Customer Experience Crossroads

Is body language as useful as we think? How to tell if someone is lying

Clients often have a strong preference for in-person qualitative research. They say it is because the body language and facial expressions of the respondents are important. I know one of the reasons is that they find it more engaging.

How important is body language anyway? Can you get anything more than gross indications of interest from it?

People have been researching lying to try to help, in particular, the police, child protection workers, and security services. Here is some of what they have learned, according to a recent story in The New York Times.

• Liars do not avert their eyes more than people telling the truth
• Liars do not fidget, sweat or slump more than truth-tellers
• There are fleeting changes in expression, but these are difficult to analyze

It turns out that content analysis is actually more useful.

People who are lying tend to try to stick to a script, to avoid getting caught in a lie.
People telling the truth don't have a script, so they tend to recall more extraneous details, and make mistakes. And the more they talk about a given experience, the more of these details come to mind.

This is particularly noticeable if you have some baseline for how a given individual tells a story, so the recommended procedure is to start with a basic story.

My take:

In my work, it's not so much that people are lying, as that they are posturing, or saying things that they believe to be more socially acceptable. It's nice to learn that the words are just as important as the non-verbal to truly understand.

Resources:

Judging Honesty by Words, Not Fidgets, by Benedict Carey, The New York Times, May 12, 2009

Deep diving customer needs: What we can learn from solicitations

Dear Mr. [your name here]:
I am personally pleased to announce your selection for the Institute's esteemed MAN OF THE YEAR representing your country for 2009. This Award exemplified the importance and validation of deeds well done.

The letter goes on in this fashion for a couple of pages. For $295 USD you can get yourself a nice plaque for your wall that says you have been named Man of the Year by the American Biographical Institute. 

The award itself is "an elegant 8 x 10 inch plaque in a cherrywood piano finish with a black gloss insert and gold lettering." And it's guaranteed against material defects during shipment.

Just think of the margin on this operation.

It seems to be a very successful business, in operation since 1967.

But it reminds me of something I once heard about the wine industry, along these lines... if you can't win a medal in a wine industry contest, you need to start a new contest.

I guess you could just go out and buy your own plaque. But that probably feels just slightly less satisfying, and where's the fun in that.

Susan's take:

OK, maybe you don't want to sell people overpriced plaques. But people need and want to feel special and unique and they want their achievements recognized. In a world of six billion people, getting a little recognition counts for a lot.

Maybe there is a better way to achieve that.

Resources:

Wikipedia entry on American Biographical Institute, showing some of the awards they make available. 

Benazir Bhutto was apparently awarded the 2000 Millennium Medal of Honor in November 1998.

A university professor issued a press release on his award.

It looks like there's a similar operation in the UK, called the International Biographical Centre.

Check out the list of awards this 'surgeon' has. Clearly, this individual understands the importance of third party confirmation in getting people to trust you.

Predictable novelty keeps things appealing

I was reading in the paper that it has now been proven scientifically that a television program is more interesting if interrupted with commercials.

We adapt quickly to pleasurable experiences, according to Prof. Leif Nelson of UC San Diego, who conducted the study. So the brief interruption of the advertisement enhances the program. (Unless it has a fast-moving, complicated plot. Hello 24.)

In other research, Dr. Nelson has found that interruptions of an unpleasant experience similarly increase the unpleasantness. 

There are a couple of implications for experience designers. First, when you have something unpleasant, try to get it over with in one session. Example: returning goods for refund.

More generally, I think we need to bring some novelty into good experiences that are predictable, just to break them up a bit and reduce the adaptation. This is why seasonal specialties add so much to the experience in restaurants and coffee shops. We have the pleasure of anticipation of seasonal treats, but don't have them on the menu long enough to get fully adapted to them, and therefore bored.

I think of this as predictable novelty. We like novelty, but not too much. We like small surprises, small delights that exceed our expectations. But we do want to be able to rely on those expectations a bit, too -- things that are complete novelties are difficult to navigate, and generally not pleasurable at all.

For another example, consider artists that completely break with artistic traditions -- they often receive a cold welcome from the public and from art critics, who need time to understand the new thing in order to enjoy it.

The completely predictable is boring. But the completely novel is unsettling. Predictable novelty is pleasurable.

Dr. Nelson has a number of interesting papers on his web site at UC San Diego.

Free e-book: Painless Insight Planning helps you set objectives, avoid wasting money on qualitative research

 

I've refined a number of tools to use in my work over the years. A few of them are tools designed to help clients in one way or another. This free e-book, Painless Insight Planning, is one of these tools with some narrative wrapped around it.

