The Apple world is full of fun speculation. Apple fans expect innovative new products. So let me introduce you to iChart! Apple’s upcoming killer Enterprise product.

iChart is a flip chart on steroids. It borrows the best from the past, building on the lowly paper flip chart and the easy sharing built into Electronic Whiteboards. It redefine the future of presentations. iChart breaks the monotony of the PowerPoint / Keynote presentations with live customized notations (by the presenter), audience participation, and simply pinch and zoom sorting. Finally, the flexibility of transparencies again. And yet so much more….. Airplay, video conferencing, and dual or multiscreen presentation possibilities. iChart is the future for any boardroom presentation, training room discussion; presenting the data in a format more adaptive and free flowing, enabling the presenter to work the displays in  a multi-modal fashion. Like brainstorming? Like post-its? Like enabling an audience? Let them scribble post-it notes on their iPhone or iPad and see them magically appear.

I’m not quite sure why I woke up with this idea, or if it has been suggested before. I know I’d read something about Airplay and multiplayer gaming coming to the next generation AppleTV (still speculation really out there). There’s also plenty of speculation written about whether or not Apple will enter the living room with large displays. For me…. iChart…. a huge flip chart sized display provides a perfect example of something that really uses the big screen in a new way and like the iPad which enable more personal and intimate “sales” exchanges (vs a laptop example in a doctors office) this enables a more creative conversational style around a large screen device. Perhaps a flip chart is too small. Yet I can see ad agency execs carrying it as part of a portfolio case. Importantly, iChart would take the iPad, iPhone further into the Enterprise environment. They would be great at conferences.

So would you want an iChart in your business? How would you use it?

Will iChart kill other telepresence / video conferencing products with it’s FaceTime built in? What might it mean for networked meetings? What special apps could it be loaded with? How might these be used in store? For promotions?

What would the real screen specs be? How much would it weigh? How low could the cost be? It appears the real cost will be in the screen?

I liked this presentation on Google+

I’ve continued talking in Circles about Circles with other Circles while on Google+. I find that many are confused. They don’t know what Circles really mean. While I’m beginning to come to grips with them myself, I’m not sure I want to or can be effective using them the way they are implemented. So, this post is going to outline my current approach and what I’m trying next. After writing this post I also read Facebook and Twitter are broadcast design models; Google Plus is a sharing design model which helps add some real clarity to what actually is going on. Also via Luis Suarez I had to add this video link via Ross Mayfield.

Let’s start with a parallel and a comparison. I tweet @stuarthenshall publicly to anyone that wants to follow. I have also used other Twitter handles from time to time (business, experiments, prototype examples etc.) and those tweets are broadcast publicly. In all these cases these handles get followers. In all these cases the handles broadcast different tweets ostensibly targeted to different audiences – although some of these handles had the same followers.

Google+ works like I want to use 5+ twitter handles at once and send different tweets out. That’s a very complex task for many of us. I’ve never managed it in Twitter or Facebook or any other social network for that matter. My initial response to Google+ was great. Now I can “gtweet+” to my family, my closest friends, work colleagues, and then more broadly. Oh and I can go publicly too. Then you must ask… who sees it?

After just a few days I see big issues with that. My family isn’t on it. Yes I could use it to drive them to it via an email… but what’s the point? They won’t be here for 3 to 5 years. (maybe less; the cycles are speeding up). Other groups similarly. Oh dear, now I need to compose special messages for each of these groups. What will my frequency be? What will they want to see?

That’s what trapped me next. Sure I can organize my Circles. I can create a group like “VoIP” where all my VoIP, Skype buddies, Communication mavens all reside. I look at that group now and find I have 44 in that group. Now I have a choice…. I can share just with them or I can share publicly. If I share with them via Google+ there is no guarantee they will see it unless I put their names in the post (which generates a notification). If it was a valuable link share I also limit it’s potential share-ablity with others. So why limit a post to a group that may not see it ever? And those that don’t follow me – see it as “incoming”.

There are a couple of reasons… Members in a group may see it later on your profile. However, these posts are prioritized – eg my profile is ranked on latest posts for your viewing rather than most recent personalized updates. The what’s up with Stuart – personalized for a visitor simply isn’t there. So why not just go public with all posts anyways? All anyone is likely to ever see on your profile is your last post/update if any.

There’s no reciprocity in Circles. While I can know if it is public or pushed to a limited Circle or even just to me it takes time to identify it. It certainly may mean more to me if I am only one of 10 that got it… even if I don’t know who the other ten were. Example. I create a Circle and congratulate a colleague on their birthday with birthday wishes. I may not want to make it broadcast.  It’s useful although if the birthday person doesn’t follow me then my wish is only “incoming” while for others it may be a reminder. So make sure to put their name in the wish as then at least they get a notification! So, I can create a circle for the moment! They get the benefit of my reminder and the sort of Hangout type implications. Maybe these things should be color coded. Eg less than 10 people saw this.. less than 20. Then perhaps it becomes more interesting. Oh I’m a recruiter. I want to screen / talk to some candidates and get suggestions. I create a Circle for a job. MY MESSAGE WILL ONLY BE INCOMING if they don’t follow me!  That means, unless limited circulation posts get some visibility or a higher ranking then I’m not going to see a lot of point in doing them myself! In other words. If “LIMITED” sharing is important – then it needs to be more visible. The job example doesn’t require a CIRCLE unless they are already following.

In the future I’m potentially happy to have some declarative Circles where reciprocity is declared. Although this again has little value if my post remains buried deeper in the stream despite the apparent need/interest. That would also make us a group! Groups have the advantage that they can cross-promote and attract lurkers. Of course we have lurkers on Google+ too. They can see my public profile and posts.Yet without out some form of obvious reciprocity I can’t do much about it. A “GROUP CIRCLE” gets a common definition and a purpose. It has more clarity on what you and “We” are collectively trying to do.

There’s benefits to sharing more broadly in a Twitter and Blogging world. You simply never know who will see it, or pass it along. There’s also something that’s very personal about leaving a comment on a blog post. It’s personal, it is a gift (well sometimes a rant too). It’s remained difficult to comment on a blog and get the same comment back into Twitter, or now G+ etc. Trackbacks don’t tie back and yet the comments have often moved to Twitter – facebook etc. Now your blog post can be read anywhere.

So today I think the most value I can add to myself and perhaps to others is “Comments” on Google+. It’s more conversational than my blog. A better conversation is what I think has really turned people on to Google+. That’s the hope and the dream. However, my hope is for more personal conversations, more one to few exchanges.  This afternoon when my G+Stream was polluted with a long list of comments on a perfectly reasonable Robert Scoble post I thought…. and posted:

Commenters on +Robert Scoble really screw up my stream. I wish his commenters were hidden and expandable! At least limit them to 2 or 3 or the most relevant or to people first that I follow. Too much scrolling to get to other stuff.

I could have commented on his post… however, it would have probably just added to the noise level. From this I draw a few conclusions. These are really thinking about a “reading” and response strategy rather than a broadcast strategy.  I’d be better off:

Commenting on G+ People’s posts where it’s likely to create a stronger bond or more positive exchange. IE focus on adding to the conversation rather than the noise. (Maybe all posts should be limited to the first 20 comments or require ranking after.. so the best float to the top.

This approach means I should reorganize my Circles.

1. Organize them for conversation. Eg I’m going to start a “I commented on Circle”. If I get an answer back I’ll add them to a “Reciprocity Interest Recorded”. I will look to add and build value with this group over time. This will be the stream I monitor most. I am most interested in participating in Public comments for the most part. I’ll have to have a better understanding of the other person when it is “limited”.

2. I’m going to remove people from circles that don’t follow me. I’ll put them in a “Grow” bucket and see if I’m really interested in commenting on their stuff.

3. I’m going to track those that have commented to me or on my comments. Again there was interest of some type.  Maybe I will see what conversations really emerge. Maybe I’ll help some of these commenters become Stars. I will look at if it was Limited or Public relative to the share.

