DISQUS

thanks Traci

this was perfect!

I am going to try keeping my @replies and DM checks a little higher & see if I can stay under the limit.

@memeticbrand

Hi Kate - thanks for posting & linking to the ebook (note: I think that the link above at the start of Social Capital Value Add section is broken).

I look forward to the edited video.

The main point that I was trying to make, above all, is that responsibility for leadership into the networked era comes from each and everyone one of us. Not from above or from traditional institutions or forms of organisation.

WE need to drive the radical changes highlighted in the Did You Know? video throughout our countries, companies, cities, families, etc.

I am glad that you like the Wizard of Oz metaphor. Whether you employ this one or "The World is Flat" or "Tipping Point" ... the point is that use of metaphor is a key tool for getting folks to understand the changes that are happening so fast that they are having difficulty keeping up.

I think Social Capital Value Add is a good rational arguement that ties a lot of silos of thought about our new society together. I hope others come to understand it and employ it to help us all rise to the challenges presented.

Overall, though ... it will be lots of story telling that gets folks emulating the small steps that anyone can take to become part of a culture of emergence, where we maximize our organizational forms to be open to rapid change and fluid environments but also optimized for sorting the good from the bad & seizing opportunities as they become prevalent.

Once corporations come to understand how social media is connected to their value, the value proposition of social media will shift from being: "let's save some money" to "we need to put our best people on this & invest heavily in order to save millions/billion in corporate value and survive in the future.

Cheers,
Michael

Michael Cayley's last blog post..SCVA in 90 seconds

Consistency, continuity and repetition are the mantras of broadcast brand creation. Natural selection is a product of variance. For the idea to spread, it needs to mutate. It needs to match the search for meaning at the right time with the unique engagement required.

"It doesn't matter what you call the dog, as long as it brings back the bone." is my play on Deng Xiao Ping's "It doesn't matter if a cat is black or white, as long as it catches mice." when describing capitalism.

Thanks for loving the dog. Feel free to link it back to the "What's with the dog?" post so that we can let everyone in on the Wizard of Oz metaphor for fun. And thanks in advance for this new scaled up form of social capital :)

As I have said many times, it does not matter what you call the dog, as long as it brings back the bone.

What's with the dog?
http://socialcapitalvalueadd.com/2008/05/14/wha...

I do agree with you about that boardroom conversation though.

That is the difficulty in obtaining the revolutionary changes required to cope with broadband empowered individuals. You need memetic branding to survive. Natural selection is a product of variance. So call it Whuffie! That is great! Call it social media, call it Social Capital Value Add ... but just call it. I've tried to incorporate a Wizard of Oz metaphor, some story telling and root the arguement in accepted financial & economic theory.

Not silly at all! I wish that I could make a video that so clearly communicates.

If I did, it may seem like a sequel to this that focuses on how Big Ice Cream factory changed as a result of empowered individuals in scoopville.

I think that we are finding that big companies, all traditional "broadcast oriented" institutions, including brand and the ways we govern ourselves will learn to focus on social media, an artifact of new scaled up social capital.

It is very simple ... these institutions are accountable to people in a new way ... via social media. Because social media impacts all of the other ways that they are held to account. Corporations - accountable for maintaining stable future earnings, must manage in a new way. Brands, accountable for margins on products must evolve in ways consistent with this new media form (i.e. memetic branding) to keep their distinctive powers and those who we appoint to govern us, must channel our new found powers into the way they manage our collective resources.

Mary,

I would be grateful if you would share a post or slideshare from your upcoming legal session. I would like to introduce your work to a KM group.

Mc

I like Lin's definition better because it breaks out the intrinsic (individual assets) and extrinsic (collective assets) because it enables us to root the idea of social capital in traditional economics. I.e. investments in social capital are made by self interested individuals.

We of course, do spend shared resources all the time. Like when a polluter dumps waste into a river. Sadly, they are spending your right to common assets.

Great post! And thanks for the links.

I will make a blog post to comment thoroughly but today my hands are full stirring up my personal social capital for votes in Ashoka's Power of Us: Reimagine Media competition: http://www.changemakers.net/en-us/node/14479

Just a couple of points ... social capital is not limited to "a relationship between two parties". For certain purposes Simmelian connections are more valuable http://is.gd/eJwC. I.e. interconnections (strong bonds) between a small group of three or more. That's why the Wizard of Oz is the metaphor that keeps on giving :)...http://twurl.nl/h7m6d0

I think the most important point in this post is the title. That is the revelation. I do agree that we have reached an inflection point for how value is created and defended that is due to broadband connectivity. Social media are artifacts of these new scaled up forms of social capital that is an important asset. Unlike offline social capital, it is less rampantly subject to rapid devaluation because digital "footprints" are permanent and findable and because social networks can be mobilized to act as a defense system when a public relations momentary crises occur.

Because corporations all have the same motives, i.e., profit and more importantly stable future earnings, I have proposed an approach that will enable us to compare corporate social capital apples to dells. I doubt that the same can be done in a meaningful way for individuals because as you quoted above, individuals all have different motives.

What is Scoble if not a case where corporate social capital has been transferred to an individual? Kudos to Robert for being able to make his own contribution to the pool and to grow/maintain it long after leaving Microsoft.

Love the scratching at productivity failures of traditional corps and the breakthroughs that are possible when identity is not an abstract brand but the authentic personal life of everyone in a corporate ecosystem.

Anywhoo, sorry for the heavy link infested comment.

The quick pitch is important. But a word of caution.

