Found this cool new site: KickStarter.com which helps budding entrepreneurs raise $ for projects. Typically these are small funded operations (less than $100K) that would be difficult to obtain financing elsewhere. Funding can come from anyone willing to donate to the project (usually in return for a product or goodie) The funding doesn't kick in unless a funding hurdle is met in an allotted amount of time ...thereby reducing the chances that your $ is wasted on projects that can get "off the ground"
Definitely this is a platform that has positive network effects. There are a few projects of mine I've had trouble getting off the ground so perhaps you might see one or two of mine on there soon. Though some of the projects are of limited commercial value and limited scope (not every project is going to be the source of a new company) some are just for fun: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/andrewhyde/monster-records-laser-cut-vinyl-record-puzzles?ref=spotlight
Monday, March 28, 2011
Social Media: The Power and Pitfalls for Organizations
The case this week depicts some embarrassing customer interactions for United and Comcast (and a few more) with employees providing poor service, in the case of United breaking a guitar and Comcast serviceman falling asleep on the job. While these individual interactions may represent a minute fraction of the overall workforce, the power of the web to amplify them (viral videos) makes it harder for an organization to control it's "message" or "image" when irate customers go online to complain. Though it's hard to believe that the single event "lost" $180M from United value. The airline sector is a volatile sector having 10% swings on other days as well as the fact that the stock rebounded from it's drop fairly quickly. Still, there is a risk to corporate value, just a bit harder to quantify.
It's true that with any new technology it changes the dynamics between customer <> company interactions. In particular with something so broad as the web, companies can deliver more relevant information across a wide swath of it's customer-base very quickly. Plane schedules, work outages, disruptions - the web enables the company to communicate these more effectively. At the same time, embarrassing situations can cause havok. The number of images / movies / embarrassments is only bound to increase. How a company manages these situations should be incorporated in its' social network strategy (and if it doesnt have a strategy formulated it should create one SOON) At a minimum the strategy should include:
1. Monitoring of social media (twitter, FB, google alerts, others)
2. A central response team (it may not always be best for all employees to have own twitter account)
3. A learning component (like United using the song in it's training videos)
4. The realization that mistakes will happen, embarrassing situations will occur. It's best to embrace the technology rather than resist it.
5. A good legal team to ensure that the company isn't hoaxed by false videos / rumors , etc.
It's true that with any new technology it changes the dynamics between customer <> company interactions. In particular with something so broad as the web, companies can deliver more relevant information across a wide swath of it's customer-base very quickly. Plane schedules, work outages, disruptions - the web enables the company to communicate these more effectively. At the same time, embarrassing situations can cause havok. The number of images / movies / embarrassments is only bound to increase. How a company manages these situations should be incorporated in its' social network strategy (and if it doesnt have a strategy formulated it should create one SOON) At a minimum the strategy should include:
1. Monitoring of social media (twitter, FB, google alerts, others)
2. A central response team (it may not always be best for all employees to have own twitter account)
3. A learning component (like United using the song in it's training videos)
4. The realization that mistakes will happen, embarrassing situations will occur. It's best to embrace the technology rather than resist it.
5. A good legal team to ensure that the company isn't hoaxed by false videos / rumors , etc.
Friday, March 25, 2011
BatchGeo.com Part II
I took a stab at my first batchgeo map. I plotted the "origins" of the bands in my Top 100 Songs list. They are grouped by "decade" as well. Though this is a small sample, the service is very easy to use (took a bit to get duplicate records for "London" or "Manchester" to actually show dupes you need a more specific location) but I can def see the power in this type of analysis. Though with just the spatial data alone it might be a little hard to guess where I grew up :)
http://batchgeo.com/map/2978bc1c7be2eff1c005e2d531425853
http://batchgeo.com/map/2978bc1c7be2eff1c005e2d531425853
Tuesday, March 8, 2011
BatchGeo.com
http://www.batchgeo.com/
Another Fremium model with a cool service. This one wired their web service on top of Google Maps for convenient "cut and paste" use of creating mash-ups / visual data. It's target market is spreadsheet users who require some sort of geographical analysis. Basic service does mapping for desktop / mobile devices. Premium service removes ads, adds support, allows grouping supports over 2,500 records, among many more features. It costs $950 / year - clearly targeted for small businesses rather than individual users.
