The Root Trend

The Difference Between Pioneers and Settlers (part II)

post note: this post summarizes my blogging effort at iroM. The "part II" is a reference to a simple post I offered there a while back. This follow up offers the organizing ideas that, IMO and very generally, sum up why and where one vector the business of content will follow to its benefit...and yes, I see correcting social mood as an important component of the bigger picture helping to swing experimentation that way. There are no final destinations on the digital frontier but there will be structural shifts in markets that reflect changing shared values as we continue the socialization of the web. Markets with depth and breadth of competition are more likely to work in the public interest and since content businesses of all shaoes & kinds will not socialize their losses, we should let them settle the bigger issues allowing full contact. I've added five bullet points at the end summarizing the biggest and longer term aspects of change.

 

An Evolving Marketplace Will Uncover the Hidden Value Needed to Unleash A Golden Age in Journalism (and much more) Through Digital Cooperation

The digital ecosystem is still a wilderness.  It is being settled quickly but evolving very slowly into a place where social order will eventually trump aggregation-minded opportunists.

The flow of data runs away from individuals and across the digital frontier. For the most part, this is harmless for now but attitudes have been changing. As time passes, in order to form a more perfect union of interests on both sides of the divide, digital enterprises will begin adding a layer of socially responsive entities balancing interests between enterprises and consumers of everything. The different thinking of this new layer will encourage very important transactional change that sticks, and eventually, will redefine relevant challenges by creating new currency used to measure and trade.

The Biggest Chunks

The first elective I took in my university days was sociology. It was a course about sociobiology and the work of E. O. Wilson. It fit my schedule. The ideas really resonated for me and was put into perspective by showing how diverse behaviors are shaped by selection. What I remember well is how the work questioned distinctions made between the effects of selection working at the level of the individual and the group.  Those ideas and questions stuck back then even if they had no place to go.

E O Wislon has published an updated set of ideas.  In it he talks about the relationship between individual selection and group selection in social animals. This is an important download of insight and wisdom.  After an initial scan I can tell it is a compelling read that manages to seem timely while being timeless. I am tempted to offer a quote from the top of page 245 for market minded folks (of all stripes) but since it is timeless, it will wait.

The Social Conquest of Earth 

 

Transparency Means Getting To Better Answers Faster

Last Sunday's headline article in the NYT asked about the Constitutionality of what has become routine cell phone tracking by law enforcement for all manner of crimes. The part that immediately caught my attention was how phone companies have quietly built businesses selling these valuable services to local police. Some towns have even invested in their own equipment to be able to protect citizens.

It is very easy to be concerned about this, so let's focus on what is great about it.

Look at how quickly the US is getting to these pointed big questions. In two decades we have gone from broad adoption of personal mobile phones, and early unformed questions about the implications of electronic tracking techniques, to now having them discussed in Supreme Court cases. The issue in the NYT headline above is not up for high court review yet but, it will be. 

In an open society we get to answers more quickly on the big questions. Sure this article talks about how various police policies instruct personnel not to talk about cell phone tracking in their public statements but this is not state secrecy. That these details are all discoverable and printed in headline stories is very important.

Several news stories last week mentioned how China is broadening micro-blog censorship. No surprise there.

Free and open societies, and markets, take us from questions to answers more quickly. Free markets commonly put up self-serving barriers to enhance profits but these are made vulnerable over time through innovation and competition. In the case of ubiquitous cell phone GPS tracking by law enforcement, we will get to legal standards fairly quickly based on an interpretation of the Constitution but what about business? The high court isn't the only one thinking about digital data privacy and these threads are the same at the level of the shared values being expressed.  Monday's Washington Post has an editorial by the chairman of the FTC citing concern about consumer privacy in all matters digital. These news items together suggest that the moving average of specific shared values is signaling change. 

Let's remember that rules and laws impulsively applied to free markets without a well developed discussion can cause large unintended consequences. There cannot be an election for most laws (nor would we want them) but that special business interests consistently access the legislative process for shorter term goals is part of seeing the ultimate solution. There's good reason to feel we are back in an era of dominant businesses and big money driving legislation, elections, and headlines. 

Apple's PR massage of their recent unfavorable headlines was nicely done with a little misdirection and topped with Chinese workers worrying about cuts to their hours. Off the radar, back here, has been the effort to grab spectrum and bottle up data connectivity into the existing phone/data oligopoly.

These days, important ideas spread rapidly and more efficiently. This new dynamic increasingly cuts both ways.

Likewise, peak social mood influenced us as we adopted new tools and began sharing information extensively.  Our collective expansion of digital technology coincided with a stretched out peak of multi-generational proportions in social mood. The broad impulse to share spread out like a glass of water spilled into many parts of our open society.  Both newspaper links (above) make it clear to us just how pervasive and broadly the digital sharing impulse has been accepted by the collective "us". I don't expect everyone to see it this way but it is more than coincidental. We were told authoritatively that our digital behavior was public behavior for many years. With that backdrop, and with commercial enterprises monitoring digital behavior of customers, social mood helped produce a backdrop of willing suspension of disbelief that this might lead to anything less than good.

The sharing trend we've been expressing reflects the long term peak period of social mood and the patterns of social correction too. It is very helpful to try to see both these reflections of mood in these broad new behaviors because it suggests where the lasting value is being created. Think: communities.  The era of the individual digital broadcaster isn't going to end but it will be contrasted by a new balancing social impulse that emphasizes the power of organized groups and demands a lot of what Chris Anderson called mass customization acknowledging the changed nature of digital content & exchanges.

When some of the air is let out of social 1.0 software, left behind will be the immense utility created, contrasted by changing expressions of shared values (that are very broad in scope), and it will all be eventually balanced out by a more competitive marketplace. Likewise, when our collective willingness to look the other way at government/law enforcement regarding privacy concerns wanes, we will make diverse decisions that require more structure and rules.