[Download Painless Insight Planning now]

One thing I've found that is often a challenge at the start of a project is getting clear objectives. People may have a problem or concern, but it is often not clearly articulated.

And I can tell you one thing for certain: a good way to waste money on research is not having clear objectives at the beginning.  I know this sounds perfectly obvious, but it is an issue more often than you would suspect.

Sometimes the problem is clear, but other elements are not. Such as -- who could we get insight from, otherwise known as "the research target."

I can't sit down with everyone individually and work through this, as I do with clients. So I thought I would put the whole thing into an e-book that you can download and use as much as you want. And then you'll have clear objectives for your research projects. And the world will be in a better place.

Because we really need insights these days, more than ever. And people inside companies can't afford to waste money or appear to waste money, get fired and be unemployed. Suppliers like me also can't afford to waste client's money. We all need to ramp UP on the insight quality and the innovation / ideation, but keep a lid on costs. 

What's it worth to get this answer?

An even harder thing for many clients is figuring out how much to spend. They ask me, what will it cost? 

WRONG QUESTION!  WRONG QUESTION!  WRONG QUESTION! 

The right question is "what is it worth to get good information on this situation?"

I have created a nice little rule to help figure this out. Not a complicated ROI on research thing. Just a back-of-the-envelope, cocktail-napkin kind of formula that I call the 10 Times Value Rule. It's a great place to start figuring out what you should consider spending to get some insight into your problem / challenge / situation.

[Download Painless Insight Planning now]

Easy worksheets

I hate filling in forms. Most people do. So there aren't forms in this book. There are easy worksheets designed to spur creative thinking to get you started. Here's an example.

Bonus content

If you download the book and actually read it, you'll find a link to some bonus content that will save you even more time. 

A small request - no strings attached

I'm simply putting this handy e-book out there for free with no strings attached. You can even add this e-book (with no changes) to your own site or blog for your own customers and prospects to use.  But I do have a small request.

If you think this e-book is of any value, please add this blog to your RSS feed reader. I also send out a newsletter about six times a year. You can add yourself to that list if you want to hear about other e-books I plan to release, or just get the newsletter. You can check out the previous issues here.

Thanks for reading. And good luck with your insights research projects!

[Download Painless Insight Planning now]

Innovation breakthroughs: now really IS the time or why recycling does not work for insights.

 

People are cutting back. [Oh, you heard that, too?]

I've had a couple of projects cancelled or postponed indefinitely in the last short while. One of them was to help an organization identify new markets so they could escape the commodity price-cycle trap of their current markets.

This is exactly the kind of project you definitely should not cancel -- projects that will help you crack new revenue sources. So what will this company do instead? I'm guessing, they will just push harder at existing markets, and find themselves in the same place a year or two down the road.

While having these thoughts, I bumped into a nice article in Marketing Profs. [Now that the economy is tanking, maybe we can catch up on our reading.] The quote from Jeffrey Immelt leapt off the page.

General Electric CEO Jeffrey R. Immelt has established a class of projects now well-known as "imagination breakthroughs," consisting of ideas that are "really hard or really important" and might generate significant revenues over a three-year period, the time that GE usually takes to implement a new idea. "Imagination breakthroughs are a protected class of ideas — safe from the budget slashers because I've blessed each one."

If it takes you a couple of years or more to really get an idea off the ground, then the fuzzy front end you cut now will leave you in even more serious glue in two to three years time. And if you kill the stuff already in the pipeline, you're not going to have anything new to launch in 2009 either.

I really wish clients would say instead: "Can you get me something substantive with less money?" That's a better challenge than dropping the idea creation process.

Caveat

The article this came from is filled with good ideas from the Zaltmans. But like many of their ilk, they firmly believe that no approach other than their technique (individual metaphorical interviews) can get to the good stuff. Not true, in my experience.

"These deeper ideas are not available from survey responses to statements such as "financial planning is difficult" or in focus groups where each participant has on average about 10 minutes of air time." 

OK, you are definitely not going to get these deep meanings from a survey. I agree. But individual interviews are not the gold standard either.

There may still be people running focus groups with 12 bodies in them. However, most of the kids I hang with have shifted to small groups when they are using a group discussion method. Small being five or six. And researchers frequently add advance activities such as blogging / electronic diaries / collage assignments / videos / you name it. And there's no rule about 90 minutes or two hours either -- you can keep people humming along for three hours quite easily. And yes, you can uncover metaphorical meanings in focus groups, in online research methods, and in many other ways.