4. The prolific high commented on Profiles I follow – I’m moving them to a place that is less important. They are stars already and if I wanted to play the same games and approach I could – it’s just not in my makeup. I may call this Circle Stars. I will continue to watch them for what and where the “mass” flavor is going. However most of them are just commenting on G+ at the moment or trying too hard to build their profiles and influence.

I’m also going to think about where I spend my time. 140char isn’t much good for conversation or deeper thought.  It’s great for links, for quick context and more. I love it at a conference, I like the buzz. It’s great in emergencies. Twitter won again this morning with #mumbaiblasts. G+ isn’t really in that place.  It’s more blogging in structure. While I have little problem with those that start a conversation by pointing to a link or a video off site… I’m not that responsive to the “gotta see this” intro. I don’t think Google+ is going to reward the equivalent of cheap tweets. I want to know why you are sharing and whether it is worth my expressing a POV.I’m also going to do an assessment re the personal exchange potential.

For me G+ wins when it grows conversations that grow into new relationships that are important to me. Otherwise I’ll soon just post blogs there and continue doing what I’m doing.

Dave Pollard wrote a post yesterday which is still resonating with me. Google+: On Communities, Circles, Friendship and Love

This got me wondering what use Google+ would be to me at all. I use Facebook and Twitter almost exclusively to republish/link to my blog posts. Why would I use Google+ any differently? (my bold)

My blog is my online presence. I use it to think out loud and to seek out extraordinary people who have been blessed with the curiosity, critical and creative thinking skill, and the luxury of time to learn about what is really going on in the world, and to imagine how we might make it better. What does Google+ add to my ability to do this? If my Gravitational Community of 70 people are the people I really want to spend my time with, what’s the best way to use that precious time with them — Reading/writing Google+ Streams? Impromptu/themed Google+ Hangout video chats? Whirlwind tours of face-to-face meetups? How do I make the people in this Gravitational Community the real friends that technology keeps promising they could be?

Dave goes on to write that he’s a little conversed out. I certainly feel for his sentiments.

What I know is…. Blogging began networking me with remarkable people back in 2002. Google+ may actually bring back some of that interest. I’d hoped that Twitter could generate more rich real-time conversations and intros. It doesn’t work that way and the thought died a couple of years or more back.

Google+ is an interesting intersection of Facebook and Twitter. I only wish I had better control of my data. I’ll be a lot happier when what I put into Google+  also ends up on my blog even if it never goes to the front page. Example I capture all my tweets that way. Twitter loses them….. On my blog they are part of me and searchable.

Open up Google+!

I’ve been trying out Google+ and I like it. I like Circles and Hangouts (I’ll provide a separate post on Hangouts) the names even mean something to me. By referencing the notes below I draw one conclusion – yet to be proven re Google’s longer term intent. I’ve also added additional links worth reading at the end.

Zuckerberg and Facebook – you are in trouble! Why? Because “Circles” is a metaphor about trust and Google+ will keep growing as long as it provides a “higher order” of trust. I don’t think Facebook has the conceptual framework today embedded in “trust circles”. Twitter? Simply, Twitter isn’t interested in conversation – it is broadcast.

Circles is a metaphor I have used from before I first blogged it way back in March 2003.

What I wrote about Circles: In March 2003 in an initial blogpost called “Identity Circles” I wrote about trust and your identity and how we naturally share. I also put it in a context for a business model based on your “attention”.  The interest today in the economics of attention are still growing. I was also not alone writing about some of these issues then. Hat-tip to Doc Searls, Mitch Radcliffe, Eric Norlin, Ross Mayfield and many others.

I also wrote many posts at the time around Identity, social capital, trust circles.  So you will see below I have no issues or problems with the basic Circles metaphor. Fact is congratulations to Google+ for using the natural choice.  In playing with Google+ I also know we just didn’t have the technology or the standards in place then to make it all work or scale as fast as Google+ is apparently scaling today.

These are some quotes from my Identity Circle Blogpost. Its a great affirmation that what I wrote then still seems to apply and is potentially playing out right now….

IDENTITY CIRCLES: CIRCLES enrich and enhance life’s many connections. Whom you know has never been so important. Professional, Business, Community, Friends, creating circles of trust that you control. Now you can be more connected and share what and when you want. In CIRCLES you can discover a whole new range of connections, intersections where you connect for fun, influence, advice, learning. Today’s world is connected. Sometimes for fleeting moments or maybe for a lifetime. We move, we change addresses, our contacts change from year to year. Yet serendipity still strikes.

We meet friends in unexpected places, and find old work or college colleagues when we least expect them. CIRCLES let’s you grow and learn from whom you know. So together we travel many different circles and through many different roles. Collectively we learn we have a lot more to offer, when we don’t always know what we can do for each other. Cooperatively we learn together, individuals can create more value from their profiles that they can individually seeding them at many different destinations. There are valid reasons for public and commerical interests. Under Circles you control access.

I then went on to write about how it works. And introduced it like this.

So what’s different? Safe and secure in your circle, you are part of a many circles environment that makes up, many trusted circles. CIRCLES guarantees your privacy and the privacy of your friends. Under Circles there is no more spam. The information is yours alone to share and trade as you wish. Circles is merely a commerical and public broker of information.

What’s interesting here is what I saw this morning in another chat although I’ve not checked it yet where there was reference to Google TOS seeking to represent you… more and more. Ie as your agent. I foresaw a P2P cloud at the time. Google now provides the cloud and the credentialing process.

I also predicted the rise of a Circles like address book, the chatting and talking to friends… and that fact that this must be mobile.  As a consequence you will never have to update your address book again. Some connections will also be temporary (eg Child’s sports team parent list). Circles makes these easy.

Within Circles, the Jabber IM solution (?) automatically lets you chat and talk to friends. You can send messages, share files or simply VOIP, while also enabling new conversations and searches to connect with friends of friends. Circles helps those important introductions. Similarly, Circles will keep you private if you don’t want unwelcome intrusions. You control the access to your profile. This becomes even more important as your profile becomes increasingly mobile with you.

If you want to read more about where this model was headed then…. These points may provide an illustration and thoughts from that time…. Perhaps the opportunity remains for Google to do the same today.

Circles approach is to create a cooperative connectivity system. Imagine the post, phone fax and e-mail service owned by you and me. First and foremost you serve your own information.  (Note this is even less farfetched today with webRTC solutions coming to browsers)

Circles simply provides the enabling and verification service for public and commercial access, those not in your friends list, and all commercial contacts…. Correspondingly your employer may open and verify an employee account. (How Google introduces “Business” / “Commerce” will be telling. How will they broker my access? What will I get for it?)…. When you activate your CIRCLES account you join our cooperative and are paid for your attention dependent on the commercial and pubic content consumed….  That way Circles earns it’s transaction fee (Visa) on each delivery. That is the economics of attention. The sender pays, not the receiver.

Similarly, small commercial transactions (eg the plumber, lawnmower, acccountant etc) may request to sign and leave a commercial greeting card. (Think Ryze guest book) Your rating and reference will then be available for other friends etc in the neighborhood. (Xpertweb??)

Some Benefits:

• Only you control access to your information.
• Circles brokers introductions and eases personal, social, business and professional exchanges.
• Circles creates a valuable economic asset, that grows with the collective value of shared information assets in the community.
• Circles aims to connect everyone on earth digitally, just like the original post and telephone, but this time for free.

In another post Identity Trust Circles (Unbound Spiral) I wrote:

Consumers you and me think about trust not contractually rather they think in CIRCLES. In circles we are safe and secure. For example MyCircle, OurCircle, TheirCircle. “TRUST CIRCLES”.

This is important because the my/your/their definition leaves out the aggregation power of “OurCircles”. It also forgets the vast number of “CIRCLES” we move in:

1) my circle of friends
2) different social circles (neighborhood, community, friends, etc.)
3) business circles (colleagues, mentors, suppliers, industry, professional, etc.)

This is used in many more ways from “reading circles”, to running round n round in circles, and circles round the campfire. Yet CIRCLES is the better metaphor. For what we want are new capabilities that expand consumer’s “circles of influence”. For once the internet can do what it was designed to do and I might add already does very well for those that use it….

