Conversationware

Could society could be stupid enough to label completely different disciplines with the same moniker?

I used to wonder.

Communications meant both “telephone technology” and a “job title within some PR function”

Back in the day though, telephones seemed completely different to the ‘other sort’ of communications, which seemed to be about getting your message published in a newspaper.

Well, doesn’t this single word make more sense this year? (Happy 2008)

Today, you can draw a theoretical line between real time voice communications, through other one to one technologies, to messaging, and on to other asynchronous group based communications like blogs, wikis and social software.

So my theme is that;

• Marketing is talking - originally to a very wide audience, but now steadily being segmented (segmented, segmented) into smaller and smaller targeted audiences.
• Real time communications is talking - originally one to one, but now steadily being increased from one to one conversation into larger and larger targeted audiences.
• Communications has finally lived up to it’s original promise.
• Cisco bought a Web Conference company last year. That tells you the same thing - communications is communications, and wherever the technology falls between the two endpoints, it is all interelated.

So: communications were unified enough already. Therefore, doesn’t the phrase ’Unified Communications’ lack definition, ambition and a sense of purpose?

Get a telephone, and surround it with lots of other technology like IM, everyone seems to say. Perhaps the better approach is to define a business process, and then telephone enable if needs be.

Voice is used to persuade, to seal the deal. But the fact is, written communications are just as useful as voice communications and sometimes a great deal more.

I suppose I could have just rung you all to tell you, but this seemed like a better way.

PBX based companies had better think this through.

It’s not a new analogy, but it should assist in understanding social networks, as to whether they are an opportunity, or not.

When I last went to a nightclub, I didn’t expect to form any lasting relationships.

Historically speaking, giving no details, there may have been existing acquaintances or friendships that might have been enhanced, and a deal or two may have been sealed. However, I never expected to come home with any sales leads for the business ready for Monday morning.

If your company specialises in things useful at a nightclub - alcohol, music, kebabs, etc then it stands to reason you need to be all over that network, making yourself look remarkable.

Actually, any consumer business might reasonably benefit if they’re remarkable enough.

I did a quick search to see if anyone else had made the facebook nightclub analogy - and of course, it’s been done rather well

Giles Bowkett says that “the cool place to be” changes and is naturally cyclical.

The google search showed a Jaiku comment - saying that facebook tags and installs tracking devices on the people showing up to its ‘nightclub’.

(I didn’t know Jaiku comments showed up in searches..I wonder if that is common knowledge)

Om Malik got this months ago, as per usual.

I suppose that it’s ironic that one of the businesses that stands to do well out of facebook is nightclubs.

This is spot on in my book,

For the record, my book isn’t facebook -

So many fads, so little time

There used to be this thing called facebook, back in the day.

It was useful, in as much as it showed what was possible, but it left people clamouring for more.

More control, more interaction, more privacy.

I often think about the development of technology -for example  where wizards stay up late  was an enjoyable read for me (the birth of the internet).

So, when Chris of Particls - an interesting product by the way - asks people to think about what they’re in favour of, rather than what they’re against, then that’s just like I heard a starter’s pistol.

Ok, so here’s my go at the next way of interacting with my Network - I think this application should be called Conversationware (why not).

It should include;

A. Contact management - CRM but something that lives and breathes

B. Conversation management

b1. Invite function - ie. “I would like a conversation ‘about’ ” - this would be in some sort blend of wiki/blog mechanism,

b2. The invitee can accept, or not

b3. Priority can be set by the inviter, and invitee….separately

b4. Presence should be conditional upon acceptance, priority and current condition/mode

b5. If accepted, Priority should include, important and urgent, important not urgent, not important urgent, not important not urgent.

C. Condition/Mode setting - automatically updating the resulting ‘availability’, according to priorities in my network contacts client software - via machine based RSS or some such. Let me explain. If another conversation participant is available at high priority, I should have that conversation before ‘becoming available’ for a low priority conversation. Ideal worlds I know…but hey, this is my dream, and I dream of productivity.

D. Feed management and attention settings

E. Tagging

F. A remarkable interface for continuing and extending the conversation (for conversation read ‘task, project, etc etc’) - this should be very very open for additions or change, like mind manager software, but updated in each participants client. Click, type, press enter, update every participants client as soon as online……not client server, machine RSS….it has to cross boundaries and firewalls.

G. Conversations will be contextual and relative. Six people will be contributing to a customer generated conversation, but only the lead will be interacting directly with the customer on the issue.

G. Conversation exposure settings - internal and or external, public or partner,  - who can search in other words, and what search engines are given access. What conversations are listed for public access/contribution - you saw Parlano before Microsoft bought them?

H. Unified Communications. That way, the agenda comes first, and then the conversation, spoken or electronic follows. All potential conversations are therefore listed as you interact, and thus, all audit trails, including call recordings,  are automatically indexed.

There’s loads more, but I’ve run out of steam.

The future is more electronic, not less and we need more tools. Tools to speed up the contact are not enough on their own. We need this stuff to get things done.

Make it viral people. Microsoft DOS software was effectively free until they sorted the licencing later on, by which time they had a user base.

I’ll await my free trial….thanks.

Encouraging your employees to use Facebook?

That’s bucking the trend wouldn’t you say? It is being reported that up to 70% of UK’s employers are banning access according to the linked article.

In that context, there is a great interview from the CEO horse’s (Jeremy Burton of Serena) mouth, over at the ‘For Immediate Release’ podcast site. When getting to the site, scroll to the player for 16th November. (24 mins)

 At ‘face value’ (sorry) it sounds like a very ‘new age’ ‘new media’ thing to do, but actually, the interview does enable Jeremy to put things very succinctly, articulately even, and it does make sense.

Mostly.

The situation first came about by banning emails on a Friday, a practice I haven’t experienced personally, but applaud none the less. And having banned (internal?) email, staff found a way around it and thus, experiencing a richer form of communication and relationship bulding, the ‘missing link’ was discovered by all.

It’s no suprise that almost anything enables better relationships and conversation than does email, but I still have this feeling that Facebook is merely a signpost, rather than an eventual destination. This year’s Second Life, if you will.

The vital question of things for me, ‘Personal versus Business communications’ was discussed briefly, but despite the answer “that it gave the CEO something to talk to the despatch guy in the lift about”, I don’t think that this subject has been put to bed yet.

Have a listen though, a few decent pointers to be had

Serena looks like an interesting company. Mashups are this year’s workflow?

I posted a video around the public safety of facebook a few days ago, and I’m still not convinced that donating your information to that particular medium is beneficial.

Linked In is also fairly new to me, although now I think probably it’s more mainstream than I originally gave it credit for - having been around before such things were referred to as ’social networks’.

Incidentally, a colleague told me he treated it as a rainy day thing, so that struck a chord. Thus, I was willing to put a little more effort in - being much more acceptable to me than that facebook for business purposes.

The thought of any future employer or customer being able to search through fluff, stuff and nonsense just makes me want to keep my private networks private, and my business networks businessy.

However - this interview post, a 15 mins thing with one of the most active users - 4200 contacts, was an eye-opener this evening.

I can see this stuff is still in its infancy, but I ‘get it’ better now. Many thanks Chip.

Any other Linked In stories will find me listening?