In the Netherlands there is a new gaming system that gets kids up and moving outside and indoors too. Swinx is a device that have downloadable audio profiles that organize and direct kids in fun games anywhere there is some open space. Players wear RFID wristbands to help Swinx determine position and activity level of each player.
Our friend and social media maven Beth Kanter has posted a insightful interview with our other friend and frequent co-presenter David Neff. David using the Sharinghope.tv platform to provide 3 key tips to non profits when entering the social medial space.
The tips are 1. Experiment, 2. Buys a video Camera, and 3. Research what other companies and organizations are doing in the field and learn from their success and mistakes. These suggestions are not only valid for nonprofits but they ring true to any organization or company. Part of being successful is understanding the space you are entering. Any for profit company will invest money and research into understanding new markets before getting into them. With social media all you really need is a few adventurous staff members to try things on with an eye always focusing on the organization's goal.
Our program Sharing Hope TV recently received press coverage from a local Austin, TX news broadcast. The story takes a look at one user and how she is using the platform to support others in their fight against cancer. Our good friend David Neff was interviewed and really discusses the community nature of the space.
What is of particular interest is how the community at Sharing Hope TV is able to self express and support at the same time. The community is a niche community and they are using the site and the underlying technology in new was not previously designed for. Of major interest is the Creative Commons content compositions, where one artists compiles and reconstitutes works, or pieces of works from other artists into something new and unique.
Albert Einstein said 'The most powerful force in the Universe is compound interest'. To that I say 'the most powerful force in philanthropy is compound interests.' The ability to bring people together based on a common interest and to make an impact is, in my opinion, the most important skill for a philanthropy to develop and hone. Superficially this flies in the face of the idea of the one man non profit. If real ultimate power comes from compounding the interests across as wide an area as possible then how effective can a hyper local one man non profit be?
The short answer is not very. HOWEVER it is my opinion that the large nationwide organizations should pay attention to this micro trend and formulate a strategy to attract and support these entrepreneurial philanthropists to further large scale medical and epidemiological research.
Nationwide organizations can leverage their fund raising vendors (Convio, E-Tapestry)for a system to enable one-off events. Beyond the fund raising appropriations there are legal concerns as well. Branding, trademarks, and a host of other technical concerns may stymie entrepreneurial philanthropists from engaging large organizations, and so they create their own.
As much as we would like to dismiss this trend it is building in momentum and volume. The next iteration of philanthropy will be to empower volunteers and donors to create something that they could intrinsically call their own. The association or agency that can make that process as user friendly for the constituent will continue to grow in importance and ability to move mission.
I just found a really good map mashup for the greater New York area that shows the locations of all of the Relay For Life events on a map. Creating mashups like these are neat for visual learners and those who like to see where events that are taking place are close to them.
As mashups continue to proliferate we will see additional medias being combined. Sharing Hope .TV is a site that encourages users to upload their own content about their cancer experience. Best part is that the site allows constituents to license their content Creative Commons. All of this is important to seeding mashups.
Alexander Alexiev is presenting on the internal and external networks have direct impact on strategic decision making from top level leadership. The complexity of decision making is complex so the research looked at the difference in exploitation and exploration. He is looking at the network differentiation in ration vs. consensus decision making. Only Ration is featured in the report. Two major factors were the homogeneity and consistency of senior management and the change pace of the market the industry was in.
In exploration having a Heterogeneous board for exploration overrules outside social network influences. The same thing is true in the dynamic fast paced environment - a heterogeneous core is very critical. One of the key future factors will be the tracking of centrality of executive officers and the bounds of external networks and their reach. Access of those networks is also a key consideration. The dependent variable was sales and product development and the question was if the new innovations were tied to new technologies or revivals of existing items.
Jurgen ZPfeffer, Michael Zerr, Martin Eichner, Markus Scwehm are asking the question where do you begin a rumor? When you are sending high social currency rumor information (sex and scandal) it is indifferent where you seed a rumor for diffusion. However initiating a low social currency rumor (Marketing) it is critical where you initiate a rumor. It is easier to be inoculated with information if it comes from different directions and different areas of your personal network. The eventual information transfer will hop to new areas of the network like flying sparks. Ideally seed local and create a seed fire from which you can generate secondary fires, but a strong seed is important to keep the information fire burning and keep interest peaked.
Berlin
Business Week has a very interesting blog post on the 10 worst tings a business can do during a recession to harm innovation. In short order creating a rigid cost driven business structure is a sure fire way to kill innovation. When business hunkers down and tightens belts it squeezes out the innovative opportunities such as outside exposure, conference experiences and a host of other creative stimuli that do not show bottom line value on a spread sheet. It is a great article to read and understand that the first reaction of contraction may be the worst.
I will say that I am very impressed with the article in yesterday's Washington Post about the Frozen Pea Fund (login is required but you can use bug-me-not with Fire Fox for access). The article looks at why the Twitter viral event for the Frozen Pea Fund worked and helps to shine some light onto the nature of technology mediated human connectivity. I particularly like the quote from Susan at the end of the article, it is telling about the importance of support throughout the cancer experience. Reality is that support is support no mater who gives it and in what form and this is a great study in support of that assertion. "There's nothing good about getting cancer," Reynolds wrote on her blog. "It helps [to] start conversations, though."
IBM released their take on the next 5 big innovations. They website has a number of report links at the bottom with research on the trends but what is interesting is that I did not seem to see them tied together in any way. I am real disappointed that they did not take a few of the major issues facing the world and overtly showcase how any one or combination of trends would make an impact on them. Health care, global warming, aging populations, water shortages are all major global concerns that are easily tied into the Next 5 but I believe that IBM did not want to go to far out on the limb to showcase the great impact that these advances could have.