“Expand your Circles”. professionally, financially and socially. The disruptive revolution is now in the wings. It’s more than matching, it is about creating environments where you can learn and grow from whom you know and the transactions you have completed. Collectively and individually we move in many different CIRCLES and that’s where the real value opportunities are to be created when we discover we “collectively” have a lot more to offer, even when we can’t possibly know what we can do for each other.

See also:
Like it or Not: Great comments
Or this example where Kevin Rose points his blog to Google+. Why, because he gets more comments than he would otherwise.

The keynote presentation to kick of the second day of eComm. Relevant Voice Platforms  -  Kelly Fitzsimmons, HarQen. Words generally paraphrased below. Presentation was much better than my notes! Clearly need her product!

“Text provides the IQ but misses the EQ”

Voice is really important. How many of you are on top of your communications? Are you in conference call hell? We have a situation with the network. The network is no longer trusted. A lot of send, and not a lot of acknowledgement. We insert more and more emoticons into our text.  And we are broadcasting more and more. Desperate for acknowledgement. Today, Unified Communications is really a euphemism for a DDOS attack. We are communicating more than we ever have and understanding less and less as the acknowledment isn’t there.

Today communications start out with a text… finally you end up on the phone. We talk when conversations get complex or confused. Yet today, our most efficient mode of communication fails us again and again. Voice is a connection device that has a richness to it that you can never replicated in text.

We expect our voice conversations to be memorized. By contrast we do lots with text…. but none of the richness. Voice as a modality has that emotional quotient embedded into it. What happens when we lose voice? Example… end of call we keep our notes and lose our memories of the call. Every day we ask people to memorize conversations and there is no way to go back to them. Had thirty thousand years to think about the iconography of text — the future demands that we get more efficient communications.

Example Call center. Today great job on collecting the data. Can even go into live calls and look at the analytics. Example Script X is failing. So we can see the percentage failing,  That tells you the what but not the why. So as soon as you can go in and check what people are saying you can soon find out that certain agents are off script. Should you through it out or not. What is the problem? Etc.

Why are their barriers to voice being adopted like text? The technology to make relevant voice platforms available exists. We can organize data in a way that you can easily find the data again. IT is not an AI problem rather a behavioral problem. What conversations could be if they were navigatable if they were prioritized and easily accessible?

Where are the economics and incentives in this? You need them both micro and macro.  Conference call hell references! Plenty of pain – we all want it different. We play angry birds and think bad thoughts. What is the incentive for change/ Macro. Telecom! It will emerge in a very different form. All the OTT players may well change the game. For the OTT’s it is just another data time. Voice is the Golden Goose for telecom. Minutes aren’t down although revenue ARPU is. Nothing is making up the difference. What will people pay for?

Voice is programmable media. (Definitely, not enough thought generally about this.) You can have programmable experiences even on a dumb phone. A voice platform can bring them as an audience back in. This also has to be multi-lingual. It is the future of commerce and the infrastructure is already there… (talking about wireline right now as it is stable, delivers voice and this can lead to a whole new way to communicate.

It’s not a new thought. The voice interface and gui dreams go way back to 1987 and examples like Apples Knowledge Navigator. See the video. You will see the use of voice related search and commands. It was a dream over twenty years ago.

It’s not simply Harqen we are one of many in this space that are going to be part of seeing it happen. I will leave you with the idea that VOICE REALLY MATTERS.

Lee is asking questions about how she will split the voice up. You can create and track and understand natural start and stop points. Example re job interview. Just the process of shifting the medium changes the reaction and how people react to it.

How do you reference the specific part of a call. Today what we are relying on is people We are getting used to SMS, texting and chat during meetings. That part that exists outside will no longer be siloed but notes become nested and then underneath…. you are editing the audio based on the behavior. See the Symposia launch later today.

Comment - Great presentation (best at eComm so far), nice introduction to thinking about voice and making voice more efficient and powerful as part of the communications vehicles we use. Will we continue to be more and more text dominated or can we harness voice to become a more powerful element in progressing and moving forward. Kelly says – Voice Matters! Yes it really does.

For years I’ve been interested in crowdsourcing complaints and how P2P systems can aggregate and shift power. Today @mrblog (David Beckemeyer) introduced me to Gripe a solution that’s using “word-of-mouth power to share public complaints or cheers that get heard!” The team at Gripe has done a great job! If you look at their resumes they aren’t exactly new to this space either. I sense they are going to get off to a good start.

There’s some learnings here.

• They’re using Facebook and Twitter – to back the profiles and will use/tie-in to other services later. Eg Yelp, LinkedIn etc.
• It’s focused at the mobile level. Eg GPS / location and thus Gripes on-the-spot. They also do a great job in bringing in local businesses via google (even while I’m sitting here in Mumbai!).
• They’ve created a simple to use template which retains the real value within Gripe.
• Companies are notified for each complaint. This is an important step – as is their ongoing ability to broker an answer and follow-up.

In all things, it is nice to see a simple focus. David and I explored this space while developing options for Phweet and Twitmart amongst others (now both closed down). In Phweet we’d seen a way to enable businesses to call a Tweeter and resolve their issue without ever exchanging a phone number. In Twitmart we enabled both long-form classified like space and the ability to thread comments. We also experimented with “real-time” notifications.

An important element is sometimes understanding the Gripes your competitors get. After all, if your competitors are learning from gripes why shouldn’t you? Even general Gripes in or close to your local if you are a local business champion / rotarian / chamber member!

I’ve also tracked Comcast and other large companies on Twitter. I’m cynical. They don’t want the complaints public. The first response is always send me your account details by DM so we can handle. Then the complaint goes underground and off the radar.  I’m yet to really learn how Gripe will organize complaints – complaints by location, by company etc. Also what the timeframe is. Resolved performances etc. Should they be there for all-time? How were they handled etc? It will be interesting to see how this transparency aspect evolves.

Location solves many of the problems of – when did this happen (on the mobile probably just now) and where (see where I’m standing). Add in the photo capability in the app and it makes for a powerful statement.

@mrblog we should get playing with the Gripe team, and consider:
1. A service to enable merchants to initiate a call request to gripers without further exchange of details.
2. Present the call request / response from a merchant with both gripe, merchant ID and details. (Not all merchants will want the cost of a call… but sometimes the insurance of going to a call is just priceless! And perhaps even more important with customers that have a real WOM factor.
3. This VoIP functionality could be built into the iPhone Android client without requiring any additional details from the user and could be routed to any callcenter worldwide.

Basically I believe when “complaints” are registered in public they become more powerful. Now years ago it was bloggers that had power to complain and it got action. On a lower level Twitter helped that process. While I might like to post my gripe to my blog too, the most important and empowering aspect of putting a complaint template on a mobile is making it simple.  Most complaints never make the post, or the call.. we crib to a few friends and tell the story a few times. Gripe potentially makes us each a little more powerful. So I can’t wait for….

• The companies with the most open complaints.
• The locations with the most unhappy customers
• The municipalities with the most needed repairs or where government isn’t working.
• The listings of complaints about bad business practices.
• etc….

Why? Because word of mouth is powerful only when we all learn faster from it. Today most of the complaints (gripes) appear to be location based (what happened). Yet equally product or model#complaints (gripes) are possible. Gripe still has a long way to go. What they need first is a lot more interested parties. Then who knows… in the future a few of us may want to opt in to local notifications – eg I’m in the are – are these gripes still gripes (the pothole in the street?) and to raise a “cheer”!

Yes I wish these guys well. I can’t help closing with… a link to a post I put up in 2002. Gripe seems to be a nice simplification and initial implementation of what I saw. A world in which consumers own the complaints and customer service is effectively controlled by them. See Antiport. That day is now coming some 10 years after I wrote the first little scenario. It’s not a recipe for today’s Gripe – just interesting in a comparative way.

Similarly it fits with the philosophy I wrote up in “The Consumer Manifesto“. Where we have a right to our data and the same transparency and brokerage that Gripe provide around complaints enables “all of us” to have a little more say.

Over the weekend  Andy Abramson received his new iPod Touch 4 in the mail. Apple’s New iPod touch Part One-VoIP on the iPod – VoIP Watch. What he’s yet to reveal is his experience with FaceTime – Apple’s new video call solution which I’ve written a series of posts on. We had our FaceTime call yesterday and I learned a few things.

1. iPhone 4 Upgrades Required: I had to upgrade my iPhone4 to iOS4.1 to enable FaceTime calls with the new iPodTouch4. When Andy tried to connect with me he received a message that I hadn’t yet upgraded to 4.1. Upgrading came at some cost to me. Loss of my jailbreak and SIM unlock, use of my iPhone4 as a hotspot using MiFi and FaceTime calls over 3G using My3G. Still, the incentive remains for the jailbreak community and I expect a new solution before long. An iPod Touch user needs an iPhone4 user’s phone number to currently contact them.
2. Email not Phone Numbers: As we knew the iPod Touch comes without a phone number.  And you can add multiple emails. See picture below. Right now this same functionality is not available in the iPhone4. Although you can add email ID’s to Game center so I imagine they will merge in time. This article explains in more detail. This highlights the need for a basic presence system and further ID management. Eg which profiles do I want to make available and to whom? This is the future for CallerID. It’s also the step necessary to make FaceTime available on almost any device; there are already plenty of rumors that it will overlay iChat and come to Windows etc.

3. Access Manager Future: FaceTime become more useful when “email-numbers” come to the iPhone4 . Emails equate to different profiles and Apple just becomes your identity manager for escalating conversations. Location-based escalations will take on new meaning. Here Apple’s been really smart – they’ve borrowed both email and phone numbers and without adding another ID layer are simply moving towards offering an “access management” solution for any profile. I’m waiting for “myprofilemanager”.
4. ADD SMS to the iPod: I added and experimented with an SMS app on my iPhone4. “TextFree” (and others) provides you with another number to receive SMS’s on. So the quickest free way to give your new iPod Touch a phone number (SMS only) is adopt one of these APPs. Free unlimited Text in the US etc. Probably not perfect although my quick tests suggested it worked quite well. TextFree supports notifications – so all you need is your iPod Touch in a WiFi zone. Or as Andy noted in our conversation… Just use your iPod Touch with a MiFi mobile hotspot and do all your FaceTime and texting for free over 3G. That’s the future and it’s one where the carrier has zero control over your number, minutes or even SMS.
5. What next? There are many opportunities. Eg auto create a contact list of FaceTime users. Add some “available indicator”. Create a parallel SMS channel (it’s already there – Apple’s notification server” we just don’t see it like that. Add in FaceTime notifications to the messaging stream and make that more manageable!.

The rollout of FaceTime is currently the most interesting and aggressive VoIP project anywhere. FaceTime is “Apple’s Startup”. Later next year, expect profiles and developer opportunities re CallerID’s while your “dating site” etc works in the background. This will mean a change to notifications. Notifications will add in Call options – it will become the communications manager. While Apple didn’t get Facebook to sync with their new GameCenter. I’m sure it will come. In fact FaceTime may also revolutionize the “mobile news” stealing Skype’s thunder when integrated with Twitter. If I was Apple I’d be working on both of these. When @stuarthenshall becomes +stuarthenshall I accept or decline a FaceTime call. Or *stuarthenshall for an “unlisted” call request via Twitter. New API’s will make this type of thing simple.

This story isn’t all told yet – more random thoughts:
The iPod Touch is becoming the “multi-faceted phone”. In some experiments people have put the same email account into two iPod touches. Like Skype, both ring and only one can be answered. I wrote about why that sort of thing was brilliant when Skype launched vs IM clients that always logged you out. This capability will only become even more interesting. So we’re moving towards a point where, when FaceTime rings your mobile, it will also ring your desktop, iPad, iPod etc. Any device you want. Finally we are “names” not numbers!

The iPodTouch4 as the home phone or even a work phone becomes better and better. (See my post FaceTime and the Enterprise). You can already turn your GoogleVoice account into a home number (for free). You can also use TextFree or the equivalent for free SMS calls. Note Calls to your TextFree number result in a notification and the number that called. Add Skype too. Let all this stuff run in the background and keep it in a dock! Otherwise the battery may not last very long. All you need is WiFi and you can route anything to it. Thus the MiFi hotspot challenge for the carriers and cable providers. When wifi anywhere is good enough the user takes control.

Where Facetime may shine is when AirPlay emerges if it works to stream FaceTime over AppleTV. Will that be in the iOS4.2 announcement?

Summary:
When Apple made your mobile phone number into ‘FaceTime’, it created its own value stream out of the carriers’ most important asset. Now Apple is offering to enable your email accounts to do the same thing. Next they let developers do it for any social networking site and connect them up to FaceTime. On the behavioral side – this puts Skype and GTalkVideo into a mobile format where they simply aren’t today. Mobile video calling even limited to WiFi beats the desktop for all short Video sessions. FaceTime is from a consumer perspective “cross platform” with only one device required to manage multiple identities.

In October 2007 I wrote Why VoIP Innovation Died with Skype In it I wrote: “Skype has four possible plays which it failed to capitalize on 1)Directory, 2)SIP & Identity, 3)API 4)Presence” Apple has all these elements in play. Apple will remain the facilitator if they expect to be really successful. Apple’s prize is all the social networks and directories coming to FaceTime first. Match, Craigslist etc. Few guesses Apple will first open it to developers and then open it more broadly to Android, Nokia etc. WHY? Because “call” and “video” interruptions are the most intrusive and valuable escalations that happen on a mobile. When Apple knows I call a car dealer Apple has the ad engine capability to make real money. Add in location. Many variations are possible. FaceTime needs to go everywhere and infect every handset and desktop. Most importantly…. Apple has no urgency on monetizing this direction. It’s not IM and it’s not a phone number. Today it’s just the evolutionary step that is next.

I wrote other clues too. “Communications is Fragmenting. Oct 2008. I see FaceTime following that brief. I also wrote “Blogging Lifestreams and My Personal Cloud” Jan 2010 where I made reference to “Unlike yesterday… conversations that matter lie outside your buddylist or following list.”  F2F hasn’t died and FaceTime is likely to bring it closer and to a geo-location near you. Add in Qik like broadcast capabilities or watching games in action and it could go a whole lot further.

If you were the VP and GM of AT&T what sort of letter would you send your customers and why? As an ex-VP Marketing I would not have sent out the letter many received from Terry Stenzel at AT&T today. For me it makes a number of mistakes serving to highlight the gap between old school thinking and marketing and where I am, as a customer, today. I don’t know Terry, I do know he put his name and title on this. His letter is a jpg in full below. It was received as an HTML email with the subject “A Special Message from AT&T”. I don’t think it has a reply to address. So my open response follows.

Dear Terry Stenzel,

I wanted to share my thoughts on your marketing letter today. I’ll be blunt and throw in a few suggestions at the end. I’m writing because you don’t know me very well and it’s apparent that you have made no attempt to find out more about me before spamming my inbox with what I feel are facts which are irrelevant relative to my needs and the service I expect.

These were my initial thoughts:

Hmmm why am I getting this letter. Oh yes I guess I renewed a contract with AT&T on 3 iPhones a few months ago. Although I wasn’t choosing AT&T again. I simply chose Apple iPhone4. Still you should know I’ve been a customer for a much longer time period and your reference to “choosing” is one that is thanking me for “choosing not to leave”. I’ve let it be known via my Tweets and even other blog posts that I’m not altogether happy. In fact the first line almost seems like an excuse line to send this “news” to me. .

Now I read exciting plans in paragraph two. I’m sorry I don’t buy the 97% of Americans – it means that every AT&T customer is in that 3% some of the time. Leave the main city and go into the country. Visit a rural town. Nada! Nada! Nada! All the facts quoted don’t fit with my experience. In fact my personal experience is that GPRS in India in rural areas is better than in the US. In fact as a global traveler almost any country I go to has better service than what I receive at home. (Your own data should tell you that this customer is “exposed” to the world and may not be happy with the parochial approach provided in the USA).

