Recently Read: January 23, 2010

/

Recently Read is an OCDQ regular segment.  Each entry provides links to blog posts, articles, books, and other material I found interesting enough to share.  Please note “recently read” is literal – therefore what I share wasn't necessarily recently published.

 

Data Quality

For simplicity, “Data Quality” also includes Data Governance, Master Data Management, and Business Intelligence.

  • Data Quality Blog Roundup - December 2009 Edition – Data Quality Pro always provides a great collection of the previous month's best blog posts, this particular entry covers my data quality “recently reads” from before the start of the new year.

     

  • Hostile Environment Data Harassment – Phil Simon discusses the common tendency for an organization's culture to not only compartmentalize data issues, but also tolerate “data carelessness” and irresponsibility.

     

  • Data Profiling For All The Right Reasons, Part 1 – In this Hub Designs Blog guest post, Rob DuMoulin begins a tool-agnostic five-part series about data profiling using psychology and Jungian word association analysis.

     

  • Personal Data – an Asset we hold on Trust – Daragh O Brien shares an intriguing case study about data protection, and discusses the key stages and data protection principles in the Information Asset Life Cycle.

     

  • Standardizing Data Migration – Evan Levy uses a motion picture industry analogy to suggest establishing a separate functional team that’s responsible for data packaging and distribution.

     

  • A Data Quality Riot Act – Rob Paller shares a great real-world example of data quality challenges even when an enterprise system is well-designed with protocols specifically put in place to ensure proper data management and data quality.

     

  • What is a MDM Strategy – Charles Blyth channels the ancient wisdom of Sun Tzu to explain that an MDM strategy is the overarching governance that defines the goals, reasons, approach and standards of its individual initiatives.

     

  • Data Quality issue in my new database - or so we thought... – Rich Murnane shares an interesting real-world example of how not every apparent data problem turns out to be an actual data quality issue.

     

  • Diversity in City Names – Henrik Liliendahl Sørensen explains the challenges inherit in global data quality using the example of the many ways that the city of Copenhagen, Denmark can be represented due to linguistic variations.

     

  • How data quality derives from meta data – Rayk Fenske examines the relationship between data quality management and metadata management by discussing directed functional dependency as well as a hierarchy in requirements.

     

  • The Quality Gap: Why Being On-Time Isn’t Enough – Jill Dyché discusses the all-too-common tendency to emphasize efficiency over effectiveness in enterprise project management, where everything is date-driven and not quality-driven.

     

  • Name Patterns and Parsing – David Loshin explains that personal names, although conceptually straightforward, are beset by many interesting pattern variations, making them a very daunting data quality challenge. 

     

  • A true story of how data quality issues can cripple a business – Graham Rhind shares a remarkable real-world example that illustrates very well the effect poor data quality (and lack of information quality) can have at every level of an organization.

     

  • WANTED: Data Quality Change Agents – Dylan Jones explains the key traits required of all data quality change agents, including a positive attitude, a willingness to ask questions, innovation advocating, and persuasive evangelism.

     

  • The Power of Slow - Paul Boal begins an excellent series about slow by explaining that a proper understanding of slow truly reveals it is the far more efficient approach—and not just for data quality. 

     

  • Data vs. Facts, Illustrated - Mark Graban discusses the common problem of relying too much on reports and dashboards without verification of the underlying data—and shares a hilarious picture to illustrate the point.   

     

  • The Value of Data – Marty Moseley discusses the core issue that most businesses still do not understand the value of data to their organizations, and shares some findings from a recent data governance survey.

     

  • ETL, Data Quality and MDM for Mid-sized Business – Steve Sarsfield on challenges of investing in enterprise software faced by small to medium sized businesses, and opportunities in the freemium model of open source alternatives such as Talend.

     

  • Beyond Data Ownership to Information Sharing – Joe Andrieu provides an interesting look at the often polarizing topics of data ownership, data privacy, and information sharing, explaining that we want to share our information, on our terms, protect our interests, and enable service providers to do truly amazing things for us and on our behalf. 

     

  • The Great Expectations of BI – Promising new blogger Phil Wright provides an excellent Dickensian inspired explanation of why, in many organizations, business intelligence doesn't live up to its great expectations.   

 

Social Media

For simplicity, “Social Media” also includes Blogging, Writing, Social Networking, and Online Marketing.

 

Book Quotes

An eclectic list of quotes from some recently read (and/or simply my favorite) books.

  • From Confessions of a Public Speaker by Scott Berkun – “Expressing ideas is often the only way to fully understand what ideas are, and to know what it is you really think.  Expression makes learning from the criticism of others possible, and I'm happy to look like a fool if in return I learn something I wouldn't have learned any other way.”

     

  • From The Dip: A Little Book That Teaches You When to Quit (and When to Stick) by Seth Godin – “The opportunity cost of investing your life in something that's not going to get better is just too high.”

     

  • From Six Pixels of Separation: Everyone Is Connected. Connect Your Business to Everyone. by Mitch Joel – “It's no longer about how much budget you dump into advertising and PR in hopes that people will see and respond to your messaging.  The new online channels will work for you as long as you are working for them by adding value, your voice, and the ability for your consumers to connect, engage, and take part.  This new economy is driven by your time vested—and not by your money invested.”

Can Social Media become a Universal Translator?

/

I have always been a huge fan of science fiction, mostly television and movies, but also a few select books as well. 

After only FTL (faster-than-light space travel, e.g., warp drive, hyperdrive, Infinite Improbability Drive, or “Ludicrous Speed”), the next most common technology found in almost all science fiction is a universal translator, which somehow manages to instantly translate all communication into the native language of the user.

Without question, and especially for television and movies, a universal translator serves as a useful plot device in science fiction. 

It saves valuable time otherwise spent explaining how people (especially from completely different planets) are able to communicate without knowing each other's language.  The time saved can therefore be dedicated to far cooler things, such as laser guns, lightsabers, space battles, and massive explosions—in other words, the truly scientific parts of science fiction.

Just a few of my universal translator (and science fiction) favorites include the following:

  • The Babel Fish – a small yellow leech-like fish from The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy book series by Douglas Adams, which after it is inserted into your ear, simultaneously translates from one spoken language to another.

     

  • Translator Microbes – a bacteria injected on the Farscape television series, which after it has colonized your brain stem, translates spoken language and then passes the translation along to the rest of your brain.

     

  • The Universal Translator – a linguacode matrix on Star Trek, first used in the late 22nd century for the instant translation of Earth languages, which removed language barriers and helped Earth’s disparate cultures come to terms of universal peace.

 

It's a Small (Digital) World

Many of my social media blog posts have included some form of the following paragraph:

Rapid advancements in technology, coupled with the meteoric rise of the Internet and social media (blogs, Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.) has created an amazing medium that is enabling people separated by vast distances and disparate cultures to come together, communicate, and collaborate in ways few would have thought possible less than a decade ago.

