Monthly Archives: August 2010

Our Food Supply: The New Frontier

Our Food Supply: The New Frontier

Nothing highlights the need for a change in our food production processes more than the massive egg recall of the past month, and the fear that the entire food safety system in America is broken. A spate of books and films, such as Food Inc. and the entire corpus of Michael Pollan’s work, has tried to deliver the same message before, but until it hit your own household, you probably haven’t heard it.

At Singularity University in Silicon Valley, however, food production is receiving a good deal of scrutiny.

Singularity U is an amazing experiment, a graduate program where accomplished entrepreneurs, willing students, and social venture advocates come together to study how technology can be used to address the world’s biggest problems.

The program is led by serial entrepreneur and angel investor Salim Ismail, a friend who always invites me to NASA’s Moffitt Field, where the university is housed, to watch the team presentations at the end of a session. This session I caught the team presentation on Food.

At Singularity U, no project is addressed that doesn’t have the possibility of impacting people on a scale of billions Besides food, this session’s participants are working on issues around Water, Energy, Upcycle, and Space.

Everyone at Singularity U–students and mentors–is already a thought leader. Together, they aim for disruptive change, and they consider several problems simultaneously because Ismail believes that

disruptive change often comes from outside a given field, not from within.

Thus, the food team was talking about how those other big issues are impacted by current food production processes, and how advances in fields of water use, energy, recycling and even space exploration can be used to change food production.

Serious issues around food supply and food purity can be solved by lighting, sensor technology, and biotech. Transportation of food from the farm to the city, for example, is a huge energy drain, and the team was advocating urban farming, vertical farming, and hydroponic farming as components of a solution. [The actual form of their proposed solution can't be disclosed, because it is the intellectual property of the team, not me].

These advances take less water and less land. and will re-connect the food producer with the food consumer, automatically creating better food safety. The South Pole, for example, gets its food supply from a green house at the site, because the cost of transporting food such distances would be prohibitive. The food down there is safe without hordes of inspectors, and the techniques used to grow food at the South Pole can be transferred almost anywhere. [See the TV series "Weeds" for examples of how modern growing techniques can be applied to agriculture.]

The gating factor for huge sustainable change in the food production system, I conclude, isn’t the availability of better food production and processing technology, but the perverse subsidies of the agriculture industry, which now encourages the wasteful use of land and energy.

Like everything else, renewable processes in agriculture will require economies of scale. How to scale when the incentives all go in the other direction is the major issue. These participants spent hours comparing current agricultural costs to the costs of new technology, and finally came up against the entrenched interests in an industry that is as old as humankind.