Like the TSA airport hassles, we stretch ourselves when safety is truly involved but when rights are violated because it is easy to do, or because it is the path of least resistance for businesses to make a dollar, change will be part of social corrections.

Some might read the two news items above and be concerned. I will worry if there are not more stories like this being reported.

First we get together into markets to grow new tools and ideas. Then later, comes the needed correction of that previous growth. It's a pattern influenced by social mood that produces broad changing shared values and is aided by transparency in all of our systems. The definition of Better is always based on the values a market shares. Soon there will be a stark difference drawn between individual sharing and the free-for-all happening with our digital data now. Responsibilities will increase for all participants. After that, we can probably expect the long tail of software for digital interaction to allow individuals to choose more details of their own experiences. All of this was initially set in motion with the spread of cell phones but the trend exploded with the interactive power of the "click". Innovations in software changed the nature of the broadcast mindset. Next, as the "me" era very slowly swings back towards an emerging "we" era, concerns about digital privacy will fundamentally change the communities we create while following broad patterns expected with social mood. More empowered and organized digital groups will challenge both enterprises and government where the influence of "me" failed to produce choices.Publish

The "we"era will be segmented. It will be more than a decade long and maybe a few decades in the making as we collectively move towards better answers. It will lag social mood at the larger degrees of trend and to produce a different social environment from today. It will add transparency in some places and take it away in others.

Here's a short interview where Robert Prechter discusses social mood relative to the Presidential election.  He also explains the differences between how people behave in financial markets and consumer markets. It's very timely insight and worth a few minutes. 

 

 

Interview with Robert Prechter: Forecasting the Presidential Election

Robert Prechter talks to Fox Business News host Neil Cavuto about his latest research on how social mood affects presidential re-election bids. In the interview below, he reveals what is the most reliable indicator in predicting incumbent re-election.

Download and read a landmark academic paper by Prechter, Goel, Parker and Lampert that identifies the link between stock market performance and presidential election winners. The research has been featured by ABC News, CBS News, U.S. News and World Report, and many more outlets.

Download the full paper for free >>

Expressions of Social Mood In Consumer Markets

I've written several posts over the years considering how consumer behavior is impacted by social mood. Some of these posts have been very generalized but those ideas are what motivated me to begin the blog. So, let me clarify some of what I see.

The study of social mood in societies is called socionomics. It allows a very useful and unique perspective on social trends of all kinds. As the Socionomic Summit approaches here is what I wrote about last year's speakers. The momentum this work has achieved is inspiring.

 

(VIDEO) The Only Time You'll Hear Bob Prechter Suggest Joining the Herd

By Jill Noble | March 21, 2012

In this clip Prechter explains why people herd in financial markets -- and then makes one suggestion to his audience at last year's inaugural Socionomics Summit that you may find surprising.

What's especially noteworthy about what you just saw is that almost every single attendee at the packed-house event really did take Prechter's suggestion!

Last year's Summit was a sold-out event, and was full of finance professionals, social mood researchers, Elliott wave analysts and more.

Yet after the day-long Socionomics Summit ended, these individuals found themselves all herding together -- as the dialogue continued downstairs at the Georgia Tech Conference Center's lobby and bar.

This year's Socionomics Summit: New Initiatives in Social Mood Research and Application promises to be another fantastic networking opportunity, with plenty of chances to mingle with an impressive group of like-minded individuals.

Don't miss your chance to join this growing community at the 2012 Summit. REGISTER NOW>>

Editor's note: Additional video from Prechter's presentation on herding is available here>>

This article is syndicated by The Socionomist, a publication of the Socionomics Institute, and was originally published under the headline (VIDEO) The Only Time You'll Hear Bob Prechter Suggest Joining the Herd. The Socionomist is designed to help readers understand and anticipate waves of social mood. Copyright © 2012 Socionomics Institute.

Below here, I just added access to two quality syndicated articles about how social mood impacts politics, elections, and governance.  These were prepared and published by the Socionomics Institute. Seeing events through the lens of social mood reminds us to look at the big picture first in order to better organize the present. Both of these articles are timely and will help you see events more clearly as you consider the countries in the Middle East, Europe, or our four year election cycle as it works its way to a pitch. Patterns in mood are expressed uniquely by each society even if we all make up part of an even larger global moving average. The graphic in the Authoritarianism study shines a bright light on slower moving political trends. These are both great reads.

 

Want to Know Who’s Going to Be President? Ask the Stock Market

 By Robert Folsom | February 13, 2012

Authoritarianism Study: Part One A Society's View of Normal is Always Changing

By Alan Hall, originally published in the April 2010 Socionomist

The Values reflected by Changing Uncertainty

The last post discussed a basic and usable piece of context.  It's a general observation about changing attitudes reflected in what & how markets create in different sized chunks. When I write here I go back and forth between explaining themes through the lens of social mood and then offering it by way of some version of mainstream interpretations. The patterns themselves matter but how to identify them requires considering social mood.

Successful business owners are constantly disciplined into adapting to their market.  Seeing markets broadly by way of changing social mood adds form and texture to what and how particular markets produce (both sides). Sometimes these changes come slowly, and sometimes the pace quickens. Markets can be described as offering "expressions" that reflect mood through changing perceptions of uncertainty***  There are a lot of good sound bites attached to the expressions of positive and negative social mood. I try to convey why a deeper dive is worth your time. 

It is easy to admire the book that gave us this pdf of the business model canvas. Centered in that view of your business world is where you may be able to apply the idea that how we value things (and what we pay attention to) changes as social mood changes. Open up the pdf and enlarge the tiny fonts for a think on what matters to your business and where the social momentum is headed.

