. Where I differ from him is his perception of the "not revolution." I don't think social media created a revolution - they provided a transmission belt for support of one though. The revolution was a social and cultural one - and it came in how we communicate, not how we do business. It was driven by the easy access to one and many that the social Web provides and by the ubiquity and commoditization of cell phones. We are now able to, via voice or text or online tools, communicate 24X7 in an untethered way with a nearly immediate response expected and, at least from peers, delivered more often than not. THAT is revolutionary because it revolutionizes how we converse and what we expect of all institutions and individuals. There is a fundamental cultural change embedded in that.

Bob Warfield

Ideas go through the same stages as people during a revolution. Denial is that first stage and we have plenty of that for Social CRM. There is no revolution, it's a not revolution. That's a good sign. It means the establishment feels challenged. Many want to hear the message that it doesn't matter and you can safely ignore it. That is a saleable message, and one we've seen for all the revolutions. But it just sets up the second stage. Anger when some have the temerity to show success while the establishment is still in denial. Anger that people just don't understand that the wool has been pulled over their eyes. I see that happening for Social CRM too.

Bargaining is the third stage, and is an interesting one. Bargaining is all about the constant dialog over whether Social CRM is really new, or just CRM done right with a few cheap pyrotechnics for hype value. Clearly we've got Bargaining already too.

Will we get Depression and then Acceptance?

If Social really is a much lower friction form of communication, it's coming, and it's coming sooner than anyone would expect. 5 years? Sounds too soon. 10 years? Sounds too long. But at some point, companies will start waking up depressed that their competitors did this and stole a march.

Great video series, Paul!

Cheers,

BW

Paul G.

Hi Prem,
Thanks for the responses. I agree with you entirely that $3 million in Dell purchases is hardly a case study. Ultimately, whether for sales, marketing or customer service, Twitter is a channel - and only one - and while it has sex appeal at the moment, won't make or break any company whether the results are good or bad. I also think in general that its a lousy sales channel because not that much is going to be purchased with 140 characters of description or discussion. I also think that while there are exceptional customer service efforts being made using Twitter (Think Frank Eliason and @comcastcares), it is only one part of a set that has to be used to provide great customer service. Its not a surprise that Frank's @comcastcares rankings are huge and great while Comcast as a whole still sits near the bottom of many customer service surveys - though I think that Frank keeps them off the bottom.

As far as Paul Seaman goes, I agree with him that social media "just is" - its a set of tools that are neutral - meaning how you use them is how good or bad they are. Where I differ from him is his perception of the "not revolution." I don't think social media created a revolution - they provided a transmission belt for support of one though. The revolution was a social and cultural one - and it came in how we communicate, not how we do business. It was driven by the easy access to one and many that the social Web provides and by the ubiquity and commoditization of cell phones. We are now able to, via voice or text or online tools, communicate 24X7 in an untethered way with a nearly immediate response expected and, at least from peers, delivered more often than not. THAT is revolutionary because it revolutionizes how we converse and what we expect of all institutions and individuals. There is a fundamental cultural change embedded in that.

So while Paul Seaman is right about social media, I don't think he's right about the not-revolution. Its just a different one from a different place than he thought.

Account Deleted

Great collection Paul. :D For the first video, I would recommend this post as a rider/caveat: http://paulseaman.eu/2009/09/theres-no-social-media-revolution/

And Dell's $3 million via Twitter is, IMHO, not a case study: http://sfh.tumblr.com/post/201095191/dell-makes-0-0025-of-its-revenues-from-twitter

The comments to this entry are closed.