In truth, the generation of insight has a lot more to do with the skill, knowledge and art inside the researcher's head than the method employed. There's no method going that guarantees insight.

As anthropologist Grant McCracken has said, the proof is in the pudding. If you got insight, you got insight. If you didn't, you didn't.

I have friends in the marketing world who have used Gerry's Zmet technique to great effect. And I believe all of methodological infighting and territory claiming must defer to this. If the method works, the method is good. The proof of the pudding has nothing to do with the theory of the pudding or the method of the pudding. The proof of the pudding is a client who says: "This was illuminating. I understand my consumer and my market in ways that I did not, could not before."

Back to the main point

This is no time to be cutting your future revenue streams by shutting down the insight machine. In fact, if you plan to be standing when things turn around, you should be cranking up the insight machine. Certainly, your customers and consumers brains are grinding away on many things right now. Not a good time to recycle some old insights.

Resources:

How to Foster "Workable Wondering", by Gerald Zaltman and Linday Zaltman. In marketing profs, reprinted from HBS.

The Zaltman Method, by Grant McCracken in his blog, 2006.

Understanding people by cultivating a sense of empathy: OR there's a reason we call it a deep dive

If you want to get deep insights into people and what they are up to in the great canvas of their lives, you must cultivate a very good sense of empathy. Good in the way a microtome slices off a tissue sample that is so fine, if you touch it, it disappears. And also good in the way of large earth-moving equipment, with the ability to shovel a lot of data around. This is industrial strength empathy.

It's different than the kind of empathy of people who are natural empaths. Most people with an MBTI feelings preference have a pretty strong sense of empathy. It's often a sympathetic empathy, it seems to me -- a Kleenex tissue of empathy, a warm hug of empathy, sometimes a down jacket. A lovely thing to have around, it's warm and protective and frankly pretty useful in a great many situations.

A good researcher needs the other thing.

Which is why, no doubt about it, the people who have truly world class empathy of this analytical kind are a bit strange. I have talked to a few. They acknowledge that they have lost, to an extent, the ability to interact with the world in the way others do, unaware of themselves interacting. The watcher is always watching, just a little bit.

Now I don't claim to be one of these world class empaths. But I'm always studying, taking my earth-mover out for drives and practicing manoeuvres. I'm taking the night classes, as it were.

There are times it feels like dangerous work.

For example, yesterday, I was doing a little exercise called "illumination" that Synectics has. I took home an insight about our consumer, and created a little talk to bring it to life. Having thought about it for several hours, (on top of the days of work already into the project), I gave my five minute talk to our creative team in the voice of our consumer. It was intended to be amusing but informative. And suddenly the real person I'd been envisioning crashed right through. I felt the weight of all her worries, all her hopes, all her dreams, just for an instant, the reality of her life. It was like something on an old Star Trek episode. Almost overwhelming.

How much easier to think of consumers as cardboard cutouts.

I've learned, for the most part, to avoid detailed stories about detainees in some godforsaken place. I want to bear witness, but I also know that I will take in a little too much. And I can't extract those experiences from memory as easily as they go in.

Which is why I'm kind of not thinking too hard about what people are going through right now with this financial crisis. The ocean of human experience is over the seawall, and the storm is still raging. Dreams are being battered, people are hanging on to broken things just for the sake of hanging on to something.

These are difficult times. We haven't even really seen the extent of the difficulty. But it's also a time of new dreams, new heroic ideas, and that is an exciting thing to witness.

One thing is certain. There will be diving.

Greenification watch: Behavior is shifting rapidly in some areas

Decades of badgering from environmentalists has had relatively little impact on our driving habits, just as badgering from nutritionists has not solved the obesity problem. But things are changing rapidly on the environmental front these days, and mostly in a good way. Let's look at a couple of core samples.

Hybrid car purchases

The demand for hybrid cars like the Toyota Prius and Camry Hybrid is so high, automakers can't keep up, according to a story in the Detroit Free Press. Ford and GM hybrid vehicles face the same situation. Dealers are telling stories about recent buyers of large SUVs, especially those that run on diesel, trying to trade in for a hybrid, even though it's going to cost them big.

Closer to home, my own recent purchase of a Vespa was actually more motivated around (a) avoiding insane parking charges for short meetings downtown, (b) a desire to avoid the crowds on the subway and (c) have fun doing it. Being green was just a bonus.