Last week's Wash. Post had a challenging piece about Google's privacy policy changes and reactions to it. I've been a fan of Google. It's convenient transit in an endless wilderness. Monopolies and oligopolies seem to naturally develop early in cycles of important large scale social endeavors, only later to naturally devolve when markets are allowed to be competitive. The importance of specialization is central. Recently I have read a lot about why the web is great exactly as it is right now by people and companies defending how enterprises operate. Changing mood reminds us how increasing friction surrounding the defense of a specific position suggests how the market may be indicating an important shift. 

One of the most beneficial uses of social mood I see is in reconsidering assumptions about the specific values and trends your business is mirroring.

For instance, a flexible approach to the digital business model will be imposed over time by customers simply wanting a choice. You can choose to see emerging issues through mainstream news reports that blame general and specific offences or, you can choose to consider how social mood creates a backdrop that influences shared values in networks of people. This can create or reshape entire markets. Read this link with the that in mind. Is mood driving this? I think so but the point is how it increasingly matters. Maybe a better question for enterprises is will these concerns affect the perceived utility of services over time? And what will be the impact on the hefty brands? Right now, big networks require scaled platforms. Will it always be that way? Will today's hefty digital businesses find long term growth through taking chances or liberties? Might small competitors come along with key innovations, yet again? How these answers are expressed by markets for digital services over time will be a function of mood to some extent.

The next post here will be authorized content from the Socionomics Institute. First up is a discussion titled Authoritarianism. It maps changing social action related to politics & governance and discusses the polarization & fragmentation expected during large social corrections. It introduces another polarity to the right-left dynamic. It's a pattern worth thinking about generally. I won't do politics here but the discussion really matters looking forward and it is a great read.

*** an underpinning of this trend model is very briefly explained in this short article. Everything I write about here touches the gray areas where uncertainty in markets exists. The realm of uncertainty is where patterns of positive and negative mood are expressed by crowds.

The Discipline of Social Corrections

This imposing painting from Goya's Black period is a favorite. Broadly felt pessimistic uncertainty can influence a lot of change in what markets groups produce over time. Opposite comparisons to (TV dog) We-go can't be avoided.

 

This is a long post that looks at a very broad and trending social theme that will touch all people and every business in years to come. For me, this post highlights the process of social corrections that are important to appreciate, especially if you are a business witnessing your market change in fundamental ways. Large social corrections; start there and work smaller for best results in seeing what really matters to your enterprise. What follows is purely how I see using these ideas, so blame me. 

During a large social corrections one group might be heard to say,

There is nothing wrong with the way things are set up. It is working for many people (and has for a long time). Others should try to see it differently because this way is best for us in the long run

An opposing group might respond with something like,

You're crazy. The number of people not able to work easily (or negatively affected) with the existing structure is growing and it is because the ideals are wrong for the larger group

This conversation is echoed in different sizes and places right now, and more will follow. 

Here are a few summarizing sound bites up front:

1)  what discipline seems to mean (to people, groups, organizations, and government) and what is viewed as acceptable is changing slowly after many decades of opposite momentum.

2)  it's not just more discipline that is needed even if it really seems that way. What's needed is to to recognize that our needs are changing because how we value things & ideas is changing.

3) this observation is easy to agree with but harder to apply to specific circumstances & outcomes. The framework for social mood opens a valuable ongoing discussion.

Below, I touch on three emerging issues where the felt need for discipline is slowly being rethought and expressed. Each should be considered separately and each in different a sized context. If you read one or more of Robert Prechter's books then you've already seen this suggestion made both very generally and toward several centrally important matters.

I think this is a worthwhile discussion to refocus on here generally because eventually, a thin coat of these feelings will be spread everywhere. Many enterprises already see these changing shared values emerging from their market but are confused about how or if to react. 

What Trends Really Matter, To You?

What large trends do you think really matter now? Are you looking at them in a way that will allow for understanding or are you responding to a seemingly chaotic environment? This post will point you to a great resource that will help you see more about what really matters.

When I use the phrase What Really Matters? I am writing here and thinking of something I learned by seeing social trends through the lens of social mood. All social trends eventually correct and many correct out of existence. Rather than beginning by asking which ones will go away forever, I suggest you begin by organizing the challenge in more thorough framework. 

When distinct societies eventually correct longer periods of social expansion, the natural tendency is for groups within to begin focusing on the issues that matter most. This is a natural, necessary group process designed to organize the larger group for more expansion down the road. And since not every social trend expands and corrects in tandem, the divergences are very instructive when seen through social mood. Social corrections, as seen through mood, are one of two basic patterns that affect how and what we create when gathered into groups and markets. (see #2 below for specific examples)

One of the main reasons I began writing this blog (years ago) is because, as seen from this broad perspective,  we've entered a long stretch of socially corrective episodes.  Massive social change is part of this and is likely to last much of the decade.  Is your enterprise geared to adapt to a changed mindset and marketplace?  What are the right strategies in your market to survive the socially corrective patterns that are emerging?  

No one is going to offer you perfect answers to these questions. If they claim to, question them. In the meantime you can arm yourself with organizing knowledge. You can apply this to markets and large groups that matter most to your enterprise or your life.

Begin the year by learning something entirely new.  Teach yourself a great gift.  You will not forget to use it.  Of all the information sources I have cultivated, this one stands alone. 

Very few places offer so much high quality content for free. 

Here are a few basic links that run deep with ideas. Check out the links within the links. I am a reader and subscriber of this work. This post is not an ad.

I witnessed a few different industries I had watched for a long time begin to change forever and needed to find a better way to organize what I was seeing in the context of what had already happened and was continuing. I am certain this can do the same for you if applied the same way. (warning: this isn't about short punchy ideas and answers...this is solid insight that must be earnestly applied in each case.)

So, WRM in the markets and large groups you care about?  Think these questions after you have had a chance to read these links....and think about them for a while.

