citizen Evangelist

Many businesses find great wealth in focusing on the small things. For example, banks and other financial institutions are very fond of the benefits of partial percentages and fractional cents. When collected together, the sum of those parts is quite exciting.

What if there were an opportunity to do the same thing with time? After all, time is money, and based upon my earlier arbitrage post, wouldn’t there be an opportunity to do some great things?

Let’s start with calculating my spare time. Each year, I have time I can invest in projects of my fancy. That time can be broken down into these categories (assuming 365 days per year):
hours: 8,760
minutes: 525,600
seconds: 31,536,000

Now, in most cases, I’m going to have certain amounts of that time allocated to things that I really need. Those things are going to include sleeping, eating, and working.

Let’s say that I’m going to sleep 8 hours per day. On average I eat two real meals, and I spend and hour on each. For work, I’ll falsely state that I only spend 8 hours each day at work, five days a week (40 hours).  Of course, I do get sick time, vacation, and holidays. For argument sake, let’s say that there are 1′840 hours which are allocated as work (2080 work hour possible per year - 80 hours for holiday - 80 hours for vacation - 80 hours for sick/personal time).

The annual time allocated will include:

Sleep: 2,920 hours (8hrs x 365 days)
Eating: 730 hours (2hrs x 365 days)
Working: 1,840 hours

Allocated time: 5,490 hours per year

Now, let’s figure out how much time I have left to discretionally invest.

Available hours: 8,760 hours
- Allocated hours: 5,490 hours
======================
Free hours: 3,270 hours

Stated in the same terms as above:
Free hours: 3,270
Minutes: 196,200
Seconds: 11,772,000

Now, imagine that I can get 24 seconds of your time to complete a small project. What would that be worth? In general, the amount of time required to complete a project will take much longer than this, but we’re talking about less than 1/2 of a minute. This represents
0.00020% of your free time per year…

Now, imagine that I can get 10% of the population to give me 45 seconds of time.

Population Clock:
U.S. 299,315,488
World 6,530,710,933
13:14 GMT (EST+5) Jul 26, 2006

US: 29.9 million people x 24 seconds = 718,357,171 seconds
World: 653.1 million people x 24 seconds = 15,673,706,239 seconds

Let’s make that tangible:
US time: 11.9 million minutes = 199,544 hours = 8,314 days = 22.8 years
World time: 261.2 million minutes = 4.4 million hours = 181,408 days = 497 years

Now.. we can argue about my assumptions… but let’s create one more calculation. What if I would normally need to pay minimum wage to accomplish these tasks, but was able to offer a solution which eliminated that cost? What type of value creation are we talking about?

US: 199,544 hours x $5.15 USD = $ 1,027,650 USD
World: 4.4 million hours x $5.15 USD = $ 22,422,107 USD

Now.. imagine I could get that accomplished more than one time per year.

Following the example of Linus’ Law, which states “given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow,” I believe that we can expand this to state that given enough eyeballs, all problems are shallow. And, I think that the companies who figure out how to leverage this crowdsourcing framework are going to drive the next wave of innovation.

Twitter This

Usuario: Password:

Making and supporting a product why trying to grow a company is hard work. I’ve often told my non-co-worker friends that I imagine it to be very much like raising a child.

In the early days, before there is any real product, you have an idealized picture of what your baby will grow up to be: innovative, paradigm changing, etc. And then, after nine months of hard word, and a terrible period of labor getting the first version out to market (beta or first customer ship), you’re exhausted.

You were running hard for the finish line only to figure out that once released, the real work begins.

Each hour you pour more of your heart and soul into the application, working hard to craft it in a way which meet your understanding of the need and helps you to accomplish the revenues required to either keep your doors open or the investors happy enough to continue funding your efforts.

Inevitably, the customers who start using your product have a different vision for its future than you do. This is your baby, but it is their tool. And, like any good parent, you have to do what you can to provide the best environment for your child, but you have to let it grow up on its own. When you are exhausted, working hard, and already anxious because no matter what you do you’re not seeing the level of growth you though you would see when the whole process started, its easy to get edgy. Its easy to start to take comments personal.

The one thing we must keep in mind, its not personal. Its business. If our business isn’t helping others to get their business done, this it does get personal. For our customers, it gets personal really quickly.

When I see something like this, it makes me cringe. I know I’ve been frustrated at times… having my best efforts criticized, critiqued, and told it came up short. Its not fun.

But, you know what? It’s part of the process. One commenter on this post at 37Signals pointed out the irony of how the customer’s word choices so closely mirrored their own using Google as proof.

Twitter This

Usuario: Password:

According to one analyst (Gartner I believe), the F1000 spends 1 trillion on marketing annually. $1 Trillion USD. Not million. Not Billion. Trillion.

