One thought that immediately came to mind. As much as Beryl has an unbelievable cool factor. I am not sure it leverages any real increase in lateral visual adjacency. Lateral adjacency to me is the primary limiting factor for user interfaces at a practical level. By definition showing items at an angle lets you see more items in perspective. A rotating cube on the other hand at most shows you three options.
I’ve always been vaguely uncomfortable with folksonomies. There is
something about the concept that just doesn’t sit right with me. Every
time I hear people wax on about them, I fidget in my seat; I feel kind
of itchy and unsettled at the same time. Perhaps it’s my latent,
leftover librarian-like nature.
Given a tag like NPTech applies to, as Gavin notes, a "tax status", it is not surprising that it is confusing. Yet so would reading all information in a hierarchical taxonomy under "China" (sub classed in Asia in the Library of Congress if I recall Shirky correctly.) The classification is simply too large. Which is why we use multiple word phrases when we search google.
In 1989, 67 percent of consumers stated they were willing to pay 5 to 10 percent more for econolgically compatible products. More recent surveys have suggested that significant numbers of consumers would be willing to pay up to 40 percent more for a "green" product.
The research shows that consumers willing to pay more for environmentally friendly products are more likely to be female, married, with at least one child living at home. This group seems more likely to put the welfare of others before their own.
On a related note, Google scholar provides great results, but nothing is cached and everything is part of some journal that requires logins. Use the "web results" link below the search result and you almost always find a publicly accessible version.
Interesting article in Forbes that discusses a survey in which people
were asked to nominate the most socially responsible companies”¦it seems
despite all the crap that is piled on Walmart”¦people still think (by a
big margin!) that they are the most socially responsible company out
there. Maybe you can buy social responsibility (at least a reputation)
with bargain basement prices. (ed: emphasis and link added)
Pricing clearly play into social responsibility. Yet we do not talk about it that way. While the industrial revolution hurt many, it also enabled millions to afford a better lifestyle. From the forbes article itself
the Reputation Institute,
which surveyed 30,000 consumers worldwide about their perceptions of
social responsibility. “But low prices are an element of social
responsibility. Consumers think, “˜They’re doing right by me.’ “
The free global report is here but you do have to register.
As someone running a business I have noticed an entire force of consultants that call on us regularly. Offering business advice. Process development. Other big words. They look at everything and then sit down. Look at you. Have this serious look on their face. And then suggest an across the board price increase. “Ed, if you have 300 clients and you raise prices by x amount each you would have x*300. Would that help increase profits?” Ya thunk?
The few days I have been asking people "what major trends do you see?" The responses have been some good and some bad. They include the list below. The list is from listening and the links are from after-the-fact googling of the concepts. And this is in no way scientific. Here is the beginning of the list:
The importance of self expression. Advertising and technology that encourages self expression will succeed. So it isn’t user-generated-content. Rather it is helping people express themselves. Myspace is a good example of this. (this was from the IABC luncheon today)
I received a link to take a movie quiz on Flixster.com from a friend. Which takes you to a login page that reads:
Flixster will send you a weekly update on new movies and the occasional site
announcement. You can unsubscribe at any time.
So they are *by default adding me to a mailing list*? And then *forcing me to later unsubscribe*. This is bad netiquette. It’s like a cop arresting you first and then asking what happened later. An assumption of guilt. Why?
The second issue with this is in a world of cats and dogs, micro-conversions such as clicking a checkbox to add yourself to a newsletter is a good thing. It is a conscious choice by the consumer to interact with your brand. Yes you won’t force as many people into your mailing list. But you will be doing the right thing. And making a better brand impression.
And this blog post on Hoi Polloi on the same topic. While obviously I am a lone blogger on this site, most of the truly successfulblogsarecommunity blogs like this one. If I were in college, I would so work hard to contribute to these to build my online reputation. A great and easy way to start. Similar to contributing links to spin thicket.
On the flip side, the Valley PR Blog has some work to do.
The current posts are all over the map on topics. And they don’t all seem on PR. Which is OK, but a more consistent voice would be helpful for readership.
Be more open. The posts have comments turned on but not trackback. Why? What gives?
So it seems to me that this ‘control of destiny’
phenomenon is in effect even among Nobel Prize finalists – if you win,
you’re the king of the world, in total control. If you don’t, you’ll
always know that there’s always somebody out there better than you,
even if it’s just one punk physicist at MIT…
For years I have sent out a quote of the day to a small group of folks. My daily quotes are usually two or three times a week so they aren’t really daily. Here is one that I have sent out before mainly in the hopes that people will read Clay Shirky’s article. The dude is brilliant.
Mailing lists were also the first widely analyzed virtual communities. And for roughly thirty years, almost any description of mailing lists of any length has mentioned flaming, the tendency of list members to forgo standards of public decorum when attempting to communicate with some ignorant moron whose to stupid to know how too spell and deserves to DIE, die a PAINFUL DEATH, you PINKO SCUMBAG!!!
Active listening is an intent "listening for meaning" in which the
listener checks with the speaker to see that a statement has been correctly
heard and understood. The goal of active listening is to improve mutual understanding.
The premise is that listening must become a priority in order to use the
Web2.0 tools successfully. I think it is a pretty critical marketing practice
despite what technology tools you are using.
Allison Fine in her book Momentum notes: "Listening requires genuine interest in
what that person is saying and a willingness to change as a result of what was
said." She gives examples of the listening deficits, but also the ways that
social media tools can facilitate listening. She acknowledges that it takes time
to listen and that there is no way around it. (more) (ed: emphasis added by me)
Beth’s post goes on and outlays exactly how you can improve your Internet listening skills. If you are in public relations or involved in a non profit, this is a great resource. Go read it.
BRATS: Our Journey Home is the first feature-length documentary, narrated by singer/songwriter Kris Kristofferson,
about a hidden American subculture – a lost tribe of at least fifteen million people from
widely diverse backgrounds, raised on military bases around the world,
whose shared experiences have shaped their lives so powerfully,
they are forever different from their fellow Americans. (more)
So you mean others don’t go to camp outs with a deuce and a half carrying their camping gear? Sheeesh.
The picture on the top right is from the brats site and was provided (to them) courtesy of The Musil Family.
Went to refresh last night. Sidebar conversations. A few questions were answered in the most amazingly politically correct manner. Political correctness is lame. It does almost no good in such a venue.
So this morning I had the link below in my inbox from another anonymous attendee. I needed that.