1. What is social mood?

    1a how it is applied

2. What are some different expressions produced by social mood expressed in various group settings?

      2a....An old post here that tries to reiterate the very basic point how we share our (forward looking)  mood in all social interactions but how aggregate social mood is unique to each society.  Right now, we see hopeful parallels in some mideastern countries but divergences can & will appear quickly across borders based on changing mood and the stability of the societal charter. Authoritarian regimes based on assumed power can crumble very quickly when respected systems are not firmly established. Our founding fathers really were visionary 222 years ago. After these largest chunks of ideas are organized for perspective, we can carefully move into the challenges of individual markets: I created these two very general slides years ago (to use for myself) after reading Pioneering Studies in Socionomics. 

3. How will some big picture cultural issues evolve as social mood changes?

    3a. So how might this control issue change?    Mood re-shapes most critical issues at pivotal times.

All markets see the effects of changing mood incrementally but it does not happen in lockstep. Different trends expand and contract based on the larger rhythms they follow and while social mood shapes it all, it does not control it. Look closer at the markets that matter to you and look also at the markets connected to those. For instance, technology is a quintessential forward looking business that is also, at times, myopic. That is not a criticism. 'They' are constantly reaching out on the edge creating and social corrections in societies just do not offer as supportive an environment of that mindset as do broad periods of social expansion. Incredibly disruptive new tools come about sometimes but remember this: social corrections typically witness swift adjustments and outright changes in perspective.  Technology businesses adapt to shared social values. They follow the collective "us" along one or more steps behind, not ahead of shared values. In this context, looking back to look forward can help us collectively focus on the getting right the things that matter most. Use socionomics as a way to see markets and large groups as a whole that are subject to mood. Just by doing that much you might be able to glimpse ahead of the mass adopting laggards to sense which parts will endure and what (if any) is more likely to be ephemeral. The material at the socionomics institute site may provide you with ideas for leading and lagging indicators in the markets that matter most to you. Don't just scan it. Study it over time and see more about what really matters to you.

The Business of Monetizing Content To Change A Lot During This Social Correction (part 3)

* see post note added at end

Successful enterprises tell us where perceived value was yesterday and today. Consumers point to where it will be tomorrow. How we value things and ideas of all kinds changes as social mood changes...and what we pay attention to changes with social mood. Lately, there has been enormous attention focused upon how companies make money (create value) in the area of content. I point at these endeavors and markets in the broadest possible manner and not towards any one kind of business. 

For five or six years we have seen an extreme experiments in social sharing as social networking moved into the digital ecosystem for the masses. There's no doubt, people want to share aspects of their life. There is also no doubt how this behavior will be subject to shifts in social mood over time. I prefer to point toward the larger shifts able to be seen using social mood because they point to basic structural change in how people want to be served by enterprises. 

The Chief Executive of Forrester, George Colony gave a talk you can go watch here. In 20 minutes he talked about where he sees the internet headed and he does in a way readers here can appreciate. In a nutshell, an excuse me if I abbreviate a great talk entirely too much, the world wide web is likely to be replaced by a wave of app-like ecosystems across the internet. Technology certainly seems to bear that conclusion out but most ordinary people are left wondering what that that really means for everyday folk. Is tech really in charge of where we take the internet or is it something else? In periods of positive or expanding social mood, we might just wait and see. That is much less likely now.

In my very humble opinion, his vision can be guided towards content markets offering a little more meat on the bone by seeing through social mood and how consumers define value (create value) through their changing perceptions and through their behavior.

Apps certainly seem to be the short-hand tech development paradigm that has become mainstream practice today. Apps by their nature, create closed-like systems. I think the idea of Choice matters more. I have defined Choice in many posts over years over at the media blog that was spawned in posts here years ago. You may use the blog search to see just how often and in many ways I have approached it. Choice, in the way I use it as a social trend, is about getting content in the digital environment and how centuries of practice and behavior have been altered in just two decades. Demand has changed and will see enormous new shifts and this will change existing industries even more than we have witnessed so far.

In my thinking, the creation of value is what really matters...and to consumers that means getting Choice, for starters. It really is that simple. As social mood changes Choice will see subtle shifts that could rock many businesses off their business model because the early digital enterprises are simple copies of analog era business practices and do not reflect the massive changes in how transactions for digital content occur. They all ignore Choice in ways that serve their business needs.  This reality has been covered up by large new successful digital companies that appear to have beaten old media companies to the digital frontier. The fight has been portrayed as if it is about old media versus new media. That way of seeing things is all wrong. In fact, it could not be more wrong.

Value to consumers in the digital ecosystem is about Choice and the old way of transacting is increasingly at odds with the perceived expansive freedom associated with the digital frontier. Picture a town with crowded streets, billboards everywhere, salesmen pushing offerings in our face as we stroll along for a view of our new surroundings. Increasingly, the anything is possible perception has been replaced by captive viewing that is increasingly limited because endless space wars are limiting creative potential. You could embrace these new managed and gated communities but they will soon be seen as left wanting of Choice. In short; good intentions driven by greed and chaos*** have taken over the scene for now. Mobile internet has been given to us by forward looking companies but what they really gave us was closed systems, not the open web experience. Users are captive and watched and served what they appear to be needed. Boy, that sounds bad when put that way, right?, but it does not have to be. App ecosystmes can be part of a chapperone style enterprise.  The open web began falling away with mobile development and now the chief of Forrester says it will be a pervasive change. Essentially, in exchange for a little creative code writing we are incrementally handing over our freedom to wander and see whatever we Choose to see and do and instead agree to be served what someone else thinks is best for us. Trust has been extended up till now.

If you are a regular reader that last sentence says it all because trust and social mood are highly correlated during big swings. This issue will be a pivot point in developing digital markets for content.