The Evangelists for Customer Evangelists once again reinforce my intuition with the note on “Marketing isn’t broke, Its Broken.” I think I’m going to need to subscribe to Forrester at some point… if Peter Kim is on the angle I think he may be. His write-up: Reinventing the marketing Organization offers the following executive summary:

Today’s marketing organizations are broken. Three out of four marketing
departments have reorganized in the past two years. Almost 80% of marketers don’t influence a critical customer interaction like customer service, and 85% don’t even own the “four Ps” of marketing anymore. To regain effectiveness, marketers must transition to a Customer-Centric Marketing Organization. Doing so requires: 1) redesigning P&Ls and metrics; 2) shifting culture away from marketing communications; 3) investing in a customer relationship infrastructure; and 4) rethinking agency relationships.

I’ve been toying with the idea of using “Fire Marketing“ as a provocative claim for the solution we’re working on building. I’ve been working around the marketing organization for most of my career so I’m well within that definition, but its clear that something needs to be done.

As I’ve continued to observe what is going on in the market, it is my assumption that marketing is largely being executed as a functional role, not a strategic mission. In its classical sense, the four Ps (Price, Place, Product, & Promotion) implies so much more than what most marketers are responsible for in today’s world. In most of the organizations I’ve worked with, Pricing is held by finance or the executives. Product is owned by engineering or product management. Place is owned by operations. Promotion is owned by marketing.

Peter Drucker once said “The aim of marketing is to make selling superfluous.” When the four responsibilities are separated like that, its really hard for me to call the function marketing. It seems only logical that it should be called promotion. If the only level you have to adjust is promotion, no wonder so much money is spent and spent so poorly.

This is a symptom of the organizational dysfunction that exists… and I suppose is, in part, the responsibility of marketers to educate their companies as to the right path.

Twitter This

Usuario: Password:

I suppose it knew it… but I had never really thought about it.

An article on CNN referenced social networking sites as the ultimate marketing tools, promoting “the virtuoso of yourself.”

In certain ways, I’m sure that blogs fulfill the same lizard brain needs.

In a world of so much anonymity… so many strangers in the crowd. I suppose that deep down we all want to connect and belong and be liked.

Match.com and many others have long catered to individuals looking for members of the opposite sex. It only stands to reason that the disconnection that is our lives would ultimately drive the need to meet with or stay connected to others in a ‘non dating format.’

My 20 year reunion is coming up and I’ve been working with a few friends to find all of our classmates. We turned to Jot to facilitate this. Our graduating class was about 120 folks, if memory serves.. and we’ve managed to get over 50% to the site… and probably 1/2 of that group to create a page with some information about what’s happened in the last 18 years with pictures of the family.

Its amazing how technology has made it so easy for anyone to create content that is enjoyable. Most classmates spend hour upon hour reading each page with detail before posting their own information. Each page that is created gives a glowing perspective on what’s going on with their lives and their families. Its right out of a Norman Rockwell painting.

When the consumer takes on the role of the marketeer… how effective can marketeers be in reaching those individuals through traditional mediums?

Even now, I want individuals to come to my site… leave a comment… enjoy their stay. But, my traffic is low. I haven’t built the infrastructure of linklove required to show up in the relevant search results. I’m now focused on how to promote my site in order to fulfill my lizard brain need for love and acceptance.

Companies that provide a customer with a venue to promote themselves will begin to endear that customer. Especially since we all have a small bit of anxiety that we may not be in the types of relationships that will allow us to accomplish the goals we have.

Twitter This

Usuario: Password:

I bought the book last week. I’ve been looking at it each day, but haven’t cracked it open yet.

I’m reading three others at this time (1, 2, & 3), and I’m in various stages of completion on each. When a new text hits the shelves, i’m drawn to it.. Especially when the topic is so near and dear to my heart. I have it, but now its hard to know whether its time to break my promise to those authors and start with this one, or to keep the course.

I’m a maven.
I’m a visionary or inventor rational
I’m a conductor, naturally and adapted.
I’m a cross-pollinator & collaborator who is working to be the storyteller.

For the last year, I’ve been working on a project with my team that is a tail enabling technology. What I haven’t been able to do is get the story down. I appreciate great storytellers. That’s one of the reasons I enjoy Guy’s work. He tells a mean story.

What I think is interesting is the way that Guy assumes folks will forget the important elements of implementing a long-tail play. I think our society and our infrastructure often prevents us from implementing solutions that fit this category.

Have you ever tried to give an elevator pitch for a new type of solution? Imagine that you were doing so for a new long-tale technology? Rob Adams keeps telling me that it sounds too good. “Cures cancer, tastes great, costs a buck” is the line I’ve heard him say most often. I know most VCs are equally cynical.

The irony… if you build your solution with the philosophy that the customer is the platform, you don’t need to be that cynical. But if you’re going to require me to keep me to 30 seconds, it will sound too good. Give me 30 minutes, and I’ll start to make you a fan.

Let’s be clear here. The Long Tail is merely the application of the efficient markets theory. I give Chris major props for coining the phrase, giving it context, and creating the framework for all the stories. But, at the end of the day, this is Business 101 stuff. Perhaps it does sound too good to be true. Perhaps economists have been deluding themselves for years. I don’t happen think so.

And, to Guy’s point, I don’t happen think that the folks who matter will forget.

I think that the real problem is that very few producers of Long Tail technologies will survive long enough to realize their dream because “the system” beats it out of us.

Twitter This

Usuario: Password: