SCVA in 90 seconds

Hmmm … not bad for a first attempt.  Thanks to the folks at groundreport and WeMedia who got me on the spot for this as part of the competition.

I am interested in your feedback.  Clearly this could be better, what are your thoughts?

Note: click on the “full screen” button so that you can actually read the flash cards.

379 entries from 48 countries … good news! SCVA is a finalist.

I received a little good news last week. Social Capital Value Add was selected as a finalist by WeMedia from a field of 379 entries from 48 countries. Details here: http://www.changemakers.net/en-us/competition/powerofus

Thank you to everyone who supported my entry. Don’t forget to let me know if you clicked through. You might win the ticket.

I know that the rules say that the judges make the selections, not the voters but feel free to try to add comments or rate my entry here: http://www.changemakers.net/en-us/node/14479

@BeCircle tweeted this about the SCVA entry:

“@memeticbrand only after reading this http://bit.ly/14kAM did I ‘get’ SCVA. SCVA.com needs this front and center”

You see competition can make things better.  I will amend the “about” page here to incorporate the language from the submission.

They gave Al Gore more than 12 minutes when he took the WeMedia stage, but then again that was before we knew it takes just 4 minutes. :)

Is anyone else going to be in Miami for February 24th to 27th?

Seed Salon: Albert-László Barabási + James Fowler

“Barabási mathematically describes networks in the World Wide Web, the internet, the human body, and society at large. Fowler seeks to identify the social and biological links that define us as humans. In this video Salon, Barabási and Fowler discuss contagion and the Obama campaign, debate the natural selection of robustness, and ask: Is society turning inward?”

The “Is society turning inward?” question is misleading in my opinion.  That headline does not really point towards the discussion that the scientists are having towards the end of this piece.  That question makes me think of xenophobes and isolationist trade policies.  In fact, the scientists are talking about the emergence of networking thinking as a dominant form in the 21st century.  They believe that our best minds are increasingly focused on our interconnectedness rather unlike the last century of learning which was primarily focused on learning about particles from quarks to the galaxies & beyond.

Hat tip to Valdis Krebs for sharing this and these related links:

http://is.gd/hpKh

PDF of Full Paper...

http://is.gd/hpMo


Seedmagazine.com The Seed Salon

The transcript is here.

Ideas Need People to Spread #2: Incentive

UPDATE: SCVA has been selected as a finalist in the Power of  Us competition! Thanks!  Make sure you let me know when you rate!

UPDATE2, Feb. 10, 2008: Toronto Community Leader, David Walsh was the winner of the ticket to the lecture & concert tonight.  He has a board meeting, so gave his ticket to singer/songwriter Michael Cavanaugh.

In Ideas Need People to Spread #1, I asked you to support a couple of initiatives … one being advanced by some friends and my submission to Ashoka’s changemaker.net The Power of Us: Reimagine Media competition.

When I received an invitation yesterday to the Martin Prosperity Institute’s upcoming “Markets Making Music” lecture & concert event featuring a lecture about the market for ideas by the Peter Munk Professor of Entrepreneurship, Ajay Agrawal followed by a Q&A session with Sellaband CEO and Co-Founder Johan Vosmeijer as well as an album debut concert performance by Sellaband recording artist Angie Arsenault a few ideas aligned …

– The Power of Us.

– Reimagine Media.

– Market for Ideas.

– “Arsenault turned to another Internet innovation and raised $50,000 from 531 “believers” spread across 34 countries”

– what goes around, comes around.

So I felt inspired to innovate a little.  I ordered an extra seat for the event in Toronto and it could be yours (or you can always give to a friend of yours in Toronto if you win).

You learn about emerging trends in the music industry, markets for ideas, see a concert and get a free copy of Angie’s CD.

All that I ask is that you go right now to this link and comment on or rate or nominate Social Capital Value Add.

Let me know once you have made that little extra digital effort.  Ideally via Twitter @memeticbrand or through a post or comment either here or anywhere on the web which it will show up in a google alert (tag #PowerofUs) or email me at michael at socialcapitalvalueadd dot com.

I have already asked a lot of people to support the idea of Social Capital Value Add.  As a result it was released by ChangeThis.  Many have supported with blog posts and tweets.

This is the most important outreach that I have done, but it is also time to get some financing.  Social Capital Value Add maybe too early to help me support my family.  The incentives, I think, are in the right places.

On February 9th, I will randomly draw the name of one digital evangelist to join in the February 10th event at Rotman.

I think a few of us from the Optimizing Business Performance event at MaRs during the day on Feb. 10th will be along for the ride.  It should be fun.

Following Robin Teigland … Leveraging Social Networks for Results

I just started following Dr. Robin Teigland on Twitter.  Get ready to be blown away … check out her slide share presentations.

She is an Associate Professor at the Center for Strategy and Competitiveness at the Stockholm School of Economics (SSE) in Sweden.  For more than ten years, she has researched and lectured on social networks and their relationship with strategy and performance.

You MUST take your time and view this presentation.

I just posted her presentation of Fad or Future: Second Life & Virtual Worlds over at www.memeticbrand.com.  It is spot on.

IAM or “Social Media Man”

One of the central concepts of Social Capital Value Add is the Individual as Medium (IAM).  I also considered using the more anthropological “Social Media Man” but wanted readers to steer past the buzz words and/or gender concerns.

Which one do you like better?  I don’t care what you call it, as long as the dog brings back the bone.

I am realizing that the IAM concept may not come across very strongly in the e-book.  I dripped references to IAM throughout the e-book.  Let me try to draw them together in this post.

Perception is reality.

Shared perception requires some form of media.  I.e., thoughts must be communicated through some form of artifact whether fleeting or more resilient.  Examples include gestures, words, text, audio and visual … anything that can be sensed among parties.

For most of history, our ability to communicate was relatively geo-spatially limited.  We could communicate as far as our voices could be heard (town criers) or our eyes could see (smoke signals). Perception was very locally oriented.

Then along came technologies that Marshall McLuhan taught us to understand as Extensions of Man.  The printing press, radio and television are a few of the biggies.  These are essentially one way, broadcast forms of media. The telephone is another biggie, it is interactive & reaches far, but does not scale well to large audiences and requires synchronous connection.

McLuhan explained to us that “the medium is the message. This is merely to say that the personal and social consequences of any medium – that is, of any extension of ourselves – result from the new scale that is introduced into our affairs by each extension of ourselves, or by any new technology.”

He also said, “Our conventional response to all media, namely that it is how they are used that counts, is the numb stance of the technological idiot. For the ‘content’ of a medium is like the juicy piece of meat carried by the burglar to distract the watchdog of the mind. The effect of the medium is made strong and intense just because it is given another medium as ‘content’. The content of a movie is a novel or a play or an opera. The effect of the movie form is not related to its program content. The ‘content’ of writing or print is speech, but the reader is almost entirely unaware either of print or speech.”

When digital media started to really emerge with the introduction of the browser in the mid-1990s, it naturally incorporated many previous forms media.  But bandwidth, computing power and storage were still scarce and expensive.  A lot has changed since Netscape came along.

We have arrived at a point in history where the effect of IAM has been made the strongest and most intense form of media we experience because it has been given all other media as its content. The movie, the play, the opera, the newspaper, the television, the radio, commercial music, print and photographs, even the brand (a broadcast concept), have all been given over to the Individual to be reincarnated as the YouTube video, the prosumer indie, the blog, the blog comment, the forum, the Tweet, the IM chat, rating & review, the Flickr album, the podcast, the viral email and the mashup.

Real world social networks (and social network applications like email and MySpace that facilitate) are the infrastructure of these new forms of media that emit from the Individual.

SCVA argues that the effect is a new scale of social capital that marks a point of inflection for business and it is this new scaled-up version of social capital that SCVA is determined to highlight the value of.

Whereas, the network infrastructure to shape shared perception could be rented with great flexibility in the broadcast era (i.e. the 30 second spot), access to social networks is a function of social capital.

This new scale social capital is a critical corporate asset.

I spent the first half of the e-book illustrating how these entirely new scales of social capital are evidenced by new scales of the intrinsic elements of social capital which are individual assets (remember, the corporation is a form of individual).  These include: information flow, exertion of influence, certifications of social credentials and reinforcement of identity and recognition.  These are observations that are consistent with Nan Lin’s network theory of social capital, whose approach enables us to link the thinking to social network analysis and economics.

Technologies have evolved and mapped so tightly to the way humans transact, form relationships and create self-identity that it is time for business management to adopt the thinking of leaders in social network theory, such as the University of Chicago’s Ronald Burt.

Like it or not, the shift from broadcast media to IAM has implications throughout the corporate ecosystem.

Almost all of the changes highlighted in the illustration above have occurred exponentially, which is why we experience them as a sudden shift.  The “more of the same”, “everything that changes, stays the same” mentality will not derive competitive advantage from change like this.  It may not even survive change like this.

Does it not seem natural? Project and scale up the power of the individual, and that value of human connection of which we are all so instinctively aware, emerges in amplified forms as well.

In addition to the new scales of intrinsic social capital elements examined in the e-book, I would like to study further the extrinsic variables of social capital that aggregate into collective assets such as trust and network structure.  I am sure that there is similar evidence of new scale that would shed more light on social capital formation, access and use.

SoCap08: Is there a thread missing?

As I sort through the after math of SoCap08, I think that you might want to check out this post entitled, The Silver Lining in the Market Collapse: Social Capital.  It seems that the theme that Jonathan Salem Baskin & I were trying to highlight last week with our co-authored, co-posted piece entitled Looking for Leadership? Invest in your Networks? was resonating at the conference.

In short, this time of crisis in confidence is a time when business leaders are looking for answers.  It is a time of opportunity for advancing social capital thinking that so many of us are dedicated to.

I am picking up that most felt that the conference captured a gritty optimism, as signaled by the attendance of more than 600 to a first time event that was planning for 300.  While it is clear that Katherine Fulton’s presentation on the state of social capital markets was well received, I am wondering if the observation that social capital markets are at a very early stage of uncoordinated innovation was out of step with the enthusiasm of the conference?

In particular, I am wondering if there was sub-context at the conference about the forces driving a revolutionary rise in social capital that is breaking down the silos between value based management (i.e. the quest to manage sources of stable future earnings, over and above the cost of capital), social capital and social network analysis.

While there were discussions about breaking down silos, I am not picking up any thread extending Nan Lin’s network theory of social capital, that is so useful in connecting social capital to market thinking IMHO.  The money quote from Nan Lin … “social capital, as a concept, is rooted in social networks and social relations, and must be measured relative to its root . Therefore, social capital can be defined as resources embedded in a social structure which are accessed and/or mobilized in purposive actions .”  A merger between individuals, social networks and media has taken place.

In short, since broadband internet connections became more prevalent than dial up in 2004, the dominant media paradigm is shifting away from broadcast towards the Individual as Medium.  Increasingly perception and therefore stable future earnings emanate from IAM instead of broadcast or offline word of mouth networks.  Whereas time on broadcast networks can be easily rented with financial capital (i.e. the 30 second television or radio spot), access to social media networks will only be granted through social capital.

This means that managing these scaled up forms of social capital is at the heart of every enterprise right now.  Not two or three stages of maturity in social capital markets from now.

Were you at SoCap08?

Am I picking up on a missing thread to the conference?  Can you help me elaborate this?  This blog post is unfinished without the input of the organizers and attendees ….

UPDATE: Here is a great overview of the SoCap08 conference from SocialFinance.ca.

Here is the blog round up from Social Capital Markets Blog that I referred to:

How did this dog get in the boardroom?

A dog has been set loose in your boardroom to bark at you about how business management has changed since 2004.  The story of how it got there is a great little case study in how valuable ideas move from inception anywhere in the world to you in the networked age.

It started with a need and a Google search.

After slugging it out in the social media startup world for years, I was ready for a glass of wine.  So we packed up the family and headed to Paris.  I looked at my MBA program there as an opportunity to put to rest a nagging set of ideas about Web 2.0.  The way in which business value is created and defended has fundamentally changed, but most of the “conversation” about social media is not designed for investors and “C” level corporate management.  From an academic perspective, I was a relative amateur.

Enter a few Google searches …

I discovered a local conference on Social Networks.  Then found myself in a room of about 10 top social network theorists.  I was waaaaay out of my league, but fortunately I was able to connect with Olav Sorenson and Matt Jackson.

Olav took the time to direct my reading.  Google helped me discover additional key pieces.  Matt was encouraging and challenging.  When I finished the paper, I sent it to almost everyone whose work I had read during the formulation, looking for credible feedback.

I received encouraging notes back.  One from Al Ries, co-author of Positioning, which is a book most consider to be a marketing bible.  Top blogger Matt Ingram said the work was “valuable.”  Then Seth Godin, author of the world’s most popular marketing blog and the best selling business books over the last decade, suggested that I submit the idea to www.changethis.com, a Digg-like site for ideas that he co-founded (but no longer runs).