Amplify

Flowtown Extends Reach of Marketing Programs

Flowtown Extends Reach of Marketing Programs
Flowtown’s “coming out” this week gives me another occasion to write about the  use of new social tools like Twitter and Facebook to manage relations with customers and potential customers. Now that brands are becoming more aggressive users ot these social tools, there’s a danger that consumers will be inundated with marketing messages and unwanted advances, especially if they are not yet customers. The messages have become “touch points” scheduled by a system;  the major brands have many ways to touch  a customer — advertising, public relations, direct marketing, telemarketing, and now SCRM.
With all that at their disposal, no wonder brands sometimes appear to be stalking consumers. But those are the big brands. What about the smaller ones? The ones that need to build a brand and can’t afford to at the same time.
Tom’s Tavern, a restaurant in Phoenix Arizona that has been in business for twenty twenty-five years, is a perfect example of a business that could use social media effectively without stalking customers. Indeed, Tom’s opened at the time when marketing was something a restaurant in downtown Phoenix didn’t need to do.
But times change, and things got more competitive.  About five years ago, I showed the founder, a friend of mine, how to use Constant Contact to send a monthly newsletter of specials, recipes, changes, and events. His loyal clientele opened that newsletter for the first several years in almost amazing numbers, because they do love the restaurant. And they came back to dine.
And then the number of opens started to go down. And down. The owner called me recently for a new idea, and I suggested social media. But for small and medium-size businesses, who don’t have an entire marketing team (in this restaurant, the owner greets the guests, writes and sends the newsletter, and even collects the business cards for the mailing list), email is often the only answer, and they have to make it work.
How does a business like this optimize its email customer list in a way that makes sense?  Luckily for Tom’s Tavern, this is the summer Flowtown came into my life.
I have started using it to market AZEC10, the nonprofit conference I organize annually for entrepreneurs.
I easily imported my business contacts and all the previous conference attendee lists. Then I wrote an email, and Flowtown scheduled a compaign for me to find my contacts on Facebook and Twitter (there are other options, too, ).
It scheduled intervals between emails, and gave me choices whether I wanted to reach all my contacts or just  Twitter followers with a message appropriate to them and another just for Facebook friends.
The first email, to my Twitter friends, with whom I am VERY engaged, got a 73.6% open rate and a 16.7% click rate, and several registrations. The second, which went to my entire Gmail contact list, and got a dramatically worse response, convinced me that my overall email list (which I never curate) is worthless. That’s what small businesses find out every day.
But if they use the people on their email list who are also on their social networks, they can find the deeper relationships they already have.  Or establish those relationships.
Flowtown gave me immediate good information.
I had names on my Gmail list like “support at deru.net” (my ISP) and the generic addresses of several mail lists.  if you consider uploading Gmail to Flowtown, remember that Gmail saves the email address of everyone you have ever emailed.Curate that list before you upload it.
Flowtown showed me how to make the most of my email contacts– how to find them elsewhere and deepen my relationship to them. By the time of the conference, I will not only have more ticket sales, but better lists. And metrics. Small businesses often don’t have ANY metrics, let alone the comparative metrics Flowtown has given me.
If you are dipping your toe into social marketing, Flowtown might be for you.
.




Amplify

Protecting Your Online Privacy

Protecting Your Online Privacy

The remarkable growth of social networking has resulted in millions of people now using these social media services to share information with friends and as an alternative platform for private communications.

With an abundance of free tools like Facebook and Twitter, the barriers-to-entry in the social-media realm are so low that anyone can join. Social media is still a young and evolving field. Fundamental changes in communications technology and the way people use it require a clear set of rules to safeguard online privacy.

Recent stories about the increasing number of security breaches merits a review of a few simple guidelines that we’ve all heard before. Here’s just a few basic rules to remember:

Avoid using the same password for different systems that are important to you. Passwords are the key to your online account information.  Doing so puts you at risk should anyone discover this single password. For this reason, you are strongly advised to have a unique password for any services performed online.

When choosing a suitable password, you might consider the following:

  • Be different – Avoid using the same password for different services.
  • Don’t be personal – Do not be tempted to use passwords that can be easily guessed, e.g. children’s names, pets’ names, birth dates, telephone numbers.
  • Never write them down – We strongly recommend that you never write down or otherwise record your passwords. If, however, you feel that you have no alternative but to do so, you should ensure that you never write down or otherwise record your passwords in a way that can be understood by somebody else.
  • In any event, you should never disclose your Internet login details anywhere online except at your trusted and verified sites, such as an online banking website which should be accessed in the normal way and never via a link in an email.

Keep computer viruses and spyware out. There are hundreds of new viruses created every month. Some are relatively harmless, but most are designed to delete files, compromise your confidential information, or damage your operating system. Both PCs and Macs are vulnerable, and the latest generation of viruses can even spread without human intervention. The best Internet security step to stop them is installing the best antivirus software and update it regularly. Same applies to spyware.

Avoid downloading toolbars
(for example, the Google toolbar or Yahoo toolbar).  Toolbars may permit the collection of information about your web surfing habits.  Watch out that you do not inadvertently download a toolbar when downloading software, particularly free software.

Avoid using the same web site for both your web-based email and as your search engine.  Email accounts will always require some type of a login, so if you use the same site as your search engine, your searches can be connected to your email account.  By using different web sites for different needs — perhaps Yahoo for your email and Google for your searches — you can help limit the total amount of information retained by any one site.

The key to protecting your privacy is knowing how to protect your personal information. Participation in online culture is just like participation in any culture. It comes with responsibilities. Individuals who are concerned about their online privacy are required to learn how they share personal information online, and to take actions to protect personal information online.

