Now, this is sort of a crowd-sourcing event on IDEO’s platform. I am more interested in the platform itself and its concept. The navigation is simple and sequential. I had the rare “I get it” feeling within seconds and I love the concept.

We have to wait and see how it goes. I am sure IDEO will figure out a good outcome even if it does not yield any original creativity. Or may be it is designed as a PR stunt to “raise awareness.” It would be interesting to see if 584 inspirations and 194 concepts are any better than a few people brainstorming in a room.

I think the problem of bias of order is still there. Ideas are listed one after the other. The threads of conversation are not random. Or even if the exposure of ideas is randomized, pure serendipity is missing because I don’t think pure serendipity is random (different debate but you get the idea). Also, in live brainstorms, really bad ideas get killed right away, no matter how much you try to avoid it. (I think that is a good thing as it reduces clutter.)

What do you think? Here is the link:

http://openideo.com/open/how-might-we-give-children-the-knowledge-to-eat-better/evaluation/

This concept is very applicable to change management. I think the idea of treating your follower as an equal is genius. Probably the most crucial point for any movement is its embryonic stage. It has not been emphasized enough in popular leadership theories as far as I can tell.  This video is entertaining and clever.

And so, I’d like to thank all of my Twitter buddies for “following me”:)

Very interesting that Apple iPad pitch is all about basic intuition uses lines like “holding internet in your hands” and “you don’t think about it, you just do!”. I think the next sustainable revolution is intuitive devices like these.

1. If your online business has not established specific key performance indicators beyond the basics (visits / total revenue).

2. If the decision-makers in your online business receive an auto-generated dashboard report but no analysis is done.

3. If you do not define specific KPIs for each campaign in the marketing brief before the campaign starts and try to measure success afterwards.

4. If you reach conclusions and make marketing decisions based on aggregate data and don’t break it down to understand segment behaviors.

5. If you have unexplained phenomena in one report but you assume that other reports would be reliable.

6. If your offline metrics go against the online metrics and there is no clear explanation.

7. If you believe your analytic team has everything figured out to an exact science.

1-1 relationship marketing has been my fascination until Zafar Iqbal, one my favorite MBA professors, introduced me to the amazing world of analytical tools and strategic frameworks for business sustainability. Most of these models are tend to solve marketing problems through aggregation.

Although marketing decision making needs simplified models but think there have to be models that support granularity just because we now have data. Instead of asking “what should we do with all this data” why not try to change the models that we try to fit this data into.

So today I launch my campaign against linear purchase funnel (awareness, consideration…). In know this is not new. People have been talking about it but can someone evolve a new purchase cycle instead of showing a big cloud clip-art in their power points?

“It’s not for everyone“, one agency visionary said in a panel discussion. “You have to look at your demographics“, he said. I raised my hand during the question session and I think at one point the moderator noticed me  but as you know, we all struggle with our attention-span in this age of information-overload.

I would argue that most well known brands already have plenty of consumer generated content (product reviews, rants/ raves) out there and most of it is inherently biased against them.

I think the best use of their social media dollars is to engage in the existing conversations and respond to negative content. This may serve better than taking chances with a viral campaign.

WHY? Because the viral campaigns are the top of the purchase funnel (consideration drivers at best, only if they work) while consumer opinions are consumed on demand, at the bottom of the funnel (preference validation).

EXAMPLE:
Let’s say you are a small electronics brand.

1. Consumer A is just about to click on BUY NOW and is having second thoughts. He/she  googles the product reviews just before clicking on “buy now”.

2. At the same time, Consumer B (probably 14 years old and does not have a credit card) is trying to find skateboarding tricks on You Tube and is most probably never going to consider your product.

Where should you spend you money? It’s a no-brainer. Spend it on PR and opinion management. Do not consider anything else until you post video responses to all videos showing your product not working on You Tube. Odds are, your video responses will have a higher visibility than an expansive viral campaign. That is, without burning your budget on media buys.

Take long awaited mobile revolution? After years and years of text messaging being the coolest thing Sony, LG and Samsung “smartphones” could offer, Apple finally invented something that stirred something up. All of a sudden everyone has figured out how to make touch-screens work.

We seriously lack real innovation. There is just too much marketing fluff. Is this a side effect of our version of free market economy that does not have a real solution to the ’short term gains’ issue?

When I ask a recently graduated Interactive designer about his/her web design curriculum, I always get the same response. They’ve taken a course in HTML and one in FLASH where they built a “project” and designed a “website”. Try and ask them about their thought-process on information architecture or usability or a simple question like as “How did you come up with the navigation?” It often leaves them fumbling for some sort of response.

Don’t get me wrong. These students are usually very talented. I would just stay away from evaluating their potential based on this school project.

At these schools, besides HTML and Flash course, the rest of their time is usually spent on making a spinning 3D robot because that’s one of the media in “multimedia.”

To any design school instructors or administrators reading this: please realize that an Interactive design program should be similar to an Architecture program where the guiding principle is “form follows function.”

Students need to spend their time learning about information design, usability, visualization, iterative design, prototyping, wireframing, behavioral profiling, heuristics, ergonomics and knowledge management. Good web design is not just about Dreamweaver and FLASH skills.

Also, enough with the “multimedia”. The industry doesn’t need a 3D game developer, video editor and web designer packaged into one career. That time is gone. Give us analytical, creative thinkers who know the real meaning of user-centered design.

We need fresh talent that’s savvier than today’s school kids. This is the one area that I don’t feel we are ready for the mobile revolution. As if there is no user-centered design, there is no mobile revolution.