Do you ever wonder what happens when you sleep?
Ever wonder what changes while you focus intently on your work, your family, and your life?
Evolution. Not necessarily of life, but of the way life works, the way communities organize, the way power is distributed.
Unless you were paying attention – or are under the age of 30 – you easily may have missed out on a crucial change that recently took place on the Internet.
There was a time – not very many years ago – when even the biggest Internet companies treated their websites as a venue to distribute content. The idea was basically to treat the Internet like it was a one-way broadcast tool to the masses. The idea didn’t stick, because whatever the Internet is, it is most certainly not one-way. It is not a movie theater. It is not a newspaper. It is neither television nor radio. It is not one-way.
People get to talk back. People get to talk to each other. People get to form groups. Groups make proposals, vote and develop rules. Groups gain knowledge from members, and those members coalesce to build power. They are customers who will tell companies and each other what works, what doesn’t work, what’s great, and what sucks.
They are a vibrant online community filled with every personality found in off-line towns (i.e. neighborhoods, towns and cities). The groups contain leader-creators who make propositions, critics who shoot down those ideas, joiners who want to be part of the action, collectors of information, spectators who silently take it all in and even those who are apathetic. They are every bit as real as a group that goes to church together, or works together, or participates in the local school’s Parent-Teacher Association.
A difference between online and offline communities may well be the speed at which they develop, the size they can reach, and the ease of participation. In the offline world – groups are limited by proximity, effective size, and meeting times.
I’m beginning to believe the development of vibrant online communities is truly an evolutionary step for our species, which changes everything, including the way we govern, the way we do business, and the way we live.
So what does all this mean for those of us who are over thirty, still rubbing the sleep out of our eyes, and wondering what to do with these online communities? Charlene Li and Josh Bernoff attempt to answer that question for the business world in their book, Groundswell.
They define “groundswell” as, “A social trend in which people use technologies to get the things they need from each other, rather than from traditional institutions like corporations.”
While that sounds disturbing for corporations, Li and Bernhoff write that it offers the opportunity to talk directly with customers, listen to them, and to energize the groundswell to help improve the corporation itself as well as to its enhance sales.
How does this happen? As it turns out, people are already talking about most corporations and the products they produce. These people include the creators, critics and spectators mentioned above. (Those titles were provided by Li and Bernhoff.) The challenge for big business is to wade into the conversation, while knowing the traditional filters and safeguards are non-existent. It has to be done with care, though, because those in the groundswell are just as likely to speak out against your product, as they are to support it. Any hint of heavy-handedness from the corporation will likely result in a negative reaction.
The reason to wade in, despite the danger, is that it offers tremendous opportunities. For one, a lot of customers will be happy that the company itself decided to join the conversation. Since they are already talking about you, they would love to talk with you, especially if they think you’ll actually listen.
Listening to masses of real customers creates the opportunity for nearly free and continuous product research. These critics will tell you when there’s a problem with your product. If you solve the problem, and let the group know, there’s the possibility of igniting the much-longed for word of mouth campaign because you’ve given these participatory customers a reason to be loyal.
Like it or not, the groundswell is the future. The question for corporations is how and when they will effectively enter the conversation. Those who decide to take a pass should consider that if this is an evolutionary step, evolution is not kind. Survival of the fittest implies that a whole lot of folks are not fit. Better to get fit by figuring out how to harness the groundswell.
Paul Adrian 