Taking money from investors is the same as starting a new relationship with a co-founder, critical software developer or any partner in life ... it is a marriage of sorts.

I find it incredible that there is so much emphasis on the 30 second elevator pitch. I think that the whole thing was devised before the "Power of Us" era, when venture capitalists had an overwhelming hold on scarce financial resources. They designed the elevator pitch to maximize what they get from you in the shortest time possible.

You need to get through the door yes. You need to be clear about the problem that you are going to solve, your great team, the size of the opportunity and go to market plan (including use of funds) but remember it takes less money than ever before to "Reimagine Media" or in other words introduce a game changing idea.

If, at any time, you find yourself uncomfortable with the style, tactics, ethics or behavior of your potential investor ... you need to give serious consideration to whether the deal is worth it. Really.

Get your pitch right and be confident about it. If you have interest, this part of your job is a success. At this point, if you can't get two hours to sit with your investor, to talk about your vision and most importantly learn about how they can help you achieve it beyond giving you money ... then be cautious.

If they do not share the passion and vision with you, the strains of the start up will tear you apart and investors are permanently tied to the venture by their capital.

Michael, is this a fit for the conversation?

http://twurl.nl/wd4i8h

Brand valuation is linked directly to product line.

http://twurl.nl/raza2n

Social Capital is more flexible and linked to sustainable value creation and defense capabilities.

http://twurl.nl/qi8cdd

Nicolas,

The Control Loss Myth needs to busted!

As move into the network era where individuals are empowered (see http://twurl.nl/r7e1yp) by broadband, social capital is the only way for brands and corporations to control their destiny. http://twurl.nl/w1zjx6

The MESH conference in Toronto is another great conference, probably the best of its kind in Canada, that evolved in this way.

There are pros & cons that I highlight in this post: http://socialcapitalvalueadd.com/2008/06/04/mes...

The trick is to leverage loose linkages to bring value to the network being served.

mc

Chris,

I like where you and Julian are going with this thinking.

Julian & I both witnessed how some of this conversation is evolving on twitter & I turned it into a blog post that I think you & your readers will find interesting about Why Twitter Matters: http://twurl.nl/ln1yym

Perhaps you and/or Julian would be generous enough to write a guest post over at www.socialcaptialvalueadd.com and/or share some feedback about my ChangeThis manifesto and ebook here on your blogs?

Best of luck with the book project.
Michael

Congrats matthew & good luck! I hope that your work at the Globe rubs off on the rest of corporate Canada!

I have tried to tie this all together into a new approach to value based management that is designed for the networked age.

Social Capital Value Add links the pioneering intellectual studies of social capital and social network analysis to social media and the priorities of marketers.

Perhaps worth of a follow up post? I would be grateful to add your review to these:
http://twurl.nl/wz686b

Here is my take on SoCap08 and the integration of social capital at the heart of capitalism.

It is due to the emergence of social media networks.

http://socialcapitalvalueadd.com/2008/10/20/soc...

Michael - I like it! And I am going to post it over at www.socialcapitalvalueadd.com.

I have been looking for someone who is interested in putting together something like this that captures SCVA ... i.e. linking Supercharged or as I say, "scaled up forms of social capital" to corporate value.

I picked up on this too Matt. My question is why doesn't social media seem to be making a difference in Canada http://twurl.nl/e742zc

Thanks for the post Jordan – great to see those illustrations!

You have given Social Capital Opportunity a slightly different take.

Towards the end of the paper, I speculate that building connections where none exist (even when that connection is not talking about you) may indeed be good strategy. I think you have highlighted this speculation.

In the paper, I was thinking of the existing Social Capital Opportunity at the point of valuation. No connection or engagement, no opportunity. The audits are designed to sort out who is talking about the corporation and its products and then who the corporation is already connected to.

"Social Capital Opportunity – Identities discovered during the Social Identity Audit are then searched for matching identities from the Social Engagement Audit. These matches provide the sum Social Capital Opportunity (SCO)."

You have correctly jumped to the general deduction. If there is a difference between the Social Identity factor and the Social Engagement factor then one way to try to stabilize future earning is to go out there and build connections with the folks who are talking about your company that you are not connected to. Note: The actual best strategy would be subtle. You would be looking for the "best" new connections. I.e. the one who are not talking about you that are prone to deliver positive results for you and the ones who are talking about you and prone to deliver positive results and some form of engagement with the negative ones that is designed to mitigate their bad results.

Alot of this seems a bit obvious, so why am I getting more "wordy" about it? I talk a little bit about the motive in this post about brand shibboleths: http://memeticbrand.com/2008/08/15/teenage-beer...

There is a need to put this into language and a framework that is consistent with the most senior levels of management and investment. The big idea here is that perception is reality. Perception now has a trail of artifacts on the web that is an accurate snapshot of what people are thinking about your company and products. An analysis of this can tell you much more about the stability of your company's future earnings than traditional brand valuation.

In any event! I can't believe that I am rooting around in the weeds when the point is … THANK YOU! Yours is the first post to tackle the valuation method and to begin a real dialogue about it. Even most of the post that I have written are about introducing the idea and talking about the general merit of taking the time to read and share the paper.

I think the sharing is about to become part of the genetics of all corporations.

Yesterday ChangeThis released my manifesto elaborating on this idea called Social Capital Value Add, which is an approach to value based management that is centred on the kind of sharing that you are talking about.

Details are here: http://socialcapitalvalueadd.com/2008/09/10/how...

The idea behind ChangeThis is that you share good ideas with folks who trust you. I hope that you like this one.