In para three I see meaningless facts. You are the Northern California and Reno manager and my account is in your region in the Bay Area. You can’t even tell me what the implications are for me locally or the names or a URL to names of rural towns that I may frequent on a weekend motorbike ride. You fail to understand that I can name all sorts of coffee stops between here and Eureka or Reno, Clear Lake, Mendacino, Pinecrest, Bridgeport etc where I’ll be in the 3% and there is no way I’ll see 3G or data.

Your fourth paragraph may be the truth and yet quite meaningless given that my own experience as a user and frequent traveler shows that the service is getting worse not better.  As for “where it matters most” that is a huge matter of opinion. My mobile would be useless in an emergency in many of the places I ride on a weekend (and I’m not off road). Frankly that may be when it matters most to me. Will all the billions you are squandering I’m sure a small country could be totally mobilized.

Finally in the last para before signing off you suggest I stop in at Facebook. I did. It instantly confirmed to me that others had a similar response to your email letter. It also poses a problem. I refuse to “like” AT&T so I can comment there. Facebook needs a “hate” button or some other intermediate solution.

Then finally I get to the corporate signature and the VP stuff and I realize there is no email to respond directly to you. I scroll back to the top. I see this is “from the office of” to confirm you are a bigshot. I have a personal message from a bigshot that you probably didn’t write, or even vett very well.

A few questions:

1. Was it really smart to send this out in the first place? Who’s advising you?
2. Is it really on message? What purpose did it serve? Other PR examples you have put your name to are more specific.
3. You tried to personalize it  (Dear Name) and yet you don’t expect to get a personal response. Why no reply to email address? Why no TwitterID, or Facebook ID?
4. Why send me to a Facebook page? I instantly see I am not alone and I become more incensed. Why aren’t you on that Facebook page? Why can’t I find you? In fact you aren’t on Facebook are you?

A few suggestions:

• In a direct mail / email campaign never send people off to a site you are not familiar with. As you apparently don’t have a Facebook account I can almost certainly presume you didn’t either write this letter or take the time to understand how customers will respond. Be present.
• I think this is the first time you are sharing with me. I searched my gmail and indeed it seems to be. The info you shared is not relevant to Northern California it is nationwide. You aren’t telling me why we are doing better here than in other states, or how I will be safer. You haven’t said how much of the investment is coming our way. Fact is this could have been sent by the CEO or someone else and there was no need to personalize it. You could have wrapped this message in some promo item left it as AT&T and I’d never have responded the same way.
• You have so much information on me and so many ways you could customize messages to me that I’m simply appalled that you can’t send me one in context. I wonder what sort of market research and internal statistics you generate. Even some basic segmentation would help you.
• Rethink the direct marketing you are doing. Hire some new people. Send me an @message on Twitter with a thank you for my feedback. Find a way to start managing the complaints that will come. There’s a huge problem. You letter doesn’t communicate one personal fact about your job or your region and how you are making it better for me. Yet you signed it.
• If you want to talk to people personally and build relationships then get on facebook, get on twitter and make sure your name is on the AT&T Facebook page. The current AT&T Facebook page should be a case study for Social Media Marketing that sucks, because the organization clearly doesn’t understand it.
• When I travel around India I see buildings painted with Reliance, or Vodaphone everywhere. Coverage is there too. When I ran beer marketing we had appropriate hoarding strategies too. Consider starting by painting walls, hanging signs and making a noise as you roll out your infrastructure into the rural areas – we are here! You will get a better bang for you buck and I’ll know that service is actually available. The locals may cheer too.
• I don’t particularly like being a customer of AT&T. I think the service is overpriced. I considered moving all our accounts out of contract iPhones to ??? but that really wasn’t a choice. The problem as I see it is bigger than your billions or AT&T coverage. The number one problem is… you are not working for me; to radically cut costs, to provide better more appropriate plans, to make Apple services more open, (eg FaceTime), or even enable other options like a “desktop client” that rings. Even GoogleVoice can do that and they aren’t a telecom company. If you have ever read my blog you would also know I have deep thoughts on how “communication” can be improved. Oh and I haven’t even told you about my data billing complaints and issues over the last 8 months.
• Lastly, the webworld is full of noise, suggestions, and people willing to help. It starts with listening, thinking about communities, relationships, and being human. You’re very successful, and it took strength and smarts to get to where you are today.  This email is disappointing from someone in your position, and doesn’t really reveal any of your plans to take AT&T forward or add value for me.

So readers if you are still with me.
Visit the AT&T Facebook Page. or A conversation with AT&T executive Terry Stenzel – East Bay Business Times – He responds that he hates giving “competitors” a mention or find Terry Stenzel – LinkedIn.  Then AT&T- News Room -AT&T Investment Delivers Improved Wireless Network Experience in Modesto which actually quotes data that is more locally meaningful. AT&T: We spent $65 million improving 3G coverage across the Bay area – Cell Phones & Mobile Device Technology News & Updates Stenzel is quoted again and yet the numbers are meaningless. Are new cell sites all the same or do they have different capacities? Did Northern California get its fair share?

What do you think? Am I off base and just picking on someone or is this really a failure of a DM message that would have worked 10+ years ago and simply doesn’t work today? How does AT&T begin to address this problem?

I’ve written a few posts on the user implications of the iPad and changes to behavior that I’ve observed. You can find these here.

Imagine my delight to find the BMWMOA International Rally had WiFi everywhere! It was excellent, consistent and delivered at high speed. Despite there being 6109 attendees there wasn’t the pressure on the network that you get at a geek fest, the interest was more in bikes, chat, and a beer or two. Still as usual I was keeping my eye open for technology – particularly iPads which beat netbooks and carrying laptops on a bike any day. There were plenty of iPhones around too in this crowd. Now this biker crowd definitely skews older – it’s quite possible the average age was over 60 there. And I know the average age of BMW riders is north of 50.

I had placed my tent down to get a shady tree early in the week. By the time I returned on Thursday my choice spot was very crowded and bikers from all over had moved in. I went to the Rally knowing no-one and was pleased to find myself in the midst of a very eclectic group. Yet in my business I’m always looking for a few insights or reminders about how the world is changing and how people are having difficulty with it. So this post is really a short story about one of my campmates a retired lawyer from Texas who’s been coming to these Rallies for quite a few years. This is less about his stories and more about my observations. If you read this my friend I trust you see how much I enjoyed sharing with you.

My buddy had one of the latest Sprint phones an HTC Evo I think… or Samsung. It was an Android phone. He also had an iPad which first got us talking about them. I also know that I changed his world talking and sharing with him what he could do with both of these tools. After we talked they were more magical and valuable to him. And the world changed slightly.

Let’s step back. He’s retired and it was his daughter that really wanted the iPad. I suspect she conned him into buying one for him too. Perhaps he thought it a good idea for the trip this year. It wasn’t the type of conversation where I could dwell too deeply on these issues. His daughter had set it up for him. His grandkids had put a couple of games on it. It didn’t have more than one and a half screens worth of apps downloaded. The iPad was doing what he thought it could do at this point and not really showing him what it could do.

So naturally I asked him what he was using it for… and we began talking about his backroads route going back to Texas. We found ourselves talking about using google maps app versus google maps in safari to find routes. (iPad tends to push you back to the app). Soon I was showing him my iPad and how I’d used DropBox to drop my route maps from my Mac onto and then save them for offline use on my IPad. But we had a more immediate need. He needed maps and screens for tomorrow…. when he wouldn’t have cell coverage (more on that later) as his like mine is WiFi only. FIRST SIMPLE trick. Take a picture of the screen. Both buttons simultaneous click. So he soon had his photo file filling with maps/screenshots of directions. He was delighted and and I’m sure he never looked at the paper maps he had on the way home. The satellite view convinced us that a few roads also weren’t right for his 1200RT.

Of course this exercise took us into comparing iPads. He looked at mine with its pages of news apps. Within moments I’d got him downloading apps for WSJ, NYTimes Bloomberg etc. I can’t say how thrilled he was with this discovery. I made sure he downloaded them. We did search I then show him categories and how to find free apps etc. He was just delighted to get a daily fix opportunity for the Drudge Report. Oh well….