But sales of two-wheeled vehicles are rising, and it seems that gas prices have succeeded where the cool factor has been insufficient.

As with many consumer behaviors, single motivators are insufficient. If you can pile up several motivators, you change behavior.

Leaving the cardboard at the store

A recent trip to IKEA revealed a new trend here that is well established in some countries: the practice of unpacking things at the store. It was always a nuisance to bundle up all that cardboard to recycle. Now that there are limitations on how much we can put out at the curb -- even of paper recycling -- people are starting to manage their usage down in creative ways.

The predictable unintended side-effect will be an increase in illegal dumping of all sorts of things, in order to avoid garbage charges. And avoid the nuisance of figuring out how to even get the truck guys to pick up an extra container. [Just exactly how do I pay? And who do I pay?]

My take

We are hearing a lot these days about "being hit in the pocketbook", which is a way of explaining all human behavior in terms of monetary consequences. This is not correct, in my view. the reality is that you need a bunch of motivators to change behavior, and $ is one of them. If you can get people feeling good, feeling righteous even, and add some $ consequences to that mix, you're much better off. If you can pile coolness, status, and other social motivators on top of that, you are in great shape.

And this is why the science of human behavior will ultimately succeed where environmentalist hectoring has failed. Because being hectored isn't much of a motivator for change.

Resources:

Hybrid sales plunge as demand keeps rising; battery shortage limits Toyota supply. by Brent Snavely, Detroit Free Press, June 11, 2008  (via Marketing Daily)

Self-expression in the office: Staples M line

In our culture, we are all engaged in a labour of self-creation. We create and present the self to the world through all of our many choices -- where we live, the kind of work we do, our hobbies, our clothes, our accessories. This is the essence of a consumer culture, and a major reason that brands are so important. Brands are signifiers of meanings, and this project of self-creation is a process of building and communicating meanings. [Yes, we are getting to office supplies.]

Staples has discovered that office supplies are a form of self-expression. Even those that can go get a pen from a stationery closet spend their own money on office supplies. Fascinating too that men spend more:

"Staples reports that consumer appetite for such things is so strong that they spend their own money rather than charge it as an business expense. On average, workers spend $90.14 per year on office supplies that reflect their style, with men spending an average of $134.00 per year, and women spending $101.00." (MediaPost, May 13, 2008)

Personally, I know that the ring-bound notebooks and classification file folders I take into meetings have garnered comments more than once from clients. [And I wish they were a little more unique. If Staples was offering classification folders with style, I'd be putting in an order today. I have to work with what's shown below.]

We know that expensive pens have been the mark of executive for years. In some industries, it's not just a pen, it has to be a fountain pen. Or a felt-pen or gel-writer if you are a creative type. And either a limited-edition design, or a genuine antique.

Staples has research that suggests a huge majority -- 82% -- notice office supplies such as "an eye-catching file folder or pen", more than they notice shoes, for example. Which totally makes sense -- how much time do you spend looking under the table at meetings anyway?

Staples has launched this venture with a completely un-Staples looking web site.

If you visit a few of these pages you'll immediately see the message of indulgence. These items are being presented like cupcakes and petits-fours. There are charming push-pins shaped like old typewriter keys, and paperclips too fancy to throw away.

The look of these materials suggests to me that Staples has learned a lot from the success of the scrap-booking industry, where people spend hours just to make a single photograph look nice.

Susan's take:

Some brands are all about the organization. It's all "we, we, we". But customers are all about "me, me, me". Buy Apple and it says you are a person who appreciates good design, and you are probably creative too. Buy Starbucks and it says you are an urban sophisticate with a European sense of style. But what the heck does HSBC say about you? What does Fidelity say about you? What does AT&T say about you? In my view, not much -- most services brands are about the service, not about the customer. Virgin is one of the real exceptions to this pattern.

For readers:

Our assignment this week is to see how the Blackberry brigade adds their unique style to their berry. All observations welcome. Extra credit for photos or links to Flickr, etc.

Resources:

Staples Says File Folders Sum Up One's Personal Style by Sarah Mahoney, MediaPost, May 13, 2008

Using personality type in marketing

I wrote earlier this week about personality type and how it affects fitness activity choices.

I've been interested in the topic of personality preferences and how this influences consumer behavior for years, but there's been very little done on this topic, which has always surprised me.

On a recent foray to seek out research, I found this bibliography, which is pretty thin for such a big topic. CAPT maintains a listing of all research into psychological type. While it may not be complete, it's usually the best place to start.