 

 

This is a guide for nonprofits and community organizations

Posted via email from Not Really Stealthmode




Amplify

Leo LaPorte, Buzz, Twitter and Facebook

Leo LaPorte, Buzz, Twitter and Facebook
As someone who has followed Leo LaPorte on every platform and listens
to a couple of this shows regularly, I was pretty surprised by his
post about what a waste of time social media has been for him.  After leaving Facebook over its privacy rules, he now leaves Twitter and Buzz because no one saw his posts (a Buzz error) and no one noticed (not even him.)Although he recanted on TWiT yesterday, I still think Leo has a
fundamental misconception about what some of these platforms do, and
that is because,as he himself points out, he’s somewhat disengaged
from his own posts. I love Leo, but I am surprised he doesn’t know
what Dave Winer taught me years ago, that Twitter is a river, and
whether your post sparks a conversation is serendipitous: it depends
on when you post and what else is going on, as much as it does what
you say. That’s why, personally, I expect my tweets or buzzes to be
ephemera, and I don’t spend my life carefully crafting each tweet. My
tweets are jottings from my day, my reading, other people’s stuff –
anything I think someone else might like to know.

Admittedly some experts have a Twitter “strategy,” as Guy Kawasaki
does. He posts every 8 hours. That raises the odds that a given tweet
will be seen, and it’s call to action heeded. But for me, Twitter
isn’t about each tweet, but about the incredible people I have met and
learned from, the way my horizon has opened the issues facing people
in Iran and Pakistan, the way I felt able to share @queenofspain’s
illness or the special occasions of friends. My Twitter friends
(although of course not all of them), are a sort of family. And I find
this family helpful and supportive. But it’s because we are listening
to each other –not necessarily to each tweet — but over a long
period of time.

And as for the brands on Twitter, unless they are like Frank Eliason
and prepared to be truly useful, I ignore them.

The ephemeral quality of Twitter is the reason many people liked
Friendfeed. You could have a conversation there. But Facebook bought
Friendfeed, and it languishes like a ghost town.

However, where did the Friendfeed guys go? Facebook. And they took the
conversation with them. The conversation is on Facebook, no matter
what you think of it’s privacy rules, or Mark Zuckerberg, or the
upcoming movie. Every time I post on Facebook, people spend hours
responding: long, intricate responses that share their own knowledge
and increase mine. Many evenings I have gone to bed and in the morning
found that the conversation has gone on all night in my absence!
Between my brother, and a friend of mine who disagree. Among women
trying to help each other on my wall. Among people who disagree with
my politics.

Facebook has the larger conversation that is outside the echo chamber
in which the geeks (and I am an interloper in the geek world) rant to
each other about whether the conversation should belong to me or to
you. The people on Facebook, even my intelligent, literate, educated
friends, only care that a conversation exists.

Leo, go back to Facebook. The conversation is waiting for you there.




Amplify

SCRM, CRM, and the Disgruntled Customer

SCRM, CRM, and the Disgruntled Customer
Thanks, Jason, for writing your post questioning the meaning of Social CRM.   We really need to examine how much of this stuff is too much, even as the tools get better. As someone who was around for the beginning of sales force automation (SFA) and saw it balloon into CRM (managing the customer after the sale, and now morph again into following the customer on Twitter (SCRM), I am pretty much done with the concept.

As a customer, it is not as much fun to be managed as you brands seem to think it is. When every business asks you to "like" its Facebook page, brand loyalty becomes too much work. Maybe I am willing to like one specific brand with which I have a special relationship, like Starbucks (where I appear every day and they are unfailingly nice to me), but that's pretty much where it ends. All other brands get my loyalty and appreciation by my repeat purchases, and they get my repeat purchases by serving me well. And combining customer service with marketing does not work for me either.

And other than the occasional notice about a sale, that's really all I want from a brand, even from Apple. Here's what I don't want: birthday cards from my last car salesman, reminders from my dentist that I should call for an appointment, a newsletter from my vet, or an email every day from Overstock.com.

Worse, or more egregious, is when CRM is used to interest me in more products, as in the customer survey I just got from American Express, who just last week had denied a purchase because they had changed their "no limit" policy but weren't willing to admit it. The Platinum Card I have paid $250 a year for over the last decade, which I keep for emergencies like the one I had last week, actually DOES have a limit, though it doesn't warn, advise, or in any way let you know that. Instead, the web site has a cute little interactive thingy that you fill in if you want to know how much you can spend.