Then this took us to mobiles. He’d said perhaps you can help me with this… I then learned he had an unlimited data plan on Sprint with an Android handset. I started looking for the data modem on it. I was telling him it is only finding the app or it is already installed and you can use this as a wifi hotspot to provide all the connectivity he could need for his iPad almost anywhere. Unfortunately, that’s one I didn’t solve but again I know he will call sprint or check around / go into their store to find out how to use it as a hotspot.

We spent about an hour on this. Both of us I’m sure were highly animated. I had a blast. I also learned he’d paid for a $99 course at the Apple store. Basically as many help visits / tuition as he wanted. I’m not sure he’d been yet. Yet I’d been showing him ABC TV, NetFlix etc. He hadn’t been aware of the streaming capability. He didn’t have iBooks installed and I then helped him add Kindle too and talked about the differences. Another “bingo” moment. I challenged him to a racing game…. it’s about that time that the other guys told us to turn them off. I think there was some tech envy creeping in – although my other campers were still being slowing pushed into the tech world.

While nice to know that one iPad user now thinks his iPad is many times more valuable and I think well certainly hope I’ve made him more curious about it and willing to explore, the whole experience was one big red flag. Tech Geek world continues to make too many assumptions. We may think the iPad is an easy to use product or that the latest Android in your hands is going to get all the various options explored. The fact is few people either have the curiosity, or the understanding to know that it should do something. These products are magical when you are curious….. otherwise they are just a dumb purchase that isn’t leveraged to the max.

Some Observations.

• Granddad is / can adapt to the iPad very rapidly. However, he’s probably going to like “print” – news more than “music” (and may have never had an iPod). He’s probably also splurge on games for grandkids when he understands how to add them.
• The iPad doesn’t / fails to create a “magic” moment out of the box for users like my friend above. That’s because they see it as a PC which for them is just email… or not much more.
• There’s a collection of Magical Products – that could make a difference. However because they are only found in the APP store we can’t assume they will ever be found. In fact the iPad store organization is terrible for helping with this problem. There’s not even a first time visitor or user set of suggestions.
• Steve Jobs for all the great marketing he is attributed with is blowing the educational opportunity with every iPad and for that matter iPhone and iPod Touch sold. The suggestions I provided, the mini-tutorials may seem so obvious that you think you can skip them. You can’t. These should be installed on the device when it ships. The idea that there is no “HELP” effectively is a mistake.
• There’s no reminder of why it is “magical” out of the box. PC manufacturers junked up their PC’s with unwanted software for years. I don’t want to see that on the iPad. Yet a few videos… the how you do this and that – take a screen shot…. explore books, etc.
• Even WiFi and Using HotSpots can add some understanding of utility. Here’s a guy that has a hotspot in his phone and he doesn’t know it. If he knew it… the iPad just became more valuable.

My reflections above lead me to believe that Apple doesn’t really have a good grasp on these new iPad users. Yes it is early days. However, the Geeks are giving them to everyone. Christmas will see huge numbers sold. My belief and the proof point really is we all want our elders to stay current, we want to keep them going, keep them curious and we’re willing to give them expensive gifts from time to time. If the choice for many is… do I give my daughter one or my father…. I think I’ll hear I can share the one at home (although the device is more personal than I expected it to be) and give one to my Dad first.

The out of the box experience is lacking. An iPod Touch may hit the market with YouTube and Music, an iPad doesn’t. It needs TV on it… more Books, some Newspapers and magazines. And most important it needs to make the APP store really accessible. Right now it confronts people with “Ah I will be paying” and potentially all the concerns this target has with online shopping. It’s a danger zone rather than a learning and pleasure zone. It’s probably a shame it is known as a store rather than a “Zone” or a “Mall”. A “Zone” would really help with things like free, learning, hints, geniusbar, and then all the other things that could be brought in. Eg social element, meetup places etc. I’m sure that it is coming yet it’s coming too slow.

Smart Phones – similar problems. I tried to find the hotspot capabilities and couldn’t.  I couldn’t find the store in two minutes to see where to go and look for it. Everything about the Android remains more complex than the iPhone from what I’ve seen with each test I’ve used and tried. The message still isn’t getting through. Dumb it down. Dumb it down. Actually make it easy to use. I believe the mobile carriers aren’t making “hotspotting” with your mobile easy enough. Now that data seems to be charged for charging extra for this option like AT&T is obviously just what it is. A rip-off.

A month ago I circulated some blog post ideas to friends on Apple Facetime. I got some feedback that they were interesting. In the meantime I’ve continued to trace Apple’s FaceTime video solution for iPhone and contemplate the implications. Ultimately, I’m interested in the opportunities FaceTime is likely to create and present. Then what it could mean for users.

I wrote three different pieces just one week after I took home 3 iPhone4′s on launch day. I titled them (below) and sent them out. My interest tracking against how technology changes are likely to impact on the office, the home, and in the types of conversations we ultimately have. For me FaceTime is a Skype-like launch moment. It’s a point in time where everything effectively just changed. It’s as important (as an event rather than in technology) to the future of communication as touch was to redefining mobile handsets in 2007 or Skype’s original launch. I’ll publish these next week.

1. FaceTime – Has Apple Suckered the Operators Again?
2. FaceTime – Call it SIP 2.0?
3. FaceTime and the Enterprise – Apple’s New Threat to RIM

Since then I’ve been watching for other snippets of information around FaceTime. I’d add to these updates on the iPod Touch that must be coming. Example. More iPod TOuch FaceTime Details Appear which includes details about your apple ID and the ability to use multiple profiles and multiple email addresses. FaceTime and Music Perfect together. While I doubt this given the way audio codecs work it’s an angle I’ve experimented with before using Skype and gaming makes this interesting. Then there are other posts on the URL approach and how 3GS phones recognize them. iPhone 3GS recognizes FaceTime URL’s in IOS 4

Some additional signals that don’t related directly to FaceTime and yet demonstrate an emerging understanding of mobile voip implications. AT&T started charging for data. Skype gave up on the idea of charging a fee.

FaceTime interests me as a user, observer, researcher and strategist. FaceTime is really nothing new. All the pieces, and the inevitability of it have been in play for years. Just like “dumb pipes” and “stupid networks”. Yet FaceTime redefines what’s under the hood in a way that other handset and OS manufacturers and developers must take notice of. What should Nokia or Android do? Samsung? How’s Facetime changed the relationship of handset manufacturers with Carriers etc? What are the implications for Cisco? Avaya? etc? in the enterprise?

My guess is many of these companies still can’t answer a FaceTime strategy question – with a straight or simple answer. From my perspective it remains an upstream signal… and and one from which a number of different scenarios could test alternate views of how things could play out.

This post is the result of a collaborative conversation. Jon Husband and I were catching up on Skype discussing where KM / HR /  enterprise learning / web2.o themes are going. I captured some of our thoughts in rough notes and  then tried to grow them. I passed back my draft to Jon who edited and added some clarity. Today blogging this my first question is too soft. It is not just looking for new conversations, what I care about is whether or not you will embrace change and have a real conversation around it. That’s something we are both effective at helping people with.

The New Conversation – Exponential Flows

Are you looking for the new conversation? The conversation you are supposed to be having or perhaps aiming to turn into gold?

How we enter into conversations is fundamentally changing. So is our role in holding them and using them. You sort of know it and yet you want the proof points too, because as often as not the “conversations” you and others may be having on the Web (the Web2.0 conversation) are too ad-hoc.

We might say it’s broken. It’s too focused on collaboration as the new work while organizations are just bogged down in meetings. Is your organization truly agile? Flexible? Connected? How are you addressing the change in processes required to succeed?

Consider these general trends:

• more information is available “in the flow”
• it can be easily searched and retention may not be the key
• change when networked effectively is not linear rather exponential
• we talk about “learning faster”, and “failing faster” in order to learn better and more quickly
• developer communities are much more agile than the enterprises they support
• we live in the flow in an activity stream and control or have access to more data personally

Enterprise conversations are at an inflection point – or closing in on one. Whereas previously “info was power” increasingly the outsourcing, the API’s, “standards” mean reduced leverage from internal information silos. Competitive advantage now comes from harnessing the value of community info. IE how connected is the organization. More importantly … how connected is each employee both internally and externally.