The dominant ethos of people who work in psychological type is that it is a tool useful for personal growth and development, useful to help people communicate better, and good for organizational and management development applications. There is a real resistance to going outside that realm, as somehow cheapening the use of the MBTI instrument.

The result of this is that if you want to include personality type in marketing research, you are looking at custom work, for the most part.

There is one instrument I am aware of that incorporates psychological type in a meaningful way, and translates type preferences into values orientation. It's the Market Evaluer tool. I've heard Maddie Hamill speak at QRCA events, and have been intrigued to use the evaluer instrument in a project. [Which has not happened yet. I think they were offering free trials at the last conference, but being the ENTP type that I am, all the materials from that conference are still sitting in a pile on my credenza waiting to be sorted, filed, or otherwise utilized].

You don't have to get fancy with this stuff to take personality type into account, however. A considerable amount of research is readily available on type and career choices. So, for example, if you know you are marketing to nurses, you know you are dealing with people who are predominantly Feeling in their judging orientation: they make decisions based on what is good for people. Hospital administrators, on the other hand, don't share that outlook.

Virtually every profession has been studied in this way, from airline pilots to medical specialties. Not only this, but if you understand the language of type, you can see these patterns emerging often through how people communicate.

While type is a finely nuanced field, some of the big differentiators are readily apparent in people. whether we love routine or hate it; whether we love detail or hate it; whether we love closure or want to keep gathering new information; whether we value facts more or ideas more. And so on.

Where we go wrong in marketing

We all tend to wonder why the rest of the world is not more like us. And we communicate in ways that make sense to us. Here's the problem -- even if your temperament is shared by a lot of people, it's not shared by everyone.

Here's a good example in action. I just finished a project where I talked to a large number of retail sales people. They told me that customers didn't care for the aesthetics of the brand in question, much preferring the design qualities of brand y. I passed this information along to the project team. At which point, the brand manager said, "I don't understand that. I like the design of our brand much better than brand y."

Well, it's okay to say that. But it's a so-what as far as improving your marketing performance goes.

The rest of the world is not like you. You may have suspected this before. And now you know.

Resources
If you want to know more about psychological type, there are many links and resources listed here.

Temperament is a different lens for viewing psychological type, and the dominant thinker in temperament continues to be David Keirsey. His very informative web site is here.

The value of novelty

Driving through a heavy rainstorm late one night, I had the chance to listen to a wonderful interview with Jerome Kagan on CBC's Ideas. (Unfortunately it is not available on a podcast.)

Kagan, you may know, is one of the great minds in developmental psychology. He has studied the nature vs nurture thing for decades. Kagan, and others, have clearly shown that some human temperaments are inborn. One of these is how much we enjoy new stimuli. About 40% of people enjoy new stimuli a lot. About 20% really dislike change and novelty except on a carefully managed basis. These tendencies are managed better as we grow up -- we don't go all stiff in our cribs and cry. But the tendency is still there.

For all humans, Kagan says, "we enjoy novelty that we understand." Well worth contemplating when thinking about customer experience, communications, and most anything else that involves human beings.

For example, we enjoy a new shampoo, a new fragrance, a new spice mix. We may not enjoy a new job quite so much. A new world order, that's seriously stressing.

We enjoy novelty that we understand. Words of wisdom.

The need for instant anywhere anything: Hair Pod

We seem to want to get anything we want on our own schedule and pretty much anywhere.
A big part of this trend is the desire to wedge something useful, fun or productive into any little snippet of time. Everyone is in a rush. We all feel like we are behind. We want little luxuries, but we want them in the most convenient possible way.
Which is why getting your nails done or having a quick massage in an airport is happening, as I reported on a while back.

Organizations that recognize and respond to this desire are finding ways to wedge little experiences in to the places where we have to wait. The latest one to cross my path is this: Hair Pod.

Hair Pod is an instant hair salon set up to do trims. It looks like it's mainly targeted at guys, but I can think of a few times a quick bang trim would have been well worth it on a trip.

There are a number of interesting design features, including a vacuum system to clear away all the cut hair, a mirror, storage for luggage / shopping and a coat cupboard. And the whole thing folds up and has closing panels when not in use.

It feels like the natural evolution of the shoe-shine stand.

Acknowledgements

Thanks to Reshma Anand for sending this along to me.

