Tag Archives: future

Beyond Marketing Gadgets, Thingymagigs and Gizmos

Define today’s concept of: marketing. Now, imagine yourself 40-50 years ago, and define marketing. Notice any big differences? Probably a few come to mind.

I bring this up because I was taught that to know where we are headed, we have to know and understand the past. Rewind back to 1969 when an article called “Broadening the Concept of Marketing” was published by Philip Kotler and Sidney J. Levy (remarkably–you can get a free copy online). My fellow social changers and social marketeers, it was this document that helped paved the way for careers, projects and initiatives we are doing today. It was this document that said marketing was a “societal activity” that can be applied for more than “toothpaste, soap and steel” but that marketing can be transferable to organizations (non-business organizations…aka, nonprofits), persons and ideas. IDEAS.

Fast forward to today, and we are still re-defining and evolving our concept of marketing. Take Seth Godin’s recent post about how we frame marketing.  Or better yet–he explains that marketing is what happens between the frames:

Marketing is what happens when you’re not trying, when you’re being transparent and when there’s no script in place.

With this sentence, one word comes to mind–authenticity. I see all the marketing, talk and chatter about the latest and greatest gizmo. I see people and organizations striving and racing. In between all that, there is authenticity. We must find it, and we must connect with it again if we are to truly be successful–and if we are truly going to make a difference. Makes me think, how will the idea of authenticity broaden marketing for future generations? Discuss.

flickr image credit: planigan412

To Make a Difference, Must You Choose?

Life is full of choices–some more important than others. I started this post about four months ago, and the question remains unanswered for me, so I greatly appreciate your insights.

To make a difference or to bring about the illusive and often intangible “change” …must we choose? What I mean is this: In the non-profit and social change arena, must you choose a cause to rally behind and make your life’s work to make an impact? I use to think no. Now, I’m not so sure.

Beginnings

When I first started blogging I was an anonymous blogger. I wasn’t sure how it would be taken by potential employers and colleagues. I later revealed my identify. However–I’ve never quite fully stated in public certain causes I support or the specific “change” that gets me motivated. In our space, must we? Should we?

I don’t need to tell you that the line between professional and personal is blurring. I use to think we had to stay middle of the road when it came to personal matters–I thought this was the better route to go. After all, you don’t see companies or employees advocating for the causes they care about or beliefs they believe in….or do you?

Shifts

I think the pendulum is swinging. More and more, people and organizations are taking a stand. I think, in the future, part of what will make you credible and a force to be reckoned with, is what motivates you and where you take your stand. Remember that quote we were told as kids as we worked to understand our world:

Do not follow where the path may lead. Go, instead, where there is no path and leave a trail.

We all have influence. Why is it–that we as people or bloggers or even companies are afraid to exercise it towards the very things we care most about? Fear is powerful–and it can occur within a person or within an organization. Sometimes, we may not even recognize the role of fear as it may be built in systems and processes we may have little control over. Good news: fear can be squashed and new solutions and innovations can light the way. We should leave more trails, rather than report each others foot steps as a pack hovering together for warmth. Am I off here?

For instance, I’m a Christian. There, I said it. Does that change things? Let’s talk about it because I’m tired of not talking about it. How come many of us don’t talk about the things that motivate us to get where we are and push us to do our work? What gave me the courage to finally publish this post is that I know I’m not alone in pondering these questions. Thank you to people like Rosetta Thurman and Alex Steed. Read their posts.

Making a Difference

If this is the goal, what does this mean? This is where my hangup is. I feel like we’d all answer this question differently. In terms of my cause-reporting on SocialButterfly, you could say I’m a bit of a generalist with a heavy leaning towards public health. But what about cause-doing? One word comes to mind:

FOCUS.

People who are successful are great at being able to focus. Lately, I’ve been thinking a lot about verticalization–thanks to friend Geoff Livingston. In the non-profit, government, and even the public health worlds, each has its verticals. As we’ve matured, more areas of focus have evolved within the realms of “non-profit” and “social change.”  I have friends who are passionate about alleviating teenage homelessness. Friends who are persistent in the drive to address climate change. Friends who persevere to find new ways of doing business. Friends who are focused.