The editorial board at ChangeThis selected the proposal and that is when its fate moved from the hands of a few key “influentials” into the “wild.”

To be published by ChangeThis, the idea had to compete against about a dozen others and be voted to the top.  Social Capital Value Add did not become the 8th most demanded proposal in ChangeThis history because I am a famous author.  I asked my friends and colleagues to support it.  Social capital went to work.  Through a combination of support from close connections and blog entries from looser links,  the idea gets a blast to 20,000 people who care about this sort of thing as part of the 50th issue of ChangeThis (along with the great ideas of John Kotter, Seth Godin, Andrew Abela, Vince Poscente and Jonathan Baskin).

At some point along the way, the momentum has changed.  I started out trying to take this idea as far as I could.  Now I am trying to keep up with it for as long as I can.

My search has changed how information flows around me.  After months of trying to find information, information finds me through connections far and wide. Four people on three different continents alerted me to Mike Arrington’s related post.  I have wandered or been invited into online groups like Seth’s “Triiibes” where Adam Helweh and dozens of others have instantly offered their help just as quick as I can ask.

Paul Wilmott has invited me to write something to introduce SCVA in his small but influential magazine that serves the quantitative finance community and I have connected with the right folks at Dell and Procter & Gamble about reporting on how the principals in SCVA are showing up in their businesses.  I am not sure how these initiatives are going to work out yet, but they are encouraging.

UPDATE: In February 2009, SCVA was selected as a finalist among almost 400 “game changing” ideas from 48 countries in the WeMedia/Ashoka Power of Us: Reimagine Media co-petition.

Social Capital Value Add (SCVA) is an idea that started in the social media startup trenches and was connected by a Google search to experts and influentials.  Wrapped up in a Wizard of Oz metaphor and signaled by a nameless dog, SCVA is powered by the social capital of a few concerned groups and now it has made its way to you from a trusted source.  It is a management and valuation approach that has been developed as a framework to help companies understand and track the impact that communications technology is having on their ability to create and defend value.  Woof, woof.

UPDATE: The SCVA ChangeThis manifesto has been released:

http://www.changethis.com/50.05.SocialCapital

Mark Zuckerburg: looting block party or catering service?

Nic Hodges has a thoughtful post up down under.  Thanks to John Maloney for flagging it.  Nic says,

“If Mark Zuckerberg turned up to your neighbourhood and started throwing you crazy block parties, while at the same time mining your backyard for gold, wouldn’t you want a cut of that gold?”

I agree with and have explored many of the same concepts Nic touches upon in his post.

I agree that social networks are not owned.  But social network software services like Facebook are privately owned so there is a transaction: service for terms of service.  A problem can emerge when companies like Google and Facebook and others are becoming so entrenched in social networks and our old watchdogs like government and journalists are not motivated or equipped to help us bring the implications into focus.

I believe that the most important thing that we can do to cope with these potential problems is to establish the link between social capital and corporate valuation, to motivate corporate competition, bring into light the true sources of value and make them accountable to investors, markets and users/consumers.  Then the regulators and press gallery will be all over it.

Social networks can not be owned.  Agreed.  That is why I think it is very useful to distinguish social capital from social networks.  I think social capital, i.e. the resources that are embedded in social networks are intrinsicly individual assets.  (Note: the corporation is a form of individual).

By investing in a connection with you, I get flow of information, the exertion of influence, certifications of individual social credentials and reinforcement of individual identity and recognition.  Hey! Smells like social media to me.  That is why I think of social media as a new, scaled up form of social capital that has emerged since 2004 when broadband overtook slow connectivity in the USA.

Aggregation of individual returns result in collective assets and properties such as trust, norms, reputation, authority, sanctions, culture, network structure (open, closed, density, clustering, diameter, average path lengths, degree distribution, bridges, weak ties, betweenness and other forms of centrality, etc.) and location (structural holes, structural constraints, etc.), which are extrinsic variables that contribute to the formation, access and use of social capital.

This is the stuff that we need to zero in on developing, measuring and valuing at this point – not just page views, unique visitors, CPMs which are all broadcast paradigm metrics.

P.S. I love Michael’s comment over on Nic’s post, “We are all becoming Paris Hilton“.

Check out Lin, Nan, “Building a Network Theory of Social Capital” ©1999 INSA, Connections 22(1):28-51, see pp.28-31 for compact history of social capital.

Add to FacebookAdd to NewsvineAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to Ma.gnoliaAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Furl