But since I don't spend a lot of time interacting with their site because I pay my bills and thought I knew how their policies worked, I had no idea that "qualifying" thingy existed. An embarrassed person on the phone who called me to ask for $434 before he could "unblock" my card told me "things have changed."

Thank you. Things certainly have changed, including my willingness to pay extra for a card whose one benefit to me has vanished. Technically there may be no limit, but operationally there sure it. No amount of CRM or Social CRM will change that.

That's not to say I don't want brands to listen on social platforms. I fell in love with Frank Eliason for life when he monitored Twitter, found me without wireless, and offered to come immediately to my rescue. He did the same thing via Facebook when I wanted to talk to someone at Citi, where he now is employed. But he was listening, not marketing to me, in both instances.

Doc Searls has been working  at the Berkman Institute on an initiative called vendor relations management (VRM) which gives the customer the control. It gives customers the ability to control how they engage with brands. Apparently, it is almost ready to launch. I can't wait.

Francine Hardaway, Ph.D, Stealthmode Partners
http://blog.stealthmode.com
http://twitter.com/hardaway
http://www.linkedin.com/in/francinehardaway
GV: 816-WRITTEN (9748836)

Posted via email from Not Really Stealthmode




Amplify

Pakistan’s Face2Face App Not Afraid of Facebook Places

Pakistan’s Face2Face App Not Afraid of Facebook Places

In the US, Facebook launched Places yesterday, and everyone started speaking their truths: this is the end of Gowalla and Foursquare,  the tipping point  of location-based services, the end of privacy. In the meantime, across the world in Pakistan, the location of one of the worst natural disasters in human history, a company based in NY with a Pakestani on its board, has launched Face2Face, another location-based iPhone app.

Two reasons I think this is worth talking about: first, because Shakir has been a friend for ten years, since he lived in the US and before he decided to bring his family back to Pakistan to start a company, and second, because my trips to Asia with Geeks on a Plane this spring taught me that not everyone around the world prefers apps from Silicon Valley. They are Facebook and Twitter-like products in China that have millions of users. And there are quite a few people in India and Pakistan and the surrounding area. In the Pakistan flooding alone, 20 million people are homeless, and that’s in rural areas. The cities have even more people of course. India has a population of a billion. There’s life outside the USA,  Other countries can be large markets.

Now, what’s the difference between Face2Face, which I have been using and really like, and other apps? Once again, two things: completeness and localization. Here’s a quote from an email Shakir sent me when I pushed back on his chances after trying the app myself and listening to Silicon Valley snark::

aggregation is one piece… but proximity the central one. We recommend that folks download it in clusters so  they can interact with friends. There’s a very neat chat feature which le’s you chat across platforms. Your aggregated friends from various networks are on Face2Face. There’s a POI (places of interest) piece which will be coming within the month along with a feature which lets you “drop” pictures on a location and your friends are alerted when you are in proximity.

The real use case is this. Say you’re at the airport. chances are that that there’s a friend of yours there at the same time but you have no wy of knowing. Using the app they pop up ONLY if they’re at the airport. i dont care where my friends are “checking in” if they’re in NY because I live in Karachi and I’m more interested in relevant POI’s and friends near my physical location. I also don’t want to be pinpointed because I value my privacy.

So far we have an aggressive monetization strategy and are working with a bank in the US and one in Pakistan. We have also closed a deal with a telco which gives us access in 13 countries.

Don’t make the mistake of ruling out companies that don’t start in Silicon Valley. What if they turned out to be the next Facebook?

The Floods:

On the subject of the Pakistan floods, Shakir tells me they have hit the rural areas very hard: rural Pakistan has taken a hammering. the flood has affected more people than katrina, the tsunami, and the 2005 pakistan earthquake combined. 20 million affected. 4 million homeless, and billions of dollars worth of infrastructure and crops wiped out. Here’s a very solid piece by an internationally known writer in the the NYT. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/19/opinion/19mueenuddin.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss

Google has stepped up at given 250k USD and has also set up a lot of tech to coordinate relief etc. here’s a good link to get info and how to help.
http://www.mosharrafzaidi.com/flood-relief-how-to-help/

Please help if you can. This money will not go to corrupt government agencies.