Each day we own … and are associated with … more of the information around us. As our lives become more digital that “search” about us (Example Specify) demonstrates the augmented power of the individual to be both part of and apart from a conversation. Today it is harder and harder to push things at me; I pull all the good stuff and some of the best stuff I may share or pass on. And while those “things” may seem without context the emerging people aggregators can make sense out of it.

Many employees are sharing stuff outside of the workplace all the time. For the most part the organization has no way to judge if this learning is relevant or even how it can use it. Why ? Because our lives are not really part of the organizations and we separate our behavior for our jobs. Do you have a life that is outside your job? In a more transparent work world we must increasingly be prepared to connect our personal world and our work world. I think we’ll benefit and so will the communities in which we work.

This boundary and managing the “what we do”  is the key reason the enterprise is stuck in thinking about information assets, and silos rather than how does the organization learn and help people prosper. For example, people such as those in developer communities are adapting more rapidly to change and are more agile in their actions. We can only expect this trend to accelerate. Another example is the way traffic monitoring systems are changing, or being changed. Today we have proof that a few mobile phones can actually process the location of traffic jams more accurately than the traditional helicopter in the sky, or more recently the webcam on the pole. Yet few organizations go would let go to this extent.

The answer is to let go and embrace the employees, and the community and encourage them to bring more in.

There’s plenty of good example of organizations that really get the purpose of the “suggestions” box. Yet if the box has a definition around it… eg boxed then how many suggestions are being missed. That’s the downside of restricting the flow of information into the organization. That’s the downside for not turning the organization outwards. Organizations are so focused on “push” that they fail to work the “pull” effectively.

Concurrently organizations must think less about “flow” and more about “acceleration”. Being in the flow isn’t enough. An organization’s effectiveness and ability to survive will be embedded in exponential escalation and network effects.  Knowledge has always flowed between individuals and within groups. However, for the most part individuals have no interest in hoarding that information. Neither do small businesses. They were never able to spend the money or capture the information to leverage “information and data” to make money. However, they built relationships better than their large compatriots. They thought about the conversations they had, and they listened. That’s something that most major enterprises don’t know how to do.

The Microsoft Kin debacle is a great example of how not to listen. If you ask me the research must have sucked, the business model re pricing didn’t hold up etc. The biggest failure was not listening, and a culture that seemingly was incapable of asking sensible questions. Microsoft had ever chance in the world not to miss this opportunity and blew it. Microsoft is also structured around old principles.

Conversation brings questions. Plenty of organizations know how to talk or is that strut their mumbo jumbo. They have PR and marketing experts now falling over themselves to provide that “social” connection and leverage. If it happens at a personal level it may work.

The crux is the information is increasingly moving to being outside the organization. Many organizations are going to be hollowed out by this effect. Just think about an organization that has no information assets, but still makes or provides something. What does it need? It certainly needs suppliers. It needs a way to estimate demand or make to order. It also needs to pay the employees. Does it need a huge marketing department in a world which can aggregate profile and demand with a simple / complex search? What will sales look like? Will it be a developer community? Or is that a user community?

In a restaurant where people go to dine (for example) the Chef has recipes. Most recipes, and how to execute them, are contained in their head. Yet perhaps tomorrow the menu should be based on who’s coming to dinner. So if you are a restaurant competing for business perhaps Yelp is going to help you with your menu?

So if you are the “new” organization looking to start a “new” conversation that will take you forward – where to start?

Don’t start with systems, and processes. Reject the idea that you are going to roll in new collaborative software. Start instead with a message. Start by listening… listening harder. In fact, that may be the first social step to getting beyond the structural impediments that lie in your way. When you listen really hard you open yourself up to new conversations. Those tend to be the ones that create real value. They are also the equivalent to learning on the job, and increasingly learning in real-time becomes the core of the work.

Think exponential. We tend to think straight line. In fact the accounting and budget departments don’t like the hockey stick estimates. Marketers always want to go viral too. That’s the same sort of exponential thinking. Yet that’s what we need. Good ideas, like a great story, are infectious, shareable, and seeded with a passion.

Empower people. Think about values and principles. It’s better to run on those than to run an organization on rules. Strengthen core values and look to build the conversation around them. Build conversations that revolve around flow, acceleration, agility, and change.

Only then will you be on the way to a new conversation. For Enterprise2.0 is stuck today in “social business”, web2.0, and resorting to outside suppliers and vendors with solutions for yesterdays problem.

When work moves beyond the boundary it becomes more social. When the organizational values are more broadly adopted by a community then engaging becomes more compelling. We’ve seen this in traditional brands and no matter how hard they try we will never see it effectively done by companies that are protected by regulation (example AT&T, Verizon, Comcast).

Companies like FedEx and UPS have harnessed information that helps delivery and tracking. They facilitate relationships between buyers and sellers. I’d suggest that more companies should think like that.


The phrase ‘thought leadership’ has some appeal to me. So today, I was reading an insightful post by Jim McGee, which led to some reflections and a gut reaction on why ‘thought leadership’ is finished as a marketing, management or PR label. [image to the left, from here].

Jim McGee writes that Thought Leadership risks becoming an empty marketing phrase just when it is becoming essential to longer term success. He concludes that organizations need to rely on a steady stream of new ideas, and need a foundation of explicit reflection to continuously build and test mini-theories on how their actions lead to outcomes.

McGee’s Musings : Rethinking thought leadership as an operating principle

Payoff to knowledge workers and their organizations

Treating thought leadership as a marketing responsibility does create organizational value, but at a significant cost in terms of effort and disruption within the organization.

On the other hand, treating thought leadership as an operating principle better aligns the demands on those core contributors. Now, rich, high quality input to thought leadership efforts are relevant components of ongoing work. Moreover, this approach enhances individual and organizational learning as a primary goal; thought leadership becomes a valuable side effect of doing work, instead of being an onerous additional requirement.

Professionals grow and develop through reflective practice. They build and test mini-theories of how their actions lead to outcomes. In a simpler world, that reflection was built on the slow accretion of experience. In today’s world, it is more effective to build on a foundation of explicit reflection.

My own two cents: In a world of rapid change, instant real-time updates and network effects, managing or marketing ‘thought leadership’ seldom puts runs on the board. It is only when the organization becomes more collaborative, more effective at asking better questions and more agile at interpretation and at finding direction that organizational performance begins to improve. That appears consistent with Jim.

What Jim doesn’t stress enough is that many organizations have hired agencies and consultants for “thought leadership” rather than for “learning faster”. These are often different skill sets. This also runs the risk of alienating the very employees that should be empowered to learn on the job. Jim identifies the opportunity as at the “edges of current practice”. I’d agree. However, for thought leadership as a caption to remain relevant, the focus must turn towards ‘upstream conversations’. We can’t predict the future, and ‘thought leadership’ is unfortunately stuck in today as a case study or as a guess about tomorrow in the not-yet executed mode. Upstream conversations, on the other hand, enable an organization to follow pathways to improved reflection, and to the capture of new, better and more agile questions, ideas and solutions. [Image Credit]

In fact I’d argue that the real health of an organization and its leadership and strategy is anchored in the quality of the conversations it has. If an organization really wants long term ‘thought leadership’ which works as both a hiring platform and a customer / relationship / partnering strategy, then it’s best to look at more immersive approaches. That’s perhaps why marketing so often had the lead and various research approaches remain key. However failing to engage with upstream technical / technology advances, or changing standards, regulatory etc, any position the company had could be frittered away.

Those that understand the “upstream” opportunities and ramifications and can bring them first to market win. Whether fleshing out a new product or evolution of a current service. The real leadership is in how the organization has the conversation.

