I recently published a POV presentation on Google+ through 22squared called Google+: What It Is and What It Means. I was also recently interviewed by Neil Glassman of SocialTimes.com during a Hangout on Google+ regarding the potential impact of Google+ for brand marketers and advertisers. It was on featured on the front page of SocialTimes today. I encourage you to read Neil’s article as well as take a peak at the actual presentation below.
Researcher Jakob Nielson suggests that when considering the internet as a network of communities, most large-scale communities consist of users who don’t participate very often. He also explains that most of the content contributed to these communities originate from a small majority of very active users. Nielson refers to this discrepancy as participation inequality and speculates that it typically follows a 90-9-1 rule in which users fall into one of three categories: Lurkers, Intermittent Contributors, and Heavy Contributors.
An article in the New York Times featuring Jump Associates, a strategy firm that teaches companies how to brainstorm, talks about a shift in the mindsets of corporate America around thinking.
What’s clear is that in recent years, much of corporate America has gone meta — it has started thinking about thinking. And all that thinking has led many executives to the same conclusion: We need help thinking.
Initially, it may come as a surprise to learn that companies like Jump charge $200k+ a day for a brainstorming workshop, but it simply demonstrates the importance and value of good ideas. In an age where information on any subject is readily available, there is nothing more valuable than a genuinely good idea. Which is why it’s so important to set up a systematic, iterative approach to brainstorming. Now, when I say systematic, I’m not trying to evoke images of a robotic assembly line where ideas are simply manufactured. Instead, I firmly believe there needs to be a solid framework and methodology in place for the development of new ideas that can be repeated to yield unique solutions each and every time. Such an approach needs to have parameters that are flexible enough to encourage creativity and innovation, yet at the same time be a systematic process in order to build rigor. Only when there is a process present will there exist the opportunity to develop rigor.