Amplify

AgChat

AgChat
Listening to a farmer and a dairyman talk at 140sf about how they discovered social media and started a connected community of “Agvocates”
who share the stories of farmers with the “users” of food.

It’s called AgChat and it is an incredible accomplishment.

Francine Hardaway, PH.d
@hardaway
816.WRITTEN

Http://www.Stealthmode.com

Posted via email from Not Really Stealthmode




Amplify

Jobs, Jobs, Jobs (or not)

Jobs, Jobs, Jobs (or not)
Watching the Sunday talk shows and the nightly cable rants,, the subject of jobs comes up over and over again. People cannot get jobs. And yet some  employers say they can’t get people. Even with LinkedIn, Facebook, Twitter, Jobing, Monster, and talent management software inside every enterprise, we are not hooking people up correctly to opportunity, and it’s beginning to show.
According to the Kauffman Foundation, most jobs are generated by NEW companies, companies less than five years old.. and those jobs have long lasting value. On the other hand,

Exposure to prolonged or repeated recessions, however, does adversely affect job creation. Firms that weather many recession years seem to consistently have lower levels of employment, the study showed, with startups surviving through three recession years having about 10 percent less employment than those surviving through none. This amounts to a difference of about 300,000 jobs, or around 0.2 percent of all jobs in the economy. While the number of jobs lost due to prolonged or repeated recessions appears to be small, these small differences might compound over the years and across groups of companies to create a lasting mark on the economy.

The current recession is the longest in several years; thus, startups established right before or at the beginning of the current recession might have been significantly affected.

Which is probably why companies that have been through recessions don’t immediately re-hire when the government statistics tell them the recession is over.

This recession was a bit different, in that fewer laid off people started companies than previously. Economists are still trying to figure that one out. Me, I think people are just shell-shocked by the real estate recession, the wild ride on Wall Street, and a slew of natural disasters. It’s a wonder anyone gets out of bed.

However, we’ve got to get these new company formations moving again. The question all entrepreneurs should be asking each other is what can we sell that people need, that involves people? Almost like a commune for the country? Can we get together and create a new reality?  And if we come up with the ideas, there is definitely venture capital and angel capital to fund them. It just doesn’t want to fund another “me too” idea.

I’ve written about this before, and I’ve suggested infrastructure. Why not build the smart grid? Or the new water and sewer purification system? I also think small businesses are underserved.  What about more micro-finance to disrupt the big banks that keep cutting those credit lines and credit limits small businesses depend on?

Smart people read this blog. Is anybody incubating some great idea in his/her mind? I would love to work with you on a world-changing project that would set the US back on track and restore optimism and energy. I am tired of listening to everybody piss and moan, including myself, about the state we are in:-)




Amplify

How to Handle Social Customer Complaints

How to Handle Social Customer Complaints

I hear these comments from companies every day:
“Do they expect me to be on Twitter ALL the time?”
“We can’t be expected to work 24/7″
“People expect instant gratification.”
“What do they want from me? I am only one person.”

This is the verbal equivalent of sliding down the emergency chute, mad as hell and unwilling to take it anymore. You may get your fifteen minutes of fame, but you can’t build a sustainable future on that response because, for better or worse, the customer owns the social tools.

ERP and CRM may have originated in the enterprise, but social networks didn’t. Social networks are all about people, and they are pulling companies toward better customer service.

Let me tell you another personal experience of mine. In engineering parlance the following is a data point, and therefore not significant, but in larger terms, it’s a metaphor. And besides, I am the customer, and these are MY social tools.

For two years I have been trying to contact Citibank mortgage, which owns the (worthless) home equity line of credit on my house. I modified my first mortgage, which you can read about in the archives, using social media. Without blogs and LinkedIn, I would have been just another shnook who lost his house.

Citibank has the IVR system from hell. To call it interactive is a joke, because as soon as you interact with it further than accepting automated responses, it disconnects you. I have spent hours jumping from number to number, only to be put on hold and disconnected.  Citibank also doesn’t answer snail mail. And until recently didn’t have a Twitter account.