It's a really good paragraph (it must be since I just used it yet again!).  However, apparently channeling science fiction's useful plot device, I waxed poetic while ignoring the still very present communication challenge of language translation.

My native language is English, and like many people from the United States, it is the only language I am fluent in.  Blogging has made the digital version of my world much smaller and allowed my writing to reach parts of the world it wouldn’t otherwise have been able to reach—places where English is not the primary language.

 

What language do you blog in?

I have to admit that despite my professional experience, which has included some international commerce, I am often oblivious to how much of a challenge is faced by non-English speakers in the business world.  Blogging is certainly no exception.

On ProBlogger, Darren Rowse recently posted Bloggers from Non English Speaking Backgrounds, which was a follow-up to a recent newsletter survey about the challenges facing bloggers going into 2010, where quite a few of the responses came from bloggers for whom English was not their first language, and they cited two primary challenges:

  1. Not knowing which language they should blog in – Should they blog in their primary language and reach a potentially smaller readership, or should they blog in English where their readership could be larger, but where they have challenges with writing well?

     

  2. Feeling isolated from other bloggers – Some bloggers felt that they were not taken as seriously by bloggers in other parts of the world and therefore found networking difficult.  

Since Darren Rowse (he is based in Australia) is also only fluent in English, he requested that his readers comment on his post and share their perspectives on these common challenges.  The last time that I checked, the post had over 170 comments.

One of the most telling things for me is that this discussion wasn't limited to blogging in the business world. 

For me personally, I would have no choice but to blog in my primary language.  Just as an example, if Spanish was the primary language of the business blogging world, then I would have to either settle for a smaller readership, or simply not blog at all. 

Despite my four academic years with the language, just about the only complete sentence I can say in Spanish today is:

¿Dónde está el baño?

I can (pretend to) speak Danish

Some of you are probably thinking: What about computer software and online services for language translation?

I have always used Yahoo! Babel Fish (and long before it was purchased by Yahoo).  It is far from the most robust online translation service, but the science fiction reference in its name (see above) is likely the reason I frequent that particular website.

Many have told me that Google Language Tools is probably the most advanced (and free) online language translation service currently available.  However, no tool can make it as easy as science fiction—at least no current (free or otherwise) tool.

I recently used these tools to say Tak for din kommentar (“Thanks for your comment” in Danish) to Henrik Liliendahl Sørensen, for the excellent comment he left on one of my recent social media blog posts, which inspired me to write this blog post.

Not bad Danish for a non-native speaker, huh?  Well, to be completely honest—that was the final translation provided by Henrik after my initial attempt (although close) was not quite correct.    

And just to name one of the current options for blog translation, Wibiya is a free service allowing you to integrate applications and widgets into a customized web-based toolbar for your blog.  One of those applications is Translation, which is powered by Google Translate, and allows your blog readers to translate any page on your website into their native language with just a single click of their mouse.  If you would like to view an example of a blog using this feature, then please visit: Phil Simon's Blog.

 

What makes language translation so difficult?

Although the current online language translation services are helpful, they are far from perfect.

The most common challenge is what is referred to as round-trip translation, where in the process of translation, an intermediate language is used (most often the primary language of the translator).

As a simplistic example, let’s pretend I wanted to translate the earlier Danish phrase into Spanish. 

I would begin with a Danish to English translation (back to my primary language as a starting point), then an English to Spanish translation, and finally a Spanish to Danish translation (for verification purposes):

Tak for din kommentar –> Thank you for your comment (Danish –> English)

Thank you for your comment –> Gracias por tu comentario (English –> Spanish)

Gracias por tu comentario –> Tak for din kommentar (Spanish –> Danish)

Now, let’s try a more complex example by translating my favorite social media paragraph from English to Spanish to Danish, where for the sake of this example, we will pretend Spanish is my primary language.

Original paragraph in English:

Rapid advancements in technology, coupled with the meteoric rise of the Internet and social media (blogs, Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.) has created an amazing medium that is enabling people separated by vast distances and disparate cultures to come together, communicate, and collaborate in ways few would have thought possible less than a decade ago.

English –> Spanish:

Los rápidos avances en tecnología, junto con el meteórico ascenso de Internet y medios de comunicación social (blogs, Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc) ha creado un medio sorprendente que es posible que las personas separadas por enormes distancias y culturas diferentes se reúnan, se comunican, y colaborar en cuantas formas hubiera creído posible menos de una década atrás.  

Spanish –> Danish:

Hurtige fremskridt inden for teknologi, kombineret med den rivende anledning af internettet og sociale medier (blogs, Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, osv.) har skabt et miljø, der kan overraske folk adskilt af store afstande og forskellige kulturer mødes, kommunikere og samarbejde på måder få troede muligt mindre end et årti siden.

Danish –> English:

Rapid advances in technology, coupled with the meteoric rise of the Internet and social media (blogs, Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.) has created an environment that may surprise people separated by great distances and different cultures meet, communicate and collaborate in ways few thought possible less than a decade ago.

The differences are relatively minor:

  1. “advancements” –> “advances”
  2. “amazing medium that is enabling people” –> “environment that may surprise people”
  3. “separated by vast distances and disparate cultures” –> “separated by great distances and different cultures”
  4. “come together, communicate, and collaborate” –> “meet, communicate and collaborate”
  5. “in ways few would have thought possible” –> “in ways few thought possible”

However, #2 (“enabling” –> “surprise”) and to a lesser extent #4 (“come together” –> “meet”) have not only lessened the dramatic effect of my original words, but may leave the overall message open to different interpretation.

Therefore, it is easy to imagine the challenges inherit in translating entire blog posts or websites.

 

Can Social Media become a Universal Translator?

Will the continuing trends of both the rapid evolution of social media technology and the widespread adoption of social media for communication and collaboration, be able to deliver on science fiction’s promise of a universal translator?

Although we still don’t have warp drive or lightsabers, we do have some of the other seemingly impossible technologies from science fiction—just compare that mobile device you carry around with you to the communicator and tricorder from the original Star Trek television show.

Therefore, I remain hopeful that a universal translator is in our not too distant future.

Social Karma (Part 2)

/

In Part 1 of this series:  I introduced the series premise, motivation, and intended format.  I also provided disclaimers about my social media experience and my lack of affiliation with any person, website, event, product, or book that I recommend.

In Part 2, we will discuss leveraging social media for “listening purposes only.”  This approach provides a passive (and safe) way to determine what (if any) type of active involvement with social media makes sense for you and/or your company.

 

You seek first to understand

Let's start with a few common questions about social media:

  • Should every individual professional have their own blog?
  • Should every company have its own blog?
  • Should every individual professional actively use social networking sites (e.g., Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn)?
  • Should every company actively use social networking sites?

Some social media “experts” defiantly claim that the answer to all of these question is: YES!

However, the only honest answer to all of these questions is: Maybe.

As with everything in the business world, you should seek first to understand what social media can offer and what it requires, before making any type of professional commitment. 

Both of those last two words are important—professional and commitment. 

This series is about the art of effectively using social media in a business context.  Therefore, we are discussing a topic about professional communication—which for both individuals and companies, must always be taken very seriously.

Using social media effectively, more than anything else, requires a commitment—mostly measured in time.  As bad as many claim it is to not get actively involved in social media, believe me—doing it poorly does a lot more harm than not doing it all.

 

You say you want a conversation

Well, you know—do you really want to change your world?

The pervasiveness of the Internet and the rapid proliferation of powerful mobile technology is transforming the very nature of human communication, and perhaps most strikingly, business communication.

Social media is taking advantage of this amazing medium, enabling people separated by vast distances and disparate cultures to come together, communicate, and collaborate in ways few would have thought possible less than a decade ago.

We continue to witness the decline of print media and the corresponding evolution of social media.  I believe the primary reason for this transition is our increasing interest in exchanging what has traditionally been only a broadcast medium (print media) for a conversation medium (social media).

So, returning to my paraphrasing of The Beatles that opened this section, I have to ask—do you really want a conversation?

In the business context of social media, conversations can occur on several levels.  Just a few examples include:

  • Between companies and their customers (including both prospective and former customers)
  • Between companies and their employees
  • Between employees and customers (in a less formal sense and beyond the walls of the workplace)
  • Between employees (both within and beyond the walls of the workplace)
  • Between customers

Only you can determine if you or your corporate culture is willing and able to properly participate in these conversations.  Many rightfully argue that you may soon simply not have a choice.  Therefore, if you are currently unwilling or unable, now is the time for you and your company to properly prepare—once again, a lack of preparation will do a lot more harm than good.

Of course, once you are properly prepared, you will be positioned to turn this challenge into a true competitive advantage.

 

Your worlds are colliding

We are becoming an increasingly digital society, and through social media, we are living more and more of both our personal and professional lives online, blurring—if not eliminating—the distinction between the two.

Later in this series, I will return to this topic and its implications for individual professionals.  However, from a company perspective, there are digital walls that can prevent (or at least slow down) your worlds from colliding—the company intranet.

First, I recommend establishing a corporate policy regarding what is permissible for employees to say about the company on external social networking sites such as Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn, as well as other social media platforms, including the employees’ personal blogs.  I am not advocating censorship—just some basic guidelines of professional behavior.

Next, I recommend evaluating an internal social networking platform such as Yammer or Socialcast (to name just two examples among many options) for employees to use while at the office for robust communication and collaboration.  You might not have to block external social networking sites, but companies should strongly encourage that all work-related social networking be performed within the safety of the intranet and not out in the serendipitous “Series of Tubes” also known as the Internet.

Later in this series, we will discuss active participation in external social media (e.g., blogging) and social networking sites.

 

You're listening

Before committing to active involvement in (external) social media, perform some due diligence by actively listening. 

Dedicate time to reading the blogs within your specific industry or other areas of your professional interest.  Pay close attention to the most frequent topics of discussion—especially in the comments section.  Your goal is to learn as much as possible about the online community within which you are considering active participation. 

Useful—and free—listening tools include (but are not limited to) the following:

  • Google Alerts – receive e-mail updates of the latest relevant Google search results based on your choice of query or topic.
  • Google Blog Search – search blogs (or the web) based on your choice of query or topic, which can be saved as a RSS feed.
  • Twitter Search – Unlike other social networking sites, you don't need an account for read access to Twitter content.  You can also save search queries as RSS feeds.  If you are not familiar with how to use it, then check out my Twitter Search Tutorial.
  • Google Reader – aggregate your research, websites, blogs, and RSS feeds into a single “listening station.”

 

Conclusion

Just like with any professional endeavor, honestly evaluate both your expectations and your readiness before you and your company get actively involved with social media in a business context.  Diligent research and proper preparation are standard best practices—and there is absolutely no reason that these sound business principles should not also apply to social media.

I have also recorded the key points of this blog post as a podcast:

You can also download this podcast (MP3 file) by clicking on this link: Social Media Preparation

 

In Part 3 of this series:  We will begin discussing the basics of developing your social media strategy by first examining the benefits of establishing a blog as your social media base of operations for effective online community participation.

 

Related Posts

Social Karma (Part 1) – Series Introduction

Social Karma (Part 3) – Listening Stations, Home Base, and Outposts

Social Karma (Part 4) – Blogging Best Practices

Social Karma (Part 5) – Connection, Engagement, and ROI Basics

Social Karma (Part 6) – Social Media Books

Social Karma (Part 7) – Twitter

DQ-Tip: “Start where you are...”

/

Data Quality (DQ) Tips is an OCDQ regular segment.  Each DQ-Tip is a clear and concise data quality pearl of wisdom.

“Start where you are

Use what you have

Do what you can.”

This DQ-Tip is actually a wonderful quote from Arthur Ashe, which serves as the opening of the final chapter of the fantastic data quality book: Executing Data Quality Projects: Ten Steps to Quality Data and Trusted Information by Danette McGilvray.

“I truly believe,” explains McGilvray, “that no matter where you are, there is something you can do to help your organization.  I also recognize the fact that true sustainability of any data quality effort requires management support.  But don't be discouraged if you don't have the ear of the CEO (of course that would be nice, but don't let it stop you if you don't).”

McGilvray then suggests the following excellent list of dos and don'ts:

  • You DON'T have to have the CEO's support to begin, but . . .
  • You DO have to have the appropriate level of management support to get started while continuing to obtain additional support from as high up the chain as possible.

     

  • You DON'T have to have all the answers, but . . .
  • You DO need to do your homework and be willing to ask questions.

     

  • You DON'T need to do everything all at once, but . . .
  • You DO need to have a plan of action and get started!

“So what are you waiting for?” asks McGilvray. 

“Get going: build on your experience, continue to learn, bring value to your organization, have fun, and enjoy the journey!”

 

Related Posts

DQ-Tip: “Data quality is about more than just improving your data...”

DQ-Tip: “...Go talk with the people using the data”

DQ-Tip: “Data quality is primarily about context not accuracy...”

DQ-Tip: “Don't pass bad data on to the next person...”

 

Follow OCDQ

If you enjoyed this blog post, then please subscribe to OCDQ via my RSS feed or my E-mail updates.

You can also follow OCDQ on Twitter, fan the Facebook page for OCDQ, and connect with me on LinkedIn.


Video: Twitter #FollowFriday – January 15, 2010

/

In this OCDQ Video, I broadcast (from within The Tweet-rix) my Twitter FollowFriday recommendations for January 15, 2010.

