Hello!
The comments on this profile are unclaimed and thus are unverified.
Do they belong to you? Claim these comments.
Jon Clausen
Is this you? Claim Profile »
1 year ago
in The difficulty of participation by the corporation on Community Guy
@Stephen - If were going to be completely open and honest around the ROI we have to calculate the long-term and the short-term effects on that - the latter which may not always be positive.
For any publicly traded corporation, long-term ROI has to be balanced with shorter-term shareholder equity and that is a very slippery slope to tread. The embracing of any online community introduces new risks (e.g. - user revolts which become public, messy, even viral.). These can introduce negative ROI and momentum on the street and those are significant. You'll get no argument from me on the long-term ROI of opening yourself up, but I it's a risk/reward scenario that isn't always favorable in the short-term.
On the outside looking in, we can call it fear and scoff but there are real risks that can justify a conservative approach to opening yourself up as a corporation. I'm not saying it's the right decision. I am saying, getting beyond labeling it as simply "fear" and having a frank dialogue about the risk/rewards - not all of which are positive - is an important part of the process of guiding a corporation to embrace the Social Web.
In my previous life, I was part of a large-scale change initiative that, initially, failed because we painted a picture of the summit with broad brush, but didn't have a frank and honest discussion about the rigors and risks of the climb.
For any publicly traded corporation, long-term ROI has to be balanced with shorter-term shareholder equity and that is a very slippery slope to tread. The embracing of any online community introduces new risks (e.g. - user revolts which become public, messy, even viral.). These can introduce negative ROI and momentum on the street and those are significant. You'll get no argument from me on the long-term ROI of opening yourself up, but I it's a risk/reward scenario that isn't always favorable in the short-term.
On the outside looking in, we can call it fear and scoff but there are real risks that can justify a conservative approach to opening yourself up as a corporation. I'm not saying it's the right decision. I am saying, getting beyond labeling it as simply "fear" and having a frank dialogue about the risk/rewards - not all of which are positive - is an important part of the process of guiding a corporation to embrace the Social Web.
In my previous life, I was part of a large-scale change initiative that, initially, failed because we painted a picture of the summit with broad brush, but didn't have a frank and honest discussion about the rigors and risks of the climb.
1 year ago
in The difficulty of participation by the corporation on Community Guy
In applying these three thoughts to my previous career I think it's a little more complicated than that in many cases.
I think most halfway decent companies are open to all three of the above, but they want to do those things in a traditional (read: safe) manner which accepts everything which comes in and filters what comes back out to the customers, employees, and shareholders.
I think of the, literally, millions of dollars that my previous company spent on gathering customer feedback, competition analysis, and exploration of strategic initiatives which might not pay any dividends and those three things don't ring entirely true.
The bigger you get, the more risk there is in opening yourself up to a community which, in the digital age, can turn on you and disseminate negative information which affects shareholder value. I'm not saying I agree with that perspective and think there is a way to do it right, but I don't think it can be quantified that easily. Just saying...
I think most halfway decent companies are open to all three of the above, but they want to do those things in a traditional (read: safe) manner which accepts everything which comes in and filters what comes back out to the customers, employees, and shareholders.
I think of the, literally, millions of dollars that my previous company spent on gathering customer feedback, competition analysis, and exploration of strategic initiatives which might not pay any dividends and those three things don't ring entirely true.
The bigger you get, the more risk there is in opening yourself up to a community which, in the digital age, can turn on you and disseminate negative information which affects shareholder value. I'm not saying I agree with that perspective and think there is a way to do it right, but I don't think it can be quantified that easily. Just saying...
1 year ago
in Supporting Obama on Community Guy
Jake,
I've posted a few times with similar sentiments.
I think Andrew Sullivan's editorial from December's Atlantic Monthly sums it up better than I ever could though:
"Close-up in this election campaign, Obama is unlikely. From a distance, he is necessary. At a time when America’s estrangement from the world risks tipping into dangerous imbalance, when a country at war with lethal enemies is also increasingly at war with itself, when humankind’s spiritual yearnings veer between an excess of certainty and an inability to believe anything at all, and when sectarian and racial divides seem as intractable as ever, a man who is a bridge between these worlds may be indispensable."
I've posted a few times with similar sentiments.
I think Andrew Sullivan's editorial from December's Atlantic Monthly sums it up better than I ever could though:
"Close-up in this election campaign, Obama is unlikely. From a distance, he is necessary. At a time when America’s estrangement from the world risks tipping into dangerous imbalance, when a country at war with lethal enemies is also increasingly at war with itself, when humankind’s spiritual yearnings veer between an excess of certainty and an inability to believe anything at all, and when sectarian and racial divides seem as intractable as ever, a man who is a bridge between these worlds may be indispensable."
1 year ago
in Mozilla is becoming disappointing on Community Guy
I still use Firefox as my primary browser for the developer tools and plugins, but I think it's becoming a victim of it's own success. Features seem to be the main focus, at the expense of stability.
Frankly, I never understood why Camino was a necessary development product. Seems like they could have deployed those resources on making a better, faster, more stable Firefox for the Mac.
Frankly, I never understood why Camino was a necessary development product. Seems like they could have deployed those resources on making a better, faster, more stable Firefox for the Mac.