And then a miracle happened. Frank Eliason (http://twitter.com/frankeliason) left Comcast to work at Citibank. And he popped up one evening in my Facebook news feed. It was as if he manifested from the sky!

If you don’t know about Frank, he started the legendary @comcastcares account on Twitter and revolutionized Comcast’s customer service by listening and following through.

I reached out to Frank, and he reached out to his team. First Mike, a member of the social media team, called me, and when I told him my story, he sent me Annette, a mortgage specialist.

In the course of an hour, Annette and I formed a “friendship” of mutual respect, and she got me all my answers. Two years of anger and frustration dissolved in a minute.

None of this would have been possible without the big 3: Facebook, Linkedin, and Twitter. Now the customer can talk back, or can get help, depending on how you as a company use the tools.

For the company, things are now more complicated. On the other hand, Frank Eliason converted me first to an evangelist for Comcast and now is on the way to doing the same with Citibank. It doesn’t take much to turn a frustrated customer around– just a helpful face/voice.

As Jeremiah Owyang (http://www.web-strategist.com) points out, social media doesn’t scale for companies unless they can convert customers into brand evangelists. So what should brands do? For those who love lists, here’s a list:
1)hire or designate a social media team
2)be careful who you put on that  team. This is an important position, not something for a kid who knows Twitter. This requires judgment and psychology
3)empower the social media team within your organization. Make sure people respond to it’s requests
4)as a C-level executive, become familiar with these tools yourself.

And yes, I consult.:-)




Amplify

Do Brands Need More “Agents?”

Do Brands Need More “Agents?”
A post in Ad Age about how even big movie stars are “unemployed”
between gigs, and need talent agencies to help them find work inspired
a conversation this morning on Twitter among Liz Strauss, Albert
Maruggi and myself on the subject of pay for performance and customer
satisfaction. The article said small advertising agencies need someone
to get their clients for them. An agent, like a talent agent. And said
that agents who were on straight commission were highly motivated. At
least that’s what I took from it.
Liz sent this: From AdAge: Small Ad Agencies Could Use Hollywood-Style
Agents http://is.gd/eaLwQ // –>What could you do with this?
Talent agents, indeed, do not get a salary. Instead, they get 15% of
what they negotiate for their clients. Real estate agents don’t get a
salary either; they get 6-7% of the price of the sale.
Straight commission jobs are not for the faint of heart. But they
traditionally foster great and lasting relationships. My dad got his
income for a while from booking artists, and they loved him. My mom
made him stop, because it was both uncertain and stressful. But his
“acts” loved him and remained his friends.

I have only been “employed” for one year of my career, and that was
after I merged my business with Intel (well, they swallowed it up).
The rest of the time, I’ve been an “agent,” for the talent of brands,
companies, and entrepreneurs. I’ve gotten them gigs, articles,
speaking engagements, customers, financing, and partnerships. My
commissions have been equity in many cases. Or deferred compensation,
or partial compensation.

So what does it take to be an agent besides motivation? It takes love.
You have to love the “talent” and believe in it. You have to be
willing to evangelize, to put your own reputation on the line for it.
You also have to be smart, have good judgment, be ready to do
anything, to take advantage of any opportunity. And you have to make
sacrifices. You have to be of service. Don’t let Entourage’s Ari Gold
fool you. Agents don’t bill by the hour, and they don’t get a check
every week. It’s a hard knock life, and there won’t be a season in
which Ari takes it easy.

Of course advertising agencies need agents just like movie stars do; this
season’s “Mad Men” demonstrated this in Episode 3.

But so does every company and every brand. Every brand needs a team
to develop and package projects for it, the way agencies do for stars.
Agencies read scripts, find a director and a producer, and a star,
(hopefully all in their talent stable) and present the package to a
financing source. Only then do they get paid.

The same thing needs to be done for brands and businesses. In the best
cases, it IS done. In the worst, entrepreneurs are scammed by agents
who take upfront fees and don’t produce partners, customers, or
funding (see Jason Calacanis about this one).

One good thing about the recession is that performance is now
mandatory. Even people on salary must perform. Tomorrow at your job,
think of yourself as your company’s agent, not its employee.




Amplify