 

If you are having trouble viewing this video, then you can watch it on Vimeo by clicking on this link: OCDQ Video

 

Tweeps mentioned in the video:

 

Related Posts

If you tweet away, I will follow

Video: Twitter Search Tutorial

Live-Tweeting: Data Governance

Brevity is the Soul of Social Media

Tweet 2001: A Social Media Odyssey

“I can make glass tubes”

/

One of my favorite television writers is Aaron Sorkin (more famous for creating The West Wing), who created the short-lived Sports Night, where William H. Macy guest-starred as an expert consultant brought in by executive management.

In a “strategy session” scene, where executives are dictating mandatory changes, Macy's character calls for a break, allowing the frustrated team to leave the room before losing their composure.  He then asks executive management to take a walk with him. 

Unbeknownst to them as it is happening, while he proceeds to escort them out of the building, he recites the following:

“You guys know who Philo Farnsworth was?

He invented television.  I don't mean he invented television like Uncle Milty [Milton Berle]. 

I mean he invented the television in a little house in Provo, Utah, at a time when the idea of transmitting moving pictures through the air would be like me saying I figured out a way to beam us aboard the Starship Enterprise.

He was a visionary.  He died broke and without fanfare. 

The guy I really like though was his brother-in-law, Cliff Gardner. 

He said, ‘Philo, I know everyone thinks you're crazy, but I want to be a part of this.  I don't have your head for science, so I'm not going to be able to help much with the design and mechanics of the invention, but it sounds like you're going to need glass tubes.’

You see, Philo was inventing the Cathode Ray Tube [CRT], and even though Cliff didn't know what that meant or how it worked, he'd seen Philo's drawing, and he knew that he was going to need glass tubes.  And since television hadn't been invented yet, it's not like you could get them at the local TV repair shop.

‘I want to be a part of this,’ Cliff said. ‘I don't have your head for science.  How would it be if I were to teach myself to be a glass blower?  And I could set up a little shop in the backyard.  And I could make all the tubes you'll need for testing.’

There ought to be Congressional Medals for people like that.

[At this point, and quite understandably, executive management was very confused.]

I've looked over the notes you've been giving over the last year or so, and I have to say they exhibit an almost total lack of understanding of how to get the best from talented people.

You said before that for whatever reason, I seem to be able to exert some authority around here.

I assure you it's not because they like me.  It's because they knew two minutes after I walked in the door, I'm someone who knows how to do something.

I can help.

I can make glass tubes.

That's what they need.”

What's my point?

Sometimes—and with the very best of intentions—when we try to help others, we have a tendency to try to get them to change everything they are currently doing.  More specifically, we try to get them to do things our way.

After all, our way works great for us, surely it will work just as well for them, right?

Wrong.

Judy Garland once said, “Always be a first-rate version of yourself, instead of a second-rate version of someone else.”

So, if you want to help others be a first-rate version of themselves, then follow Cliff Gardner's lead. 

Take a good look at the situation, realize the person you are trying to help is full of potential, and probably just needs a little help with something very minor.

Listen carefully to the person you want to help—and then—kindly let them know:

“I can make glass tubes.”

Related Posts

My #ThemeWord for 2010: KARMA

Social Karma (Part 1)

/

An effective social media strategy is essential for organizations as well as individual professionals.

Using social media effectively, including blogging and social networking sites (e.g., Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn), can definitely help promote you, your expertise, your company, and its products and services. 

However, it is sad—but true—that too many people and companies have a selfish social media strategy. 

You should not use social media to exclusively promote only yourself or your business. 

You need to view social media as Social Karma. 

If you can focus your social media and social networking efforts on helping others, then you will get much more back than just a blog reader, a LinkedIn connection, a Facebook friend, a Twitter follower, or even a potential customer.

 

I am not a Social Media Expert—but I play one on the Internet

I am not a social media “expert.”  In fact, until late 2008, I wasn't even interested enough to ask people what they meant when I heard them talking about “social media.”  I started blogging, tweeting, and using other social media in early 2009. 

Please let me do the complex math for you—I still have less than one year of actual experience with social media.

I don't know how you define expertise—and I do acknowledge the inherent difficulty in vetting expertise in such a new and rapidly evolving field—but less than one year of experience with anything does not an expert make, in my humble opinion.

However, I have spent over 15 years in computer science and information technology related disciplines, as a software engineer, consultant, and instructor.  I have considerable experience and expertise applying technology in a business context in order to implement solutions for Global 500 companies in a wide variety of industries. 

Therefore, I am not a complete moron—but I will leave it to you to determine the actual percentage.

I am currently a full-time writer making all of my income from social media—mainly from blogging and mostly from ghostwriting for corporate blogs.

I am not trying to sell you anything. 

I am going to freely share what I have learned so far, including what I have learned from people with far more experience using social media.  As I stated previously, I hesitate to call anyone an expert in such a rapidly evolving discipline, but I will mention several resources I have found helpful. 

I have absolutely no affiliation or any paid relationship with any person, website, event, product, or book that I recommend.

 

About This Series

The primary reason that I am organizing my thoughts about social media involves my preparation for an upcoming conference presentation about using social media effectively for business purposes (more details in the next section).

I am publishing this content as a series on my blog, not only to provide supporting material for the small group of people that actually attend my conference session, but also because I have learned firsthand how the two-way conversation that blogging provides via comments from my readers, greatly improves the quality of my material.

Throughout this series, I will combine traditional blog posts with presentation slides, podcasts, and videos, in order to build a multimedia library of supporting material—all freely available, no registration required.

 

Enterprise Data World 2010

EDW10 Speaker Badge

Enterprise Data World is the business world’s most comprehensive vendor-neutral educational event about data and information management.  This year’s program will be bigger than ever before, with more sessions, more case studies, and more can’t-miss content, providing over 200 hours of in-depth tutorials, hands-on workshops, practical sessions and insightful keynotes to take you to the forefront of your industry.   

Enterprise Data World 2010 will be held March 14-18 in San Francisco, California at the Hilton San Francisco Union Square.

The full conference agenda can be viewed by clicking on this link: Enterprise Data World 2010 Conference Agenda.

The registration options can be viewed by clicking on this link: Enterprise Data World 2010 Conference Registration. 

Use the discount code of EDW10SPKR for a $100 discount off your registration fees. (Discount code expires on February 26.)

On Monday, March 15 from 5:00 PM – 6:00 PM, I will be presenting (30 minutes of material and 30 minutes of Q&A):

Social Karma: The Art of Effectively Using Social Media in Business

In Part 2 of this series:  We will discuss leveraging social media for “listening purposes only” as a passive (and safe) way to determine what (if any) type of active involvement with social media makes sense for you and/or your company.