At the risk of repeating myself, As social mood changes what we pay attention to changes and how we value things of all kinds changes. I am going to cut this post short and offer a single powerful slide I created maybe five years ago when Viacom sued Google for a billion dollars(it seemed like a lot back then).  I saw this change and now I see it even more. It could go right along with what the Forrester Chief suggests is coming. It could completely agree with his vision if only one small change in approach is made. If some app enterprises shift their focus and fully face the consumers they serve....100% and nothing otherwise, then this is exactly what is going to result in an explosion of newly created value. Consumer facing enterprises could reset the web and all high quality content enterprises. 100% consumer facing enterprises could produce a new currency to redefine value in a way long overdue.  In order for that to happen some gargantuan shifts will have to happen. There will be winners, losers, and those willing to recognize social change as it is happening. If you ever got caught in a rip tide or found a useful thermal of air, then you know they are invisible without some good idea of how to identify them at the right time and place. Social mood makes these events appear differently.  To me, this is the future of content of all kinds as we work through this giant social correction of previous periods of expansion. Trust the customer consuming content first and only and they will trust you. That is the singular basis of this idea working. The rest is just tech details (and a lot of social change):

 

* I will be updating this post over holiays and consolidating it with the two previous posts on the same topic and shrinking it all down to a smaller profile. About Face Part 1 (a simple explanation), About Face Part 2 (A Basic Structural Change)  The point of sharing these ideas is less about making a prediction and more about suggetsing where the big influences will shape ongoing events so that we can use existing momentum to fully exercise the freedom to be informed and to inform. I do not take this for granted especially in light of the trends I propose will drive these changes.

*** to be clear: greed and market chaos are both absolutely necessary and good. Any seeming opinion about the atmosphere (in that paragraph) was my own sense of consumerism and should be considered separately. Social mood suggests how we should see all market particpants as part of the trends being expressed and the main thing I am trying to highlight in this paragraph is how diverging shared values create images like those I attempted to capture. Our shared history offers many episodes of social expression extremes that are later sharpy diverted. Many.  Seeing through social mood may allow us to consider trend directionality from the standpoint of specific changing behaviors. Sharing will not stop but some expressions will change a lot as mood corrects.  This is where and how the larger forecast matters most.  Once you know how to match up these forecasts (large chunks) with your market(s) you can use deep market knowledge to see both confirming and divergent issues. I submit that this kind of "seeing" is a zone of competitive advantage and why this is valuable.    

 

 

Part II to the post About-Face is now posted here. Part one, below, was intentionally succinct. Part II offers some detail on how I see current trending opening a brand new divide in digital markets. This view presents both opportunity and obstacle for enterprises. This follow-up post, and Part I, has been my attempt to demonstrate how social mood can help see into big challenges in specific markets. I began considering the case of markets for content here several years ago when Viacom and Google first clashed legally over links and clicks(page down to oldest posts). At the time I likened it to the range wars on the old western frontier that led to fences and legislatures. Their legal face off lead to the big idea in these two current posts and will, in time, affect everyone. Social trends lead while businesses, industry, and government follow us where we are going. There is a lot of value in seeing trends from this perspective and it can help make sense of change in any market.

Socionomics is the best way I have found to frame the past and provide helpful insight to look forward in different sized chunks of time. This post from 15 months ago is as timely as ever given recent headlines. Data security and privacy is an obvious trending shared value in the US and elsewhere. Free Speech issues in the US and abroad will/are diverging now. The Arab Spring suddenly seems as if it could be an indian summer. As Americans have learned over time, a sound social charter agreement is only one of several parts needed to guard freedoms. These safeguards only frame the conversation and the ongoing discussion continues to be affected by the developing social mood. As always: broad social impulses lead diverse needed changes, and businesses eventually follow us dutifully. Sometimes it really pays off to back up as far as the social charter to see events more clearly. 

The Approaching Public Discussions re: Free Speech & (digital data)Privacy Issues (llink thread at end for these broad issues)

post note: This is posted on the media blog (link to the right here) but the trend point makes more sense here as it is something I have watched and considered for a long time.

Choice is an obvious general trend that reflects how the nature of demand for content is changing because of the digital environment after a very long time, (centuries?), of the opposite circumstances through the various media. It has always helped me to see Choice as a very large social pivot point relative to technology and content; affecting our use of media in many ways.  Social shows us it goes beyond scheduling and will have more dynamics to express.  Add the context of changing social mood and the potential for this trend to impact commerce broadly and in ways not previously imagined is worth noting. That stated, what follows is purely my opinion.

About-Face

Does your business sell advertising to generate revenue?

Is that dynamic creating a conflict with primary customers in order to serve
secondary customers? Who are your primary customers, exactly? Are they
consumers or other businesses?

The time has come to make clear distinctions between customers, their needs
and values, and secondary constituencies.

Why now?

The market dynamic that can be called Choice has taken us here along with
social mood. The long era of broadcast effectively began closing with the
advent of digital networks of connected people. The result, the market
dynamic I call Choice, will now increasingly require a distinction to be
made by enterprises. This would not be necessary in a world without Choice.

Businesses will not change to mirror this overnight but because the nature
of some transactions has changed forever, we are now slowly moving to this
end.

The consistent expression of Choice will be impacted by social mood and
result in changes to commerce requiring many new kinds of specialization.

So, the question is likely: which customer will you decide to face down and
which will you serve by aligning your world view (and actions) with theirs?

The need to ask this question is new because just as the times change, so
does how we value things and ideas of all kinds. Choice will eventually
require a decision by content oriented enterprises (and others too) that
have multiple kinds of customers with conflicting demands. Glossy ideals
about anticipating digital customer's needs better will be re-framed inside
of this new movement. (It may seem early for this larger trend but, it is
morning.)

To truly know your primary customer and to engage them in a manner that
serves you both well, requires trust be established and maintained without
the help of legalese. Choice will, in the changing light of shared social
values, force businesses to make important distinctions.