No real surprises in this first “report” on iPad usability. Still it is well worth the read. I’ve found and made many of the same observations. They have a 93 page report you can download at the end. There’s some good technical jargon and it certainly supports my general contention that the “publishing” media apps are the most boring. I’ve also been less than impressed by the “navigation” found in iPhone apps. Fact is up-sizing iPhone apps doesn’t work very well. Some of the language does seem harder than necessary yet it’s required to frame the real opportunity the iPad represents. That so many have already embraced it positively merely points to what is to come.

iPad Usability: First Findings From User Testing (Jakob Nielsen’s Alertbox)

Another big difference between iPad and iPhone is that regular websites work reasonably well on the big tablet. In our iPhone usability studies, users strongly prefer using apps to going on the Web. It’s simply too painful to use most websites on the small screen. (Mobile-optimized sites alleviate this issue, but even they usually have worse usability than apps.)

The iPad’s bigger screen offers reasonable usability for regular Web pages. Of course, there’s still the “fat finger” problem common to all touch screens, which makes it hard for users to reliably hit small targets. The iPad has a read–tap asymmetry, where text big enough to be read is too small to touch. Thus, we definitely recommend large touch zones on any Web page hoping to attract many iPad users.

Also, most Web pages offer a rich and overstuffed experience compared to the iPad’s sparse and regulated environment; when an iPad app suddenly launches users onto the Web, the transition can be jarring.

For more than a decade, when we ask users for their first impression of (desktop) websites, the most frequently-used word has been “busy.” In contrast, the first impression of many iPad apps is “beautiful.” The change to a more soothing user experience is certainly welcome, especially for a device that may turn out to be more of a leisure computer than a business computer. Still, beauty shouldn’t come at the cost of being able to actually use the apps to derive real benefits from their features and content.

Finally I’m getting to my eComm posts and notes. On the third day, AR or Augmented Reality came to eComm America2010 in the form of ARConf.  I know many of the telecom crowd didn’t stick around for day three and I feel they missed out big time. Almost 12 hours long, Lee Dryburgh and team pulled together a line up of talks that kept your attention, stretched your perspective and most importantly helped you personally reframe a little of your world view. Few left the room at any time.

I admit I was somewhat skeptical going in. I think AR is like VR was. Overhyped and overstated. Example I can’t get excited by Layar in it’s current rendition although appreciate why it has investor dollars. Yet as with any new technology experience we require the prototypes and users to learn. My purpose with this post is to cover:

1. What the telco geeks that left, missed out on and perhaps a little of what I needed more of in the first two days of eComm
2. What AR challenges are there
3. The next step for AR experiences
4. A future conference thought

1. Telecom, VoIP and AR – What’s the relationship? On one level the answer is seemingly very little. On another at the infrastructure level it’s huge. Yet it took me most of the day to understand this. The thrust in AR is from the desktop to the mobile. The rah rah end of AR today is in companies like Layar – an augmented browsing experience where the information is overlaid over views of the environment. For this to work on the mobile, the cloud has to be very effective. While there was some talk of voice into the cloud embracing the full spectrum of opportunity represented by AR will require important developments in location, sensors, and access. While the AR examples shown were not about voice it stands to reason that voice ultimately is part of this reality.

2. AR Challenges. I heard, over and over, the history on AR and the challenges of the current crop of mobile AR implementations. Biggest problem. AR solutions that look through the camera resulted in a restricted or smaller field of vision. This reduces the impact of the experience, however probably counteracts for the other professed problem… how accurate is the location. Typically off by 27 feet (from memory). By contrast one of the most compelling demos I saw was of a dancer playing virtual instruments she couldn’t see. Albert Hwang the dancer, who calls himself an Information Artist was amazing. Check out his video on Spatial Computing:

I could quickly translate that Smule’s magic piano at some future time would stay in my pocket while enabling a performance. Amber Case, a Cyborg Anthropologist further reinforced this thought with the practical symplicity of GeoNotes and using a belt unit and buzzer for getting you to your destination.

3. The next AR experiences. I don’t believe we will have too many experiences that really change everything through the camera or mobile phone. The gesture of walking along with a camera and looking though the limited lens doesn’t work. I left believing the short term challenge is to enable the AR overlay while your phone continues to reside in your pocket. The obvious example is when walking there’s no need to look at a map and the voice directions don’t have to be delivered in time to make a screeching turn.

Another element of this observation is “speed”. This is one of my new mantra’s when talking mobile and inserting apps into the flow. Unless they run in the background they won’t work at all. Eg Even now waiting for a map to load or a twitter client to switch to a camera to then upload it is all too slow. Waiting for the Yelp app if you can find it (oh search) to identify that restaurant. For those with a 3GS iPhone with a compass I hear Yelp Monocle is quite popular (although I don’t know what that really means). Speed or response to environment remains a key issue.

So there’s a big opportunity for “voice” in the background when or as appropriate. The smart assistant. There’s also the opportunity for considering the “gestures” that the mobile can enable. These could relate to movements, sensors etc. What’s exciting to me is the AR world leads in a direction that makes the mobile ultimately less visible and more practical and personal at the same time. I’ll be writing another post on what AR may mean to iPhone 5.0.

Conclusion:
Ecomm America 2010 was a powerful event. #ashcloud impacted on the curation. I really felt for Lee Dryburgh the organizer, curator, and moderator who had to watch his conference from half a world away. I see opportunities for the next eComm to broaden the “mobile” discussion, broaden insights into global markets and balance the edginess of some apps with the needs in the emerging markets.

eComm is ultimately about people and creating a better global communications environment. While it grew out of eTel and VoIP, the future is beyond Asterisk, and numbers. Communications tomorrow is more likely to be effected by Facebook and Twitter, than Skype or GoogleVoice. The handset is morphing into a computer and yet the future couldn’t be any more unevenly distributed.

A quick dive into AR proved to me that the mobile as a “tool” remains the most exciting device on the planet. As a mobile computer it becomes even more compelling. The stretch remains in infrastructure, whether frequency, or sensor networks and standards and regulatory agreements or in simple UI solutions. Mobile continues to teach us a lot about why websites aren’t engaging. Soon it will teach us how to replace money, educate our children and more.

Right now I don’t know of one conference that thinks very very deeply about the future of mobile. It’s fragmented and piecemeal while overall it is an industry with an increasing set of unknowns. My attendance at the first eTel and then later eComms was driven by my desire to see cost and friction driven out of communications. I’ve watched the shift to communications that are always on with presence, that have moved from simple status updates to ongoing contextual messaging and the acceleration and in many cases the usurping of chat by SMS. I’ve also watched mobile move to a gesture and touch based direction while maps and various mashups around them became more pervasive. In ten years (maybe less time) the website as we know it today will be dead. It will be completely dominated and led by the mobile experience.

There’s real challenges on the horizon for setting the agenda for the next eComm. There’s plenty of issues. Example the gap between organizations and where us users are rapidly finding ourselves. The real-time web, notifications, patents on gestures, more on UI design, more statistics on APP stores, better coverage of the emerging world, and more. The conversation is changing. TV is now part of eComm. Books perhaps. Communications and connectivity is trending to how the tool in our pocket is radically reframing the world.

Bonus Link: check out young Pranav Mistry’s Sixth Sense – “a wearable gestural interface that augments the physical world around us with digital information and lets us use natural hand gestures to interact with that information.”. Here’s a talk he gave at TEDIndia:

This is an incredibly important set of points re joining the flow. The quotes below represent JF’s thinking (and I’ve already bookmarked his previous post in Delicious). If you are thinking about “flow” you cannot miss reading the FAQ on FlowPlace.

We operate exactly the same with knowledge. We accumulate knowledge in our inner basement. Knowledge that was first poured in our heads at school (this is the dominant vision of school programs in most cultures). How much of it do we really make publicly available? How much do we freely redistribute? How trained are we to pass it on, naturally, fluidly? These new social media and free economies are so odd in regards to what we learned at school…..

later in the same post..

The evolutionary threshold is that now we can scale up the properties of original collective intelligence (and still benefit from the amazing evolutions of pyramidal collective intelligence). We are now on the verge of inventing the language of flows, so that wealth can flow through us at the right time according to our needs, rather than accumulate in our backyards after a long and exhausting hunt for scarce money.

This new level of complexity requires a new techno-economic infrastructure. Just like the printing press, this is going to create a new culture.

via From owning to flowing.