 

Related Posts

Social Karma (Part 2) – Social Media Preparation

Social Karma (Part 3) – Listening Stations, Home Base, and Outposts

Social Karma (Part 4) – Blogging Best Practices

Social Karma (Part 5) – Connection, Engagement, and ROI Basics

Social Karma (Part 6) – Social Media Books

Social Karma (Part 7) – Twitter

OOBE-DQ, Where Are You?

/

Scooby-Doo, Where Are You!

Much of enterprise software is often viewed as a commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) product, which, in theory, is supposed to provide significant advantages over bespoke, in-house solutions.  In this blog post, I want to discuss your expectations about the out-of-box-experience (OOBE) provided by data quality (DQ) software, or as I prefer to phrase this question:

OOBE-DQ, Where Are You?

Common DQ Software Features

There are many DQ software vendors to choose from and all of them offer viable solutions driven by impressive technology.  Many of these vendors have very similar approaches to DQ, and therefore provide similar technology with common features, including the following (Please Note: some vendors have a suite of related products collectively providing these features):

  • Data Profiling
  • Data Quality Assessment
  • Data Standardization
  • Data Matching
  • Data Consolidation
  • Data Integration
  • Data Quality Monitoring

A common aspect of OOBE-DQ is the “ease of use” vs. “powerful functionality” debate—ignoring the Magic Beans phenomenon, where the Machiavellian salesperson guarantees you their software is both remarkably easy to use and incredibly powerful.

 

So just how easy is your Ease of Use?

Brainiac

“Ease of use” can be difficult to qualify since it needs to take into account several aspects:

— Installation and configuration
— Integration within a suite of related products (or connectivity to other products)
— Intuitiveness of the user interface(s)
— Documentation and context sensitive help screens
— Ability to effectively support a multiple user environment
— Whether performed tasks are aligned with different types of users

There are obviously other aspects, some of which may vary depending on your DQ initiative, your specific industry, or your organizational structure.  However, the bottom line is hopefully the DQ software doesn't require your users to be as smart as Brainiac (pictured above) in order to be able to figure out how to use it, both effectively and efficiently.

 

DQ Powers—Activate!

The Wonder Twins with Gleek - Art by Alex Ross

Ease of use is obviously a very important aspect of OOBE-DQ.  However, as Duke Ellington taught us, it don't mean a thing, if it ain't got that swing—in order words, if it's easy to use but can't do anything, what good is it?  Therefore, powerful functionality is also important.

“Powerful functionality” can be rather subjective, but probably needs to at least include these aspects:

— Fast processing speed
— Scalable architecture
— Batch and near real-time execution modes
— Pre-built functionality for common tasks
— Customizable and reusable components

Once again, there are obviously other aspects, especially depending on the specifics of your situation.  However, in my opinion, one of the most important aspects of DQ functionality is how it helps (as pictured above) enable Zan (i.e., technical stakeholders) and Jayna (i.e., business stakeholders) to activate their most important power—collaboration.  And of course, sometimes even the Wonder Twins needed the help of their pet space monkey Gleek (i.e., data quality consultants).

 

OOBE-DQ, Where Are You?

Where are you in the OOBE-DQ debate?  In other words, what are your expectations when evaluating the out-of-box-experience (OOBE) provided by data quality (DQ) software?

Where do you stand in the “ease of use” vs. “powerful functionality” debate? 

Are there situations where the prioritization of ease of use makes a lack of robust functionality more acceptable? 

Are there situations where the prioritization of powerful functionality makes a required expertise more acceptable?

Please share your thoughts by posting a comment below.

 

Follow OCDQ

If you enjoyed this blog post, then please subscribe to OCDQ via my RSS feed or my E-mail updates.

You can also follow OCDQ on Twitter, fan the Facebook page for OCDQ, and connect with me on LinkedIn.


Freemium is the future – and the future is now

/

Earlier this week, two excellent blog posts—Three Ways to Start a Revolution by James Chartrand on Men with Pens, and Your Dream is Under Attack by Nathan Hangen on Copyblogger—discussed the somewhat polarizing debate about making money from blogging, which is one of many examples of the so-called “freemium” business model, which was first articulated in 2006 by venture capitalist Fred Wilson:

“Give your service away for free, acquire a lot of customers very efficiently through word of mouth and referral networks, then offer premium priced, value added services or an enhanced version of your service to your customer base.”

In 2009, Chris Anderson published the book Free: The Future of a Radical Price, which among numerous other coverage, was critically reviewed in the article Priced to Sell by Malcolm Gladwell, and discussed in an interview conducted by Charlie Rose.

 

Isn't everything on the Internet supposed to be free?

The freemium model, as well as the concept expressed in Anderson's book, is not entirely about the Internet.  However, it is most often at the center of polarized debates because more and more businesses, in varying degrees, are becoming online businesses.

General public perception is that the Internet is free—getting on the Internet does have a cost (sometimes conveniently ignored), in terms of electricity, ISPs, and the various computer and mobile devices used to access it.  However, once you are connected, the content on the Internet is either free or is supposed to be free—according to the “logic” of a very common perspective.

To be fair, this is somewhat understandable, especially given the fact that many of the most popular online services, such as Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube, to name but three examples from countless others, are in fact, free – and their users often defiantly claim that they would never pay any amount of money for such a service.

 

So how does the Internet make money?

The Internet has traditionally made money the same way broadcast television (also “free” when you conveniently ignore the cost of electricity, cable and satellite providers, and the various devices used to access it) has traditionally made money – advertising.

Paraphrasing (and oversimplifying) the words of Chris Anderson, the three generations of making money on the Internet:

  1. Pop-Up Ads – in the beginning was the Pop-up Ad—and it was not good.  Do you still remember (or are you old enough to remember) the early days of the Internet?  Nearly every website you visited brought the seemingly random attack of pop-up ads.  Even after the invention of pop-up blockers and the advent of alternatives to pop-up ads, online advertising was not very context sensitive and not only annoying, but also largely ineffective.

     

  2. Google AdSense – the next generation of advertising was basically pioneered by Google (or companies they now own).  Exemplified by the now somewhat ubiquitous Google AdSense, ads specific to website content provided online advertising that is both less annoying and seemingly far more effective.

     

  3. Freemium – we are just entering the third generation of making money on the Internet, and the first one not ruled by advertising—at least not advertising in the “traditional” sense.  Under this new model, free online content is made available to everyone—providing the opportunity to “up-sell” premium content to a (typically small) percentage of your audience.

 

Freemium is NOT a new concept

Although many Internet users become seemingly outraged by the very notion of the option to purchase premium content, the idea of giving away something for free in order to facilitate a potential purchase is by no means a new concept.

Just a few simple examples include:

  • Samples at the mall food court are free, but you have to pay to eat a full meal
  • Movie previews are free, but you have to pay to watch an entire movie
  • Broadcast television shows are free, but you have to pay for the DVD box sets

The Internet, however, has seemingly always been viewed as a special case.