In coming years markets will demand that enterprises choose which customer
to face. There will be opportunity and limitations in either choice because
this is a fundamental change that will shape other decisions and business
dynamics.

If the choices your enterprise makes puts it at odds with the primary
customers then,

About-Face!

This first era of social reaction in the digital age will be different than
many expect but do not think this is an argument about one kind of company.
The digital ecosystem will interact with changing social perceptions and shared values to force incremental & ongoing specialization upon the entire business model.

Last thought: on the media blog, I posted this under the trending category, "permission and accountability".  Consider that a primary thread developing inside of Choice. 

current links in this thread of trending after the jump...Last add 11 16 11

Back on Dec 1st, 2010 I posted this about how which State you live in will really matter. I've populated a number of links following that thread at the bottom of the post since then. The trend of state by state challenges is very clear as is the increasing polarity of state politics in finding solutions to gaping holes in finances. Today's NYT article link about California's southern counties considering cutting ties as well as Monday's issue discussing Minnesota's current gov. shutdown is posted there now. Will this social correction in the US see the division of any states in the years ahead? Large social corrections are capable of shrinking borders. Just look at Europe's map a few hundred years ago and now. Increasingly, what really matters to individuals will be closer to home and have the potential to change how we live everyday. What used to be a lifestyle and physical surroundings kind of decision has already changed for many since the housing crisis. I will update this trend post soon.  

Who is Able or Allowed To See Into The Cloud?

9 27 11 The challenges of cloud security below 10,000 feet

8 10 11 a more sophisticated set of thoughts on business in the cloud. The real guts of this discussion is in the comments. This is an unuaually good blog for tech issues and you can see social mood dynamics expressed readily.   

7 29 11this great read was forwarded more than a week ago and about half way through addresses cloud issues in a larger context. You can easily see how social mood will impact the challenges discussed in this New Scientist article.

 

Are you living, working, or spending any time in the cloud these days?  Not many months ago most people would have been confused by that question but new technology is quickly accepted these days. 

Let's consider social mood relative to this emergent trend for a few thoughts.

The cloud is a potential means for everyone to use inexpensive processor chips in their gadgets and not be weighed down by bulky and expensive memory needs. This, in theory should free us all up to be more connected for more tasks in more ways to improve life. And if this cloud trend holds social traction, then the possibilities in developing economies is beyond beyond because many do not have a choice now (like Americans) between local storage devices, large screens, lap tops etc. or, the cloud.  All this requires is connectivity and a low priced gadget for great results. I see this trend and I see two critical aspects. First there's productivity expanding for almost everyone using this new universal storage. I also see, as time passes, more uncertainty and changing attitudes toward the keepers of our data and the overall utility of using the cloud.

Here's the social mood component:

What happens with our data?  Our pics, our notes to people in all of our circles?...Our ideas, our actions, and our plans?  The first thing we've seen cloud businesses address was security and, the first news stories about cloud services we're seeing are data security related. As an observer I try not to stir the pot of negative opinion on such matters ...especially since the utility of cloud services is understated when called incredible.

however...

In an always uncertain world the certainty of a professional cloud server farm being there for me is a great thought.  But what about big brother and all the data starved web businesses out there without a clear sense of right and wrong until they are slapped? (aka: "ask for forgiveness not...") Ok, that sounds paranoid just reading it back but the headlines this week alone justifies some of the concern. The question worth considering: Is your disposition biased toward comfort using the cloud for all manner of data? (business or personal)? or is it somewhat contained by 'let's wait and see'? Is it more negative than that? What are your various social groups feeding back to you on issues like this? It is very early yet but many people in business have already experienced the utility.

Social mood is a giant moving average of attitudes that are directionally predictive and it is like a dip stick of broad social action at any one moment. That's how I visualize it in order not to get stuck in the concerns of individuals and think in the realm of larger groups (and markets).

The uncertainty associated with a social shift to the cloud is a perfect opportunity to assess mood in one specific social dynamic right now and in the months ahead too.

As discussed here many times; there are (right now) conflicting examples of mood out in all societies that represent some degree of the emergent pattern in aggregate (societal) mood. My guess is that adoption and use of the cloud will reflect shorter cycles in mood as opposed to the cycles represented by longer social trends talked about here. The very appearance of the cloud is a result of a longer term social trend.  My guess is that cloud services will be impacted by changing social mood and manifest shorter swings (even reverses) in participation and momentum as a concurrent indication of mood. Why do I think this?  Because in the social correction of late 2008 & early 2009 the types of everyday concerns and complaints that manifested were rooted in seemingly practical matters affected by a rapidly changing social environment.  I am not suggesting the demise of the cloud but momentum could be reversed so much that it seems inevitable. The cloud is just getting started but it seems to have begun with very little clear market dictated definitions. Social affirmation of expectations using the cloud is the next step and that will be more complicated as it will most likely happen in the context of a deepening social correction. For now, the benefit to to industry of mass adoption of the cloud is incremental purchases of many more small processors and services. To anyone who appreciates technology the cloud is not a surprise but to most consumers, it was a fresh use of digital ecosystems to make many tasks easier. In a nutshell, the cloud trend is reflective of a larger positive social trend. It is building something new and expanding digital markets.

My main point now is how I will be watching and (somewhat) expecting to see multiple examples of how negative social mood is expressed toward cloud services in a concurrent expression of mood as it corrects in the years directly ahead. Like all great new ideas and tools,(think: search engines)  this will serve to define what and how the cloud should be used & managed. Obvious and almost expected stories will emerge that instruct us about considered use of cloud services and related responsibility of cloud enterprises.  Some uses are a natural and some uses will be sharply questioned. The first link below should begin to shape thinking on what kind of data should not be stored in the cloud. The second highlights ambiguous societal borders in the digital ecosystem and get us to think about how mood has the potential to crash through those gateways.