This service could easily be replicated by Google or a competitor....but my infatuation with spreadsheets it caught my eye. This could easily be an add-on to Google Spreadsheets (push a button, see it mapped) The lack of macros in Google spreadsheet leaves Microsoft a feature-by-feature advantage that keeps my favorite program Excel alive. The day that goes is the day I stop running my football pools since it's built on a souped up/ macrotized 16 year-old spreadsheet.
Another Fremium model with a cool service. This one wired their web service on top of Google Maps for convenient "cut and paste" use of creating mash-ups / visual data. It's target market is spreadsheet users who require some sort of geographical analysis. Basic service does mapping for desktop / mobile devices. Premium service removes ads, adds support, allows grouping supports over 2,500 records, among many more features. It costs $950 / year - clearly targeted for small businesses rather than individual users.
This service could easily be replicated by Google or a competitor....but my infatuation with spreadsheets it caught my eye. This could easily be an add-on to Google Spreadsheets (push a button, see it mapped) The lack of macros in Google spreadsheet leaves Microsoft a feature-by-feature advantage that keeps my favorite program Excel alive. The day that goes is the day I stop running my football pools since it's built on a souped up/ macrotized 16 year-old spreadsheet.
Google: The Early Days
Though the case covers Google til early 2010, I will consider which a few key factors Google had in it's "early" success (1999~2002).
1. Their "special sauce" PageRank algorithm was a powerful and effective tool to rank web pages. Their index / catalog of the web was growing faster than other competitors.
2. They developed an ad revenue model that closely aligned costs with benefits (cost per impression was a better model than Overture's cost per click)
3. They maintained their focus on their core competency - search and advertising. They didn't expand corporate strategy until later on.
4. They recognized their weakness/limitations for corporate management and added experience early on with Eric Schmidt as CEO.
5. The unique governance structure that insulated the people who develop the strategy from the pains of quarterly earnings reports / investor quixotic demands.
6. Google is a platform-mediated network with a self-reinforcing positive network effect. Both user growth and advertiser growth of Google were positive (and still are) this allowed Google to beat Overture both on pricing and added even more advertisers to their network. .
Their own "operating platform" (or philosophy) is quite interesting. Devoting 20% of employee time to future projects "that may seem strange" or may even fail (Google Wave) The company established a very unique culture for continued disruptive innovation.
Some of these are a bit of over-simplifications. There are more complicated reasons for Google's success that we can discuss in class. Though I have to say Google's "Do No Evil" stance is quite hypocritical. Their services existence enables much evil to be done. Like a gun manufacturer that says they don't kill people - of course they don't, but they enable the killing of people (as well as protect people) Yes Google's good still outweighs the evil done, but by refusing to recognize the fact that they enable evil undertakings (like any technology does) they are delusional. But this isn't a class on philosophy so I will stop there.
1. Their "special sauce" PageRank algorithm was a powerful and effective tool to rank web pages. Their index / catalog of the web was growing faster than other competitors.
2. They developed an ad revenue model that closely aligned costs with benefits (cost per impression was a better model than Overture's cost per click)
3. They maintained their focus on their core competency - search and advertising. They didn't expand corporate strategy until later on.
4. They recognized their weakness/limitations for corporate management and added experience early on with Eric Schmidt as CEO.
5. The unique governance structure that insulated the people who develop the strategy from the pains of quarterly earnings reports / investor quixotic demands.
6. Google is a platform-mediated network with a self-reinforcing positive network effect. Both user growth and advertiser growth of Google were positive (and still are) this allowed Google to beat Overture both on pricing and added even more advertisers to their network. .
Their own "operating platform" (or philosophy) is quite interesting. Devoting 20% of employee time to future projects "that may seem strange" or may even fail (Google Wave) The company established a very unique culture for continued disruptive innovation.
Some of these are a bit of over-simplifications. There are more complicated reasons for Google's success that we can discuss in class. Though I have to say Google's "Do No Evil" stance is quite hypocritical. Their services existence enables much evil to be done. Like a gun manufacturer that says they don't kill people - of course they don't, but they enable the killing of people (as well as protect people) Yes Google's good still outweighs the evil done, but by refusing to recognize the fact that they enable evil undertakings (like any technology does) they are delusional. But this isn't a class on philosophy so I will stop there.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)