I believe this is mostly due to the ratio of free to premium.  Food samples, movie previews, and an individual episode of a television show, are small compared to the size of a full meal, a full-length movie, and a full season (or series) of episodes.

In other words, what we get for free isn't much, so paying for the rest makes more sense.  On the Internet, this ratio is reversed. 

Since almost everything on the Internet is free (again, after the cost of connection), we are genuinely, and perhaps really quite understandably, surprised or even annoyed when we encounter something that we are asked to pay for.

In other words, since we get so much for free, paying just to get a little more simply doesn't seem to make sense. 

After all, if the full meals at the mall food court were free, we certainly wouldn't pay just to eat samples.

(And yes—I do realize that was a terrible analogy on so many levels—so please stop yelling at me.)

 

Isn't freemium the end of the world as we know it?

Obviously, the real issue is not the ratio of free to premium, or how much you should (or should not) expect to get for free. 

The fundamental argument is that anything you pay for should be worth the price.

Historically, price has been the indicator of value, meaning something has value only if people are willing to pay for it.  Higher prices, in theory at least, indicate higher value, especially if people are willing to purchase at the higher price.

So, if people are willing to pay for it, then this indicates there is a demand for it, for which a supply of it must be produced. 

(And yes—I do realize that was a huge oversimplification of economic theory—so yet again, please stop yelling at me.)

One of the most common counter-arguments to the freemium model is that if price is allowed to essentially drop to zero, then there will be no way to accurately measure demand, which means there will be no way for content producers to determine what to supply.  Furthermore, if almost everything is free, then why would content consumers be willing to pay for anything at all.

If nobody is willing to pay, then nobody can possibly get paid, and all online content will be completely user-generated, and following Andrew Keen's argument in The Cult of the Amateur, a cultural apocalypse occurs, which results in not only the Internet, but the entirety of human expression, being reduced to us hurling our feces at each other just like our primate cousins.

(You may feel free to resume yelling at me now.)

 

Freemium is the future—and the future is now

Obviously, the freemium business model doesn't only apply to blogging.  By the way, it is totally understandable if you had forgotten that my lunatic fringe was ignited by the debate over making money from blogging.

Freemium is the future of most of the business world—and the harsh reality is—the future has already arrived.

In my opinion, too many people, companies, and in some cases, entire industries, are wasting their time, effort, and money trying to fight the unrelenting reality of freemium.  Instead of refusing to accept that the price of what you are now offering may be falling essentially to zero—focus on creating something new that people would be willing to pay for.

Once again, to paraphrase Chris Anderson, “free” is only one of many markets—and only one of many additional pricing levels. 

Don't stop at thinking about just two versions of each individual product or service—one free version and one premium version.  You should be thinking about one free version and multiple tiers of premium.  Value still drives price.  Therefore, if you can truly add more value at each tier, then you can successfully demand a higher price.

Freemium works as a viable model because people will always be willing to pay a premium for something worth its price.

If you can't (or can no longer) produce something your customers are willing to pay for—that's your problem, not theirs.

Podcast: Open Your Ears

/

I began this week by telling you to Shut Your Mouth—in a blog post utilizing Sports Night, Tao Te Ching, and Shaft in order to make the case for the critical role that listening plays in effective communication.

 

What better way would there be for me to emphasize this point, other than by providing you with something to listen to?

 

In this OCDQ Podcast, I discuss Stephen Covey's five different levels of listening, as well as empathy, emotional intelligence, the nature of opinions, and why all of us really need to learn to shut our mouth and open our ears.

 

You can also download this podcast (MP3 file) by clicking on this link: Open Your Ears

 

Related Posts

Shut Your Mouth

Hailing Frequencies Open

Resistance is NOT Futile

 

Follow OCDQ

If you enjoyed this blog post, then please subscribe to OCDQ via my RSS feed or my E-mail updates.

You can also follow OCDQ on Twitter, fan the Facebook page for OCDQ, and connect with me on LinkedIn.


Shut Your Mouth

/

New data quality consultants ask me for advice all the time. 

Some are “new” because they are just starting their career.  Others are new because the recent economy has provided them the “opportunity” for a career in consulting. 

Either way, when asked if I have one key piece of advice to offer, I respond immediately with:

“Shut Your Mouth.”

Understandably, an explanation is always required.

 

The Path of Least Resistance

My advice is sometimes misunderstood as:

“Just do as your told—don't rock the boat.”

I have been a consultant for most of my career and in various capacities, namely for the services group of software companies, for consulting firms, and also as an independent.

From my perspective, consultants provide extensive experience and best practices from successful implementations.  Their goal is to help clients avoid common mistakes and customize a solution to their specific business needs.

Their primary responsibility is to make themselves obsolete as quickly as possible by providing mentoring, documentation, training, and knowledge transfer.

A consultant that chooses the path of least resistance by always agreeing with you is not worth the money you are paying them.

To quote a favorite (canceled) television show:

“If you are stupid, then surround yourself with smart people. 

If you are smart, then surround yourself with smart people who will disagree with you.”

The Art of Communication

Perhaps inevitably, my advice then becomes misunderstood as:

“I shouldn't be afraid to speak my mind—and tell them like it is!”

Not so fast—put the bullhorn down—and slowly back away.

 

Communication is more art than science. 

The ability to effectively communicate is an essential skill for all (and not just data quality) consultants.

More than anything else, effective communication requires (in fact, demands) excellent listening skills.

I often joke consultants shouldn't be allowed to speak for at least their first two weeks. 

In other words—and yes, I am also talking to you, World's Foremost Expert Supercalifragilistic Consultant—there definitely needs to be less of you telling your clients what you think, and more of you listening to what your clients have to say.

You must seek first to understand your client's current environment from both the business and technical perspectives. 

Only after you have achieved this understanding, will you then seek to be understood regarding your extensive experience of the best practices that you have seen work on successful data quality initiatives.

 

Can Consultants Lead?

This great question (and the interesting debate it sparked) was the title of an excellent recent blog post by Phil Simon.

My conversation in the comments section with Don Frederiksen, included my paraphrasing of Chapter 17 of the Tao Te Ching (since I literally own eight different English translations, please note I am quoting from possibly my all-time favorite, the “American poetic” translation by Witter Bynner), where I substituted the word leader with the word consultant:

A consultant is best
When people barely know that he exists,
Not so good when people obey and acclaim him,
Worst when they despise him.
‘Fail to honor people,
They fail to honor you;’
But of a good consultant, who talks little,
When his work is done, his aim fulfilled,
They will all say, ‘We did this ourselves.’

Shut Your Mouth

Good communication is a bad mother—Shut Your Mouth!

I'm talking about becoming a better listener.

Can you dig it?