Let's watch together. Based on headlines this week, we ought to consider how data security is bumping into information needs of competitive interests and how social boundaries are not fully established even if we think they should be.  So, how can any one cloud customer be sure that they are not being bumped down some priority list of our cloud operator?  If phones can be hacked so too can cloud accounts.  Are cloud companies going to be as responsible as credit card companies to their customers?  The ongoing digital aggregation of our various data has produced an alternate potential that can be accessed by many technologically savvy outside interests. The cloud is a fantastic idea and a great example of a lagging expression of a long term peak in mood at the largest degree of trend.  It is, however, a sharp tool that can and will cut both ways.  In the meantime we will see rules and norms be developed by noisy users, especially if overall mood expressions turn negative in the months ahead.  The social development of the cloud will be governed by short term mood. I expect the cloud to survive but if the definition of utility includes security, does that suggest positive potential or negative longer term potential?  Social mood will play a role in how we see, use, and value the cloud in both the short term and the medium term.  (These links are both quick and worthy reads)

Security Issues Cast Cloud over Online Backup Services

Microsoft Admits Patriot Act Can Access EU Cloud Data

Monitoring social tools for specific kinds of change

Brands and social media tools are being impacted by changing social mood. If the pace of social change is to pick up considerably then these two are worth considering together for a few minutes.

An old thread not addressed here lately revolves around brands...specifically, brands in crisis during a social correction. The subject has been sitting out this cycle of expanding (positive) mood. Moreover, I have backed off the Toyota brand issue for what are dual reasons of both timing and respect. I did see this week that a key trial (related to the unintended acceleration issue) has been scheduled for 2013. That timing is more than a little suggestive though not surprising as armies of lawyers prepare for war.

What is not lost on me is how this general idea about brands might seem specific to a few. Yes, a few brands are likely to be eviscerated by a prolonged social correction. Likewise, this view is a heads up from a broader place to suggest how the social utility of brand images may shift again in a deep social correction.

In a world increasingly influenced by highly efficient text messaging and tweets of 140 characters, the value of branding references is being extended as a social tool.  And like all behaviors of increasing frequency and overall participation, the benefits may cut sharper as well as the drawbacks.  Moreover, the resumption of a corrective mood trend will magnify the need for caution if you care for a brand because of changing perceptions. When you skip beyond present speculation regarding recovery and double dips, bear market or bull market, you can look around and see evidence of many corrective social trends that are expressed in polarities over very long periods of time...much longer than this current 28 month social rally.  The implication is that even though many social trending dynamics we see are lagging indications of present mood, the positive swing we are (collectively) creating now is not likely to completely reverse these individual (longer) trending expressions of corrective mood. Of course, observations about smaller social expressions (trends) do not guarantee a larger period of social correction. The point here is not to use circular reasoning. The goal we should aim for is to organize a hierarchy of social expressions and compare them and note critical contrasts.

During a prolonged social correction where smaller units of association are increasingly expressed in diverse ways, many brands will undergo a transformation reflective of our larger social correction. Like the twists and turns in business, most of these will not be about endings or beginnings. It is about adaptation to changing social circumstances that provide for both opportunity and setbacks because how we value things changes as social mood changes.  Language and money both offer excellent tools for various estimations of changing social value but can these newer media (listening) tools be used to distinguish important structural shifts in shared values? What might help us see specific geographic challenges approaching? How can these new social listening tools be adapted to distinguish signal and noise in a time of rapid social change?

...more on the current digital (social) crosscurrents

The PR machine that is called Apple announced how the PC and Mac are being demoted to "just devices" the other day and that the move to the cloud is now on. Coffee with a friend over the weekend showed that even though he is a contractor for the gov't, he did not fully know what the cloud was yet because his work will not be headed that way but his brand new smart phone will show him quickly. The momentum headed to the cloud in business may be real but are the larger fundamentals in place in order to sustain the kind of anticipated growth?, or is it more hype than reality? Does the quality of hype make reality? (note the mood implication in the question) 

Based on the last post here, you may appreciate how any prediction of a huge move to the cloud would require a presumption that the current expression of positive mood will prevail.  An embedded trend in our move to the cloud that is dependent upon overall mood expressions is also how instead of buying a hard drive now we are predicted to want to rent a hard drive in return for a constant stream of payments in order to have the anywhere convenience and that we will trust the reliability and security of our stuff in the cloud. This kind of decision is mostly a rational (economic benefit) decision but if people around us were to begin openly questioning both the ongoing cost burden and security issues, the trend would see halting progress. IMO Never ending streams of payments for many new basic services built into our outlook is indicative of the larger degree of trend expressions we still see positively influencing actions. Anyone questioning this preconceived idea is foolishly pessimistic, right? 

I introduced what I see as several related macro ideas in the last post and feel obliged to point out how complex corrective social action may not always go as we expect from a glance based on positive or negative mood polarity. This is exactly why deep knowledge of an industry is critical to applying social mood modeling to unfolding trending. For instance, the link I offered for patent issues is such a deep source and he (and many well connected commenters) suggests that patents for software should not exist. That answer cuts both ways just like the opposite does now. There is no substitute for knowing a business deeply and then adding the model that uses mood as an aid. Since that last post I have seen the phrase "economic warfare" used in a few good reads where China openly criticizes Google.  One of the reads clearly suggests that the Chinese were (very indirectly) justifying hacking Google owing to their larger social framework's need for centralized social control...even if that control involves people who are not Chinese.  As a teen in the late 70's I had to use the non-powered grass cutter instead of the gas engine mower for "obvious safety reasons". And while you are simply deciding for yourself if that has any relevance (whatsoever) here remember that when some kinds of social values end, instead of correcting, the creative social energy is redistributed towards other valued social endeavors in the same way we might describe the allocation of capital toward a hot investment. There is an emotional component to all social values and group endeavors and the main question is how can the influence of that part be measured effectively(?).  Digitally, we cannot forget how all social trending respects borders somehow because we are all still branded citizens even if the logo is not always showing and mood in different places is not often perfectly parallel.