In the past, I focused on giving the Hispanic community a voice in Mid-Missouri and got involved in immigration issues. Then I focused on spreading awareness about multiple sclerosis and raising funds for multiple sclerosis research. In four years, I got to be a part of raising over $325k for multiple sclerosis through event planning and grassroots efforts.

Then, to be honest, I avoided “choosing” and this is why. I discovered social marketing–and focused on it because to create change and have an impact, you need to learn behavior changing skills and knowledge. You need to be a student of the evolving strategies, research and tools. This is why social marketing is appealing to me–because it provides a framework to go about influencing change, whether you are passionate about combating human trafficking, decrease drug abuse, ending poverty, eliminating HIV/AIDS, address climate change, increasing the country’s health or wanting to increase the rate people in your school wear seat belts–social marketing can light the way. Now, my focus is social marketing. I firmly believe that the process of social marketing can help address many of the battles we face. Yet I’m torn.

Bothered

The more I think about it, the more I’m bothered. Being bothered is good because it shakes you up and makes you question, think and go deeper. Thus, I ask you: To make a difference, must I (or you) choose one cause–one organization–or one group of people–to champion?

flickr credit: angrytoast

A Look At Science 2.0, including OpenWetWare Case Study

Last week, I published a post on Health 2.0, based on a couple research studies that were recently released.

Also last week, another report was published by the Scientific American Magazine that looked at the concept of Science 2.0, titled “Is Open-Access Science the future?

About

Before this article was published, the author put the draft version of the article in a wiki, and encouraged readers’ comments and edits…to help formulate the articles final version.

In this article, the author looks at the increasing use of social media within marketing, journalism, and politics – and how it can spread to the field of science, as more researchers increase their use of web 2.0 tools within their research. Some critics think that this new process to scientific discovery curbs the traditional institutional lines and poses danger. Advocates see Science 2.0 as a way to increase openness and collaboration across studies – furthering progress

Science 2.0

Science 2.0 refers to the growing movement of integrating social media into the scientific process and its promotion. Science 2.0 is a component of the broader Open Science movement according to the author of the article, M. Mitchell Waldrop. This Open Science Movement includes other topics such as open-access scientific publishing and open-data practices.

Case Study

The article points to a success project named OpenWetWare at MIT, which:

OpenWetWare is an effort to promote the sharing of information, know-how, and wisdom among researchers and groups who are working in biology & biological engineering. OWW provides a place for labs, individuals, and groups to organize their own information and collaborate with others easily and efficiently.”

OpenWetWare now hosts more than 15 labs, 6100 web pages and is edited by 3000 registered users. To learn more, gain access, or get involved, you can contact the project at admin@openwetware.org or join here.

Concerns

Due to the content of this budding use of technology, in that it is labeled ‘science’ brings many concerns to critics minds. These include:

  • Privacy Concerns
  • Authorship and Copyright
  • Looking ‘unprofessional’
  • Undermining the field of ‘science’
  • Trust-worthiness of information and hackers

Future

Despite concerns, advocates see Science 2.0 as still in its launching point. Future ideas for implementing Science 2.0 include:

  • Collaborate for scientific articles and ideas
  • online lab journals
  • Developing internet-friendly lab equipment
  • Virtual scientific conferences
  • Virtual Labs
  • Updated Lab ‘feeds’
  • Data-Sharing
  • Truth-Based Social Marketing
  • For more information regarding these ideas and more visit here.

More

  • Duncan Hull wrote up an insightful blog post about science 2.0 by interviewing scientist and researcher Dave DeRoure. DeRoure mapped out what he thinks is a widening gap between scientists and the web infrastruture. You can read the post here.
  • For those who like reading how trends relate, the Columbia Journalism Review wrote up a great article about web 2.0 and its evolution to Journalism 2.0 and Science 2.0, and how the two concepts relate. The author demonstrates how concerns towards the two fields are similar and the implications this has for science journalism 2.0.

What are your thoughts on Science 2.0?? A ‘yay’ or a ‘nay’ …share with us your thoughts