 

Related Posts

Hailing Frequencies Open

Not So Strange Case of Dr. Technology and Mr. Business

The Three Musketeers of Data Quality

Data Quality is People!

You're So Vain, You Probably Think Data Quality Is About You

 

Follow OCDQ

If you enjoyed this blog post, then please subscribe to OCDQ via my RSS feed or my E-mail updates.

You can also follow OCDQ on Twitter, fan the Facebook page for OCDQ, and connect with me on LinkedIn.


My #ThemeWord for 2010: KARMA

/

Rob Paller introduced me to the #ThemeWord tradition, started in 2008 by Erica Douglass as an alternative to New Year's Resolutions, where you pick one word to serve as an over-arching theme for the upcoming year.

 

My #ThemeWord for 2010: KARMA

The Sanskrit word karma (literally “action” or “deed”) is commonly misunderstood or oversimplified.  It is a complex concept with deep roots in Eastern philosophy and the religious traditions of Hinduism, Sikhism, Buddhism, and Jainism.

First and most important—please let me stress that I do not wish to offend anyone's religious sensibilities. 

I am using the word karma in a philosophical and secular sense.  However, I will admit that my perspective is greatly influenced by my non-religious study of Buddhism.  Of the many useful texts I own on the subject, my favorite description of karma comes from the book Lotus In A Stream by Chinese Buddhist Master Hsing Yun (as translated by Tom Graham):

“Karma is a universal law of cause and effect concerned with intentional deeds.  The law of karma tells us that all intentional deeds produce results that eventually will be felt by the doer of the deed.  Good deeds produce good karmic effects and bad deeds produce bad karmic effects.”

Obviously, “cause and effect” is neither only an Eastern concept, nor only a philosophical concept. 

The history of both Western philosophy, perhaps most notably by Aristotle, as well as Western science, perhaps most notably by Isaac Newton, also includes excellent exposition on cause and effect. 

Therefore, please feel free to contemplate “karma” in Aristotelian and/or Newtonian terms.

Some additional alternatives include:

  • Reciprocal Altruism
  • The Whuffie Factor
  • Quid Pro Quo

 

Reciprocal Altruism

Evolutionary biologist Robert Trivers coined the term reciprocal altruism to explain how altruism, which he defined as an act of helping someone else—although incurring some “cost” for this act—may have evolved because it was beneficial to incur this cost if there is a chance of being in a reverse situation at some point in the future, where the person that you helped before may perform an altruistic act towards you.

 

The Whuffie Factor

Tara Hunt uses the term whuffie to describe “the residual outcome—the currency—of your reputation.  You lose or gain it based on positive or negative actions, your contributions to the community, and what people think of you.”

 

Quid Pro Quo

The Latin phrase quid pro quo (literally “something for something”) is commonly used to describe an equal exchange of goods, services, or favors, which can be alternatively described using the far more colloquial phrase:

“You scratch my back, and I'll scratch yours.”

Mean People Suck

So, whether you prefer to use karma, reciprocal altruism, whuffie, quid pro quo, or other terms, we all have some way of expressing the concept of what we expect to happen when we help other people.

We have a natural tendency to “keep score” one way or another.  We usually help others so that they will be more willing to return the favor—so others will be indebted to us.  We use subtle (and sometimes not so subtle) peer pressure techniques.

We remember who turns us down (or simply ignores us) when we ask them for their help.  And we especially take note when it was someone we had previously helped.

Mean and selfish people definitely suck.  But let's face it, nobody's perfect.  We all have bad days, we all occasionally say and do stupid things, and we all occasionally treat people worse than they deserve to be treated.

 

Quid Pro No

Although I accept the fact I can't possibly help everyone, in 2010 I pledge to help others whenever I can.

Most important, I pledge to practice quid pro no—I will help others without worrying about what's in it for me.

Or to borrow the wonderful words of 8th century Indian Buddhist scholar Shantideva (as translated by Stephen Batchelor):

“Even when I do things for the sake of others

No sense of amazement or conceit arises.

It is just like feeding myself;

I hope for nothing in return.”  

How to Pick Your #ThemeWord for 2010

Karma is my theme word for 2010.  I will occasionally discuss it directly and indirectly in my blog posts throughout the year.

If you are interested in participating in the theme word tradition, then follow these three simple steps:

  1. Think of a word that reflects your hopes and dreams for 2010
  2. Share your theme word with friends on Twitter, Facebook, or your blog
  3. Be sure and use the hashtag #ThemeWord

So Long 2009, and Thanks for All the . . .

/

Before I look ahead to the coming New Year and wonder what it may (or may not) bring, I wanted to pause, reflect on, and in the following OCDQ Video, share some of the many joys I was thankful for 2009 bringing to me.

If you are having trouble viewing this video, then you can watch it on Vimeo by clicking on this link: OCDQ Video

 

Thank You

Thank you all—and I do mean every single one of you—thank you for everything.

Happy New Year!!!

The War of Word Craft

/

After publishing my previous post, I watched Empire of the Word Part 4: The Future of Reading, which was a panel discussion on The Agenda with Steve Paikin, featuring Cynthia Good, Keith Oatley, Mark Federman, Bob Stein, and Bill Buxton.

Please let me stress that I highly respect all of the panelists who were involved in this discussion.  My selective paraphrasing of their quotes, which I have woven into the tapestry of this blog post, doesn't come close to doing justice to the full range of excellent insights they shared.  Therefore, although it is 53 minutes long, I highly recommend watching the full video.

 

The War of Word Craft

Bob Stein used the extremely popular multi-player online game World of Warcraft, where the players collaboratively create the narrative in real-time, as an example of the type of interactive multimedia experience that may be the true future of reading.

This analogy inspired my post title—since the debate seems to be about not only the future of reading, but also the future of how what we read (and by whatever means we “read” it) will be produced—or using far more dramatic flourish, this debate is about:

The War of Word Craft

e-Books are the end of anything worth reading?

When the financial implications of electronic publishing were briefly discussed, Bill Buxton explained that when things go digital and there is no cost of goods (i.e., producing an e-book), there is a law of economics that states the price drops essentially to zero.

Buxton argued this would mean the end of anything worth reading.  Since, when professional writers are no longer able to make a living from writing (i.e., because e-books are “free”), then only amateurs will write.  This will cause a dramatic drop in the overall quality of writing, and therefore no new writing will be worth reading.

 

Publishing companies are the gatekeepers of standards?

A somewhat similar sentiment was expressed by Cynthia Good, in defending what have traditionally been considered the gatekeepers for the standards of high quality, professional writing—publishing companies. 

(Please note: Good was formerly the president of a publishing company, and is now an academic director of publishing.)

Good argues that historically it has been publishers and editors who select and perfect the books to be published, thereby guaranteeing high standards for quality writing—and that society still requires these standards.