Socionomics shows us the weak seams where social change is likely.  Cyberspace is catalyzing these trending influences at such a times as to compliment the larger expression of mood (quickening changes).  In such an environment, seeing farther in a business is best subordinated to contextualizing right now...especially if right now includes some big extremes in social expressions; both here and across the borders. On my other blog related to media business (link in right column) I have emphasized how privacy concerns will grow to influence enterprises. The leap I skipped was how enterprises are likely to have increasing problems as well raising a growing chorus of concern adding significant complexity to any solutions. Suddenly we will hear demands that these new values be addressed because businesses move government faster than people do. The more universal and widespread the problem, the more likely an unexpected solution will come. Not all changes have to be regulatory but with election season around the corner and Congress powerless over larger social issues, that path may be easiest right now. However, at large degrees of trend expression, getting to the better answer will take several years, easily. Social mood clearly shapes our perception of what makes a good idea.

 

Clarifying and Classifying Information Rights = Define those rights, please?

5 recent links now added below...

As I see it, we are approaching a critical need for clarification of the rights conveyed by ownership of ideas and information.  This theme is where privacy issues originate in an age of digital sharing done by people and machine alike. Before we narrow our focus to privacy issues though we must first acknowledge how the related issues are also in critical areas:

Patents The system is a mess. Some enterprises have learned to cheat rely on the advantage of deep pockets in all matters involving litigation and arbitration. ('First, let's see if forgiveness is really needed.') Others believe that software and business method patents stifle innovation. But if the small players innovate better but gain no benefit from doing so where is the incentive? A correction is needed here according to respected sources but what is it? Is it a free market fix or specific rules?

Copyright A real threat to content was the digital video recorder but now, even that concern seems a little pale out on the digital frontier where piracy across international borders is common now. The bigger players are beginning to see how delivering on the idea of consumer's Choice is a path to profitability and security, though there are no complete answers right now.

Enterprise privacy How can a company compete effectively when technical complexity makes stealing information so hard to defend against and even to prove later? This may sound identical to the patent concern above but it encompasses computer hacking community. Consider what we heard about at Lockheed Martin this week. Yes, what we see now is mostly isolated. They key to using this perspective is seeing how that general mindset will eventuallt shift and that will change how enterprises and entire industries behave.

Personal privacy In the 1970's, 80's we were urged to tear up the carbon paper from credit card receipts.  Today, not long after a historic peak in mood we hear about concerns about how all of our digitized information being aggregated and used (most times fairly, and only occasionally illegally with tough results). Behavioral profiling does indeed make the internet better for people but, the slowly evolving question is: do we really know all the concerns we should be aware of and how to work around them? Is that even possible? A conventional mindset would suggest, simply, that this is not a problem now or yet. Social mood shows us, again, how our perception of these potential events will change and as consumers, this will affect the perceived utility of various products and services.

The question behind these concerns is this: What rights come attached to the ownership of ideas (IP) and our various kinds of (personal and enterprise) information? Of course there are laws and rules now but how has the digital environment created the need for updating? How can we assign the right to use our personal information if we do not clearly understand the rules governing these agreements to use our data? Distinctions need to be made. What responsibility do enterprises have to consumers?  Is regulation really where this is headed? What if people began to think?, "If it is not going to be defined clearly in a way that is enforceable by me, then why participate in their desired interfaces that cater to both customer & enterprise convenience?"  The genie isn't going back in the bottle. Is that really true? What if some rules favor those that do revert to old behaviors where control exists? For instance: Will we go back to making phone calls for purchases because web sites have one set of rules and phone calls another? The trade offs I am suggesting here are indeed speculative but all transactions are evaluated and reevaluated as necessary by all market participants. Ok, as of today so far so good, right? My main point, right now, is how correcting social mood will influence this process considerably and it is not hard to see how it may develop directionally. This mindset is essential.

It may be easy to think I am taking this too far...making too much of nothing. The rest of this post provides limited background on my opinion about how if anything, I believe I am underestimating the challenges. So take note. The times they are a changing:

Links for the recent posts from the media blog are now in the nearest right column here (just below the fold).

I spun out the discussion thread here a while back about how media will continue to transform rapidly, and how directionally, some of the key changes are signaled by a combination of historic context and social mood. So as the media topic became a separate blog I have been careful not to let the discussion of social mood bog down the posts with too much explanation and simply offer it as an example of how the socionomic model might contextualize current events and beyond in any industry. If you are involved in a business that is affected by big social changes, knowledge of the socionomic model is critical insight.

Focus and brevity in any kind of content is a must, these days especially.  The exercise, for me, is slowly sharpening a way to use the socionomic model to form a view of the core industry of media more clearly in terms of big social trends that matter most. My hope is that eventually the general example will be a useful beyond media business issues.

The latest media post is a result of sensing one step into the early stages of the social trend towards privacy concerns growing within a background waxing social correction. More than one interesting email link this week suggested most people say they are concerned about privacy and few actually behave as if they truly are concerned much at all. I wonder...what percent of people really know what to do about it?  It appears we are discovering quickly, across several disciplines, how to better gauge the developing social mood through respondent surveys. The frequency and overall quality of surveys wishing to measure social behavioral nuances has become increasingly important. This last observation, no matter how obvious, will interact with several big trends to produce the end I suggest in that latest post. Critical adjustments (compromises) alter entire industries at critical junctions, sometimes slowly and sometimes very quickly.  People do it to get what they need. Enterprises do it to make a profit....and short dated representatives love to jump in before elections saving citizens from reading the instruction manuel.