The evolution of the hotel lobby: just plug your MP3 in here

On a recent trip through the lobby of the Sheraton in downtown Toronto, I noticed these unusual rocking chairs. They have audio plugs and holders in the arm, and speakers behind the headrest. The idea is that you plug in your MP3 player, and you can listen to your music through the speakers in the chair.

While I was taking the pictures, one of the hotel staff told me that the chairs are really popular with guests. They are usually facing the interior courtyard (which has a waterfall and large trees), and guests can look out at the courtyard and relax to their own music.

I think this reflects a desire to be part of the social milieu at the same time as having a very personally engineered sound environment: headphones shut you out a bit too completely.

I noticed something similar while downhill skiing over the holidays. Many skiers now wear headphones, and ski jackets are sold with specialized pockets and wire carriers for this same purpose. But skiing is more social than it appears, and I witnessed several instances where the headphones were interfering with communication in small groups. One woman said to her companion: "I'm talking loud enough, your headphones are why you can't hear what I'm saying."

Thoughtful quote for today

Reading Karen von Hahn recently, I pondered her evolution from the writer of the Super Shopper column -- to the writer of Noticed. With this remark, taken from her analysis of the current incarnation of the hooded sweatshirt, I believe she has officially crossed over and is now a professional noticer:

"Nothing is just itself any more. Everything out there is a symphony of signifiers, a mille feuille of meaning, encapsulating -- just like the print hoodie -- many layers at the same moment in time." [Karen von Hahn, Globe & Mail, 10 Nov 07]

Although I enjoy her column, this journey represents a journey we all seem to be on. By way of evidence, let's look at what has happened to the Women's section of the daily newspaper.

It goes something like this...

If you want to write in the LifeStyle section now, you need to aspire to cultural observer status, and even better if you can bring some interpretive chops to the party.

As we all engage in a life mission to make meaning, with few formal rules to guide us, we need our experts more than ever.

Web 2.0 watch: why Facebook is the new LinkedIn, or something like that

Perhaps, like me and one of my blog buddies, Stephanie Weaver, you have been avoiding the whole Facebook thing. You thought it was for 'young people'. You thought it was about getting hooked up, and not in a business-kind of way.
So did I.

Then I saw who was starting to fool around on Facebook. So I came to the party, albeit a bit late. [I'm hoping to claim fast-follower status here ... is it too late for that??]

LinkedIn is a great application in terms of business contact information. It's much easier to maintain LinkedIn than it is to maintain your own Outlook contacts. So it's a bit like one of those updating services, but without the annoying e-mails form other people's executive assistants, asking you to update your business card. The problem with LinkedIn is that it is kind of ... dull. Static. There's no sense of connection.

Enter Facebook. Once I got on to it, I could see why it is so magnetic. You get the feeling -- however foolish and unfounded it may be -- that you are keeping in touch with people. It's actually kind of fun.

What we really need is some kind of marriage of these two things.

More important... there are many more commercial applications being tested, just like there have been in Second Life. Here are two I'm interested in right now -- stodgy banks, OK?  But they are experimenting, and trying to find their way.

Royal Bank - RBC Financial -- has something called Campus Connection. And TD Canada Trust has the Money Lounge.

I had no idea there were so many employee groups. Bank branches. Store locations. You name it. I think the corporate IT people are trying to shut this kind of thing down, just as they have with blogs. Several of my clients would like to be able to monitor blogs as part of their work, however they are blocked by the corporate firewall. [I know, I know  ... !!!]

What to do, what to do...
Don't be thinking you've seen it all. This stuff seems to be picking up speed every day. I'm wondering if it might be a more useful collaboration tool than the online thing I've been paying big bucks for and nobody seems to want to use.

And don't be thinking you've got to get it right, waiting on the sidelines. How well did that strategy serve anyone in the early days of the web??? I'm not saying, go blow the bankroll. What I am saying is ...

Start experimenting. In small ways. With audiences that might be more receptive. Be transparent, in case you didn't already know. No fake Facebooking, OK?

Give it a little budget and resources. If I can spend half the day on this stuff without even trying, building something meaningful is going to take actual time. And probably some out-of-pocket cash. Maybe not huge, but don't ask people to do it on the side of their desk. That's not the way to success.

But you also need to get the learning started. Soon. It's September... what are you doing this month?

Resources

I found some of Grant McCracken's posts on this topic quite informative. Try this one: How Social Networks Work

Same thing for Sean Moffitt, aka Buzz Canuck. You might want to start with this post: Facebook: the United Nations of Digital Life.