 

The Cult of the Amateur

In 2007, Andrew Keen wrote the controversial book The Cult of the Amateur, which has the provocative sub-title: “how blogs, MySpace, YouTube, and the rest of today's user-generated media are destroying our economy, our culture, and our values.”

I am definitely not suggesting Buxton and Good are advocating a similar perspective.  However, I find both the notion that only “professional” writers can write anything worth reading, and we require gatekeepers of “standards” to protect us from ourselves, to be incredibly pretentious and outdated ideas.

Writing is not an esoteric skill possessed by only a select few—and the best writers are not motivated (only) by money.

Publishing companies publish books that guarantee a high profit margin—and not high standards for quality writing.

 

The New Word Order

Bob Stein discussed the differences between the old-school and new-school mentality of authors.

The commitment of old-school authors is to engage with the subject matter on behalf of future readers.

By contrast, the commitment of new-school authors is to engage with readers in the context of the subject matter.

Stein believes the future role of the publisher is to develop a community around the subject matter, and bring the content to the community who wants to read it, instead of pushing the community toward the content you tell them they should read.

Mark Federman agreed, and sees the role of the publisher changing into one of creating an environment of engagement for genres and niche communities, which bring together writers and readers.

Federman also sees the roles of writers and readers becoming interchangeable within these communities. 

Quoting Finnegans Wake by James Joyce: “my consumers, are they not my producers?”

Pardon the pun, but I believe this will become the new order of the publishing world, or more simply: The New Word Order.

 

A Different Kind of Social Media

Bob Stein explained that solitary reading is really a recent development in human history.  Previously, most reading was a very social activity, where groups of people came together to listen to books (and poetry and other works) being read out loud.

Books (and reading as we know it) will not go away.  However, Stein believes we are at the very beginning of the explosion of new forms of written (and other creative) expression. 

The idea of reading (and writing) with others is going to become commonplace again, because we value the input of others, which greatly improves our individual experience, understanding, and unleashes the true joy of reading.

In what Stein describes, I see the future of reading and writing as a different kind of social media—a better kind of social media.

 

New Medium, New Message

In his book Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man, Marshall McLuhan coined the phrase: “the medium is the message.”

Steve Paikin asked what, within this new medium we have been discussing, is the message?

Mark Federman responded:

“Connection—the ability to connect readers and writers and interchange their roles.  The ability to collaborate as we construct knowledge, as we engage with one another's experiences, as we bring multiple contexts into understanding what it is we are reading and creating simultaneously—that's the message.”


Will people still read in the future?

/

This question and debate was motivated by my comments on the recent blog post The Future of Reading by Phil Simon.

In the following OCDQ Video, I share some of my perspectives on the future of reading, specifically covering three key points:

  1. Books vs. e-Books
  2. Print Media vs. Social Media
  3. Reading vs. Multimedia

  If you are having trouble viewing this video, then you can watch it on Vimeo by clicking on this link: OCDQ Video

 

A Very Brief History of Human Communication

Long before written language evolved, humans communicated using hand and facial gestures, monosyllabic and polysyllabic grunting, as well as crude drawings and other symbols, all in an attempt to share our thoughts and feelings with each other.

First, improved spoken language increased our ability to communicate by using words as verbal symbols for emotions and ideas.  Listening to stories, and retelling them to others, became the predominant means of education and “recording” our history.

Improved symbolism via more elaborate drawings, sculptures, and other physical and lyrical works of artistic expression, greatly enhanced our ability to not only communicate, but also leave a lasting legacy beyond the limits of our individual lives.

Later, written language would provide a quantum leap in human evolution.  Writing (and reading) greatly improved our ability to communicate, educate, record our history, and thereby pass on our knowledge and wisdom to future generations.

 

The Times They Are a-Changin’

The pervasiveness of the Internet and the rapid proliferation of powerful mobile technology is transforming the very nature of human communication—some purists might even argue it is regressing human communication.

I believe there is already a declining interest in reading throughout society in general, and more specifically, a marked decline across current generation gaps, which will become even more dramatic in the coming decades.

 

Books vs. e-Books

People are reading fewer books—and fewer people are reading books.  The highly polarized “book versus e-book debate” is really only a debate within the shrinking segment of the population that still reads books. 

So, yes, between us book lovers, some of us will not exchange our personal tactile relationship with printed books for an e-book reader made of the finest plastic, glass, and metal, and equipped with all the bells and whistles of the latest technology. 

However, e-book readers simply aren't going to make non-book readers want to read books.  I am truly sorry Amazon and Barnes & Noble, but the truth is—the Kindle and Nook are not going to making reading books cool—they will simply provide an alternative for people who already enjoy reading books, and mostly for those who also love having the latest techno-gadgets.

 

Print Media vs. Social Media

We continue to see print media (newspapers, magazines, and books) either offering electronic alternatives, or transitioning into online publications—or in some cases, simply going out of business.

I believe the primary reason for this media transition is our increasing interest in exchanging what has traditionally been only a broadcast medium (print media) for a conversation medium (social media).

Social media can engage us in conversation and enable communication between content creators and their consumers.

We are constantly communicating with other people via phone calls, text messages, e-mails, and status updates on Twitter and Facebook.  We are also sharing more of our lives visually through the photos we post on Flickr and the videos we post on YouTube.  More and more, we are creating—and not just consuming—content that we want to share with others.

We are also gaining more control over how we filter communication.  Google real-time searches and e-mail alerts, RSS readers, and hashtagged Twitter streams—these are just a few examples of the many tools currently allowing us to customize and personalize the content we create and consume.

We are becoming an increasingly digital society, and through social media, we are living more and more of both our personal and professional lives online, blurring—if not eliminating—the distinction between the two.

 

Reading vs. Multimedia

I believe the future of human communication will be a return to the more direct social interactions that existed before the evolution of written language.  I am not predicting a return to polysyllabic grunting and interpretive dance. 

Instead, I believe we will rely less and less on reading and writing, and more and more on watching, listening, and speaking.

The future of human communication may become short digital bursts of multimedia experiences, seamlessly blending an economy of words with audio and video elements.  Eventually, even digitally written words may themselves disappear—and we will communicate via interactive digital video and audio—and the very notion of “literacy” may become meaningless.

But fear not—I don't predict this will happen until the end of the century—and I am probably completely wrong anyway.

 

Please Share Your Thoughts

Do you read a lot of books?  If so, have you purchased an e-book reader (e.g., Amazon Kindle, Barnes & Noble Nook) or are you planning to in the near-future?  If you have an e-book reader, how would you compare it to reading a printed book?

Do you read newspapers and/or magazines?  If so, are you reading them in print or online? 

How often do you read blogs and other publications that are only available as online content?

How often do you listen to podcasts or watch video blogs or other online videos (excluding television and movies